Talk:Sarajevo Canton

map

Nikola Smolenski wrote As I said when the article was featured, the map doesn't show entities and gives false impression that BH is divided in some equal somethings

So bold the line between the entities if you like. The map is otherwise perfectly fit AFAICT. Besides, regardless of the differences in the nature of the regions and the cantons, they're still both the third tier of subdivision in the country and it's logical to have them on the same map. --Joy [shallot] 12:16, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I'd do this myself, of course, but I can't draw well enough. Nikola 05:43, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Replaced the map now with one that has different pastel shades for the entities (also useful to diversify a little, Asim used the same color Morwen used for counties of .hr which would be pretty boring :). I'm going to make such maps for other cantons and regions too. --Joy [shallot]

It's still not good enough.

• Borders are still of the same size. I would suggest that either the entity border is tickened (probably the international border would have to be thickened too) or the inter-entity borders are drawn dotted.
  • RS regions, have far less signifficance than Federation cantons. Their borders could be made even thinner (for example with rarer dots).

Well, the two groups are colored differently, this should delineate them well enough. Though I agree that the Regions are less significant -- in fact I wasn't able to find any significance in them... But more to the point, I don't know how to easily bold the borders in the Gimp :) I could do it manually but that'd be tedious. --Joy [shallot]\

• Brcko district has a shade close (if not same) as the Federation. If you want to stress that it's not in RS, fine, but then give it completely different shade.

Nikola 05:43, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Actually the shade of the district is left the same as the original, #c6c9ff, which is close to _both_ -- I moved the color of RS regions more towards the blue part of the specter (#c6daff), and the color of the F cantons more towards the red (#e0c7ff). The map of the district itself has it bright red because I thought it was so small nobody would notice it. Note also that many of the initially made maps don't even show the Posavina Canton because Asim forgot to draw it. Its area should be a bit larger than the Brčko District's, so it's an even worse problem :) --Joy [shallot]

if the city of Sarajevo has over 600.000 population how come...The Kanton has 400.000

President of the assembly

Currently, there is no proof Mirza Čelik is the president of the assembly. There are well substantiated claims the session during which he was chosen was illegal because it wasn't scheduled properly and illegally. Yes it was requested by the majority, as an urgent session, but the presidium, the sole body charged with deciding the urgency of the session, decided that there was no urgency at all, let alone the type (specified by the standing orders) that would warrant an urgent session. Also, the president (chairperson) of the assembly isn't chosen by the majority, according to the standing orders, rather by the internal agreement of presidium itself, which consists of the four representatives of the constituent peoples (Bosniaks, Croats, Serbs, and the Others) and a secretary of the assembly. The vote of the presidium was 3-2 in favour of not scheduling the session, and members were notified. The majority scheduled this illegal session without notifying the members of the presidium that voted against scheduling the session, and without notifying members of opposition. The members of the presidium heard about the session from the media, and came to inform members that arrived that the session will not be held because it was not scheduled, but the 18 members of the majority (there are 35 seats) elected, with 18-0 in favour, Mirza Celik as president (chairman) of the assembly, even though it is clearly unconstitutional and illegal. I ask of you name the right person which is still legally the president of the presidium in the adequate spot, or to at least leave it as currently vacant. I have links to substantiate these claims. 109.175.46.201 (talk) 18:57, 10 January 2020 (UTC)