Acroterion (talk | contribs) →Location: PA redacted |
→Location: collapse thread launched by Billy Fiddle who is a confirmed sockpuppet |
||
Line 135:
== Location ==
{{hat|reason=Confirmed sockpuppet}}
<s>Crimea is in Ukraine, sure as Gotland is in Sweden. Can't we reflect this in the opening line? Does Wikipedia always have to feed the fringe view that Crimea is somehow "disputed" purely because one bully nation has occupied it illegally? --[[User:Billy Fiddle|Billy Fiddle]] ([[User talk:Billy Fiddle|talk]]) 17:36, 3 November 2022 (UTC)</s>
:I understand how the anger at this horrible invasion can tempt people to abandon NPOV, but it is still a valuable policy for Wikipedia as a whole. That Crimea is currently occupied by Russian soldiers and has MPs in the Russian parliament is not fringe. We should deal with this topic in as neutral way as possible, even if - particularly if - there's a war on. [[User:JASpencer|JASpencer]] ([[User talk:JASpencer|talk]]) 12:14, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
|
Revision as of 19:43, 5 November 2022
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||
This page has archives. Sections older than 400 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
suggest and recommend a change in the general section
even Under Russian Law the accord is still illegal. why? because the document in Russian and Ukrainian both signed in august 24 1991 specifically says the following " ..... Территория Украины является неделимой и неприкосновенной.
Отныне на территории Украины имеют силу исключительно Конституция и законы Украины.
Настоящий Акт вступает в силу со дня его одобрения.
google translate it as " ...The territory of Ukraine is indivisible and inviolable.
From now on, exclusively the Constitution and laws of Ukraine are in force on the territory of Ukraine.
This Act comes into force from the date of its approval."
inviolable means it cannot be removed any single part of land in this case further the document says "Территория Украины является неделимой и неприкосновенной.
Отныне на территории Украины имеют силу исключительно Конституция и законы Украины."
"from Now on, They are Valid exclusively on the territory of Ukraine Constitution and laws of Ukraine"
"Акт провозгласил неделимость и неприкосновенность территории Украины и объявил единственно действительными в республике Конституцию и законы Украины."
"The Act proclaimed the indivisibility and inviolability of the territory of Ukraine and declared the only valid Constitution and laws of Ukraine in the republic."
To see the official document here https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Акт_провозглашения_независимости_Украины & also here https://ru.wikisource.org/wiki/Акт_провозглашения_независимости_Украины
in another words this basically makes the referendum of 2014 invalid even under Russian law.
VERKHOVNA RADA OF UKRAINE
August 24, 1991
ВЕРХОВНАЯ РАДА УКРАИНЫ
24 августа 1991 года"
Languages: Confusing section
The section "Languages" refers to "peoples" and "ethnic communities", but apparently groups them by language (language spoken? language of their place of origin?), and includes internal links to articles about languages. I don't know what this section was meant to communicate, and since there are no sources cited, I have no way to find out. (These remarks do not relate to the first paragraph of the section, which states that Russian is the main language, and includes a reference.) Cnilep (talk) 03:37, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
Please add : Crimeans face persecutions from the majority thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.196.188.16 (talk) 23:03, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
- No. Provide a Reliable Source.104.169.22.138 (talk) 15:24, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
1,000 years of missing history
This article skips from 63 BC to the ninth century AD. There must be something to report during that millennium! Richard75 (talk) 20:00, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 22 January 2022
In the, "Russian Federation (de facto since 2014)" sub-section of the, "History" section, please change, "A 2014 referendum on joining Crimea with Russia was supported by a 96.7% of voters with 83.1% turnout according to official counts, though it was boycotted by many loyal to Ukraine and denounced as illegitimate by Western governments
" to, "A 2014 referendum on merging Crimea with Russia was supported by 96.7% of voters with a 83.1% turnout according to official counts, although it was boycotted by many loyal to Ukraine and denounced as illegitimate by Western governments." to make better sense-2409:4071:4E88:2BCB:B5C7:91DB:1DF9:8A77 (talk) 23:51, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
- Done Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:30, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
Polls show that a large majority of the residents of Crimea support the annexation"
The polls that are sourced show 54%, which I wouldn't say is a "large majority" I can not change it but I would remove large and say (54%) because this is pretty misleading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greek Architect (talk • contribs) 01:26, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
- That question is about whether regions should be allowed to secede from Ukraine. For the annexation itself, it says "For their part, Crimeans seem content with their annexation by Russia. Overwhelming majorities say the March 16th referendum was free and fair (91%) and that the government in Kyiv ought to recognize the results of the vote (88%)." Mellk (talk) 13:48, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
- Moving content from this revision by Mellk here pending consensus on what should be included. The annexation survey results from this 2014 source have been used to make broad statements about the general thought among Crimeans on their government. The 2020 source cited is behind a paywall. Could someone with access include a quote of the relevant material? I believe the 2014 source is pretty old for describing broad current thought and should perhaps be attributed/written about more carefully.
- @Mellk: The way it's being written about is less clear. Popoki35 (talk) 09:23, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Note my edit was in response to your edit that had the edit summary "closer to source". I did not include the mention of the poll in the first place and don't really have an opinion on whether it belongs the lead or not. Mellk (talk) 09:41, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- I think if someone can illuminate what the 2020 source adds to the discussion it will be easier to know what should be included in the lead. Popoki35 (talk) 09:57, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- If you opened up the library for me: thank you. Here's what I would propose based on the 2020 source: "A 2019 survey with a response rate of 54% indicated a majority of Crimean residents support Russian governance, with approval for the 2014 referendum outcome at 84% among Russians, 77% among Ukranians, and 52% among Tatars.[1]" Popoki35 (talk) 10:47, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- I think that is OK. I am not sure if it belongs in the lead but I am not against. Perhaps can have other polls included in the body and they are summarised in lead. I know there was a 2014 Gallup poll and 2015 GfK poll. Mellk (talk) 11:09, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- I tend to agree about it not fitting the lead since the article doesn't go into depth about it yet. I put the content in Crimea#Politics for now. Popoki35 (talk) 11:44, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- I think that is OK. I am not sure if it belongs in the lead but I am not against. Perhaps can have other polls included in the body and they are summarised in lead. I know there was a 2014 Gallup poll and 2015 GfK poll. Mellk (talk) 11:09, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- If you opened up the library for me: thank you. Here's what I would propose based on the 2020 source: "A 2019 survey with a response rate of 54% indicated a majority of Crimean residents support Russian governance, with approval for the 2014 referendum outcome at 84% among Russians, 77% among Ukranians, and 52% among Tatars.[1]" Popoki35 (talk) 10:47, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- I think if someone can illuminate what the 2020 source adds to the discussion it will be easier to know what should be included in the lead. Popoki35 (talk) 09:57, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Note my edit was in response to your edit that had the edit summary "closer to source". I did not include the mention of the poll in the first place and don't really have an opinion on whether it belongs the lead or not. Mellk (talk) 09:41, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Mellk: The way it's being written about is less clear. Popoki35 (talk) 09:23, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- ^ O'Loughlin, John; Toal, Gerard; Bakke, Kristin M. (3 April 2020). "To Russia With Love: The Majority of Crimeans Are Still Glad for Their Annexation". Foreign Affairs. ISSN 0015-7120. Retrieved 27 January 2022.
Islam in Crimea
90% of the population of Crimea was Muslim before the Crimean Tatar Genocide by Stalin. More info about this period of Crimean history needs to be included in the article. 176.55.110.166 (talk) 20:03, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 7 July 2022
185.6.111.106 (talk) 15:40, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
To change the word «controlled» on occupated as it is more appropriate and clear explanation
- Not done: The work "Controlled" appears multiple times in the article. You need to provide the quote from a sentence so we know whereabouts in the article you want it changed. MadGuy7023 (talk) 15:48, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
Wiki Education assignment: CMN2160B
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 8 September 2022 and 1 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Zihao Wang(Clement) (article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by Zihao Wang(Clement) (talk) 05:56, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
Neutrality of section "Russian Occupation (2014–present)"
"Disputed" means there is a meaningful dispute about something. In this case, the condemnation of the Russian actions by the international community and by experts on international law is very clear. Also, the section tells the story of the annexation in a way very close to the Russian narrative. Rsk6400 (talk) 08:31, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
Neutrality of section "Politics"
The section presents the elections under Russian occupation as meaningful, while in fact they were far from free. Rsk6400 (talk) 13:07, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
Location
Confirmed sockpuppet |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|