Talk:Crimean anti-NATO protests of 2006

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] recognition of the Crimean transfer

...although Russia never formally recognized the transfer.

There's nothing about this in the article Crimea. Can someone illuminate this statement? Does it refer to the Russian Soviet Republic or the Russian Federation after 1991? Has Russia formally recognized the hundreds of other Soviet boundary changes, or does this imply that Russia has denied the validity of the 1954 transfer of Crimea? —Michael Z. 2006-06-08 17:40 Z

This was plain nonsense. I removed it. See below. --Irpen 17:52, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] the shoe is on the wrong foot

The article needs to be brought to normalcy. First of all, such maneuvres aren't a surprize of this year. Neither there is anything new in them, they were conducted yearly with US and British miltary taking part, at least nominally. This year the opposition chose to make a show out of this. I think it is their right, but the article should clearly say that nothing drammatic was going to happen and it was drammatized for the purpose of political gain. While this controversy emphasized the low popularity of NATO among the Ukrainian population, this was also well known from the polls for a long time.

"Unsurprisingly, the U.S. marines were greeted by violent protests..." is a POV way to state things. They were never met by such protests in the past before the current opposition chose to use this at her advantage. Natalia Vitrenko "a populist leader" is a rather misleading description of this nutcase. To say that the decision of the Crimean parliament is based exclusively on the desire to relieve the "alarm of Russian tourists" is worse than to say nothing at all. This was the last thing on their minds. Ukraine's banning Zhirik and Zatulin has been long time provoked by the inflammatory rhetoric of these two fellas. It is hardly credible that Ukraine chooses to ban some two deputies in retalation to the unanimous Duma decision. Crimean transfer not recognized by Russia, is just plain false, etc.

Unless the article is brought to normalcy within a short time (or I have time to fo it on my own) the article will be POV-checked. --Irpen 17:52, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

In short, the article doesn't suit your pro-Yushchenko POV and you want to hush up this widely publicized affair as insignificant? I thought Wikipedia does not allow such dirty tricks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moskal (talk • contribs)

My consern is not pro- or anti-Yushchenko POV. Please don't put any words in my mouth. I listed some specific points which are factual issues irrespective of the POV. So, read the WP:AGF guideline and learn not to suspect everyone around with some hidden agendas. If you don't intend to address the issues I raised, I will address them myself when I get to it. I was only so far paying a limited attention to this controversy as it seemed to me more like a joke, this whole matter. --Irpen 19:38, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Majority opposition to NATO membership

The majority of Ukrainians opposes joining the alliance as well.[1]

Near as I can tell, the cited article is an editorial. Although it seems to say that the protests included representatives from around Ukraine, I don't see any indication supporting the statement above. Can someone confirm or deny? —Michael Z. 2006-06-08 20:30 Z

This is a true fact according to polls but the author didn't link them. I saw the real polls somewhere and will add them later. --Irpen 02:21, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Crisis"?

Not having read much news on the subject yet, I can't tell what constitutes a "crisis"—have the protests made it impossible to hold the military exercise, or is it the resulting political posturing between Russia and Ukraine? And how are the protests characterized as "violent"? Has there been fighting, injuries or deaths? Just trying to get an accurate picture. —Michael Z. 2006-06-08 20:34 Z

[edit] Ghirlandajo's deletion

I presented several facts that share the light on the situation in more complete way. However it seems Ghirlandajo's tries to create a biased outlook on the situation by deleting every source that shows Russia's actions against Ukraine. --Molobo 11:49, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Poland is not party to this dispute. Use either English-language sources, or Ukrainian, or Russian. And please recollect your exams. You promised to leave Wikipedia in peace until July, didn't you? --Ghirla -трёп- 11:51, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

We don't have a dispute here between Ukraine and Russia but article about events in Ukraine. Polish sources are as good as English ones if not better due to Poland being closer and more informed. --Molobo 11:53, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Polish media are severly biased against Russia, as you have been demonstrated ad nauseum before. And their lies about Russia have been exposed here too often. Please stop trolling and find reputable sources for your claims. --Ghirla -трёп- 12:06, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

I think there is no need to comment biased and anti-polish views of Ghirlandajo presented here. This is another case of several of your comments when you value information basing it upon the nationality of the source. I think it is heavily against Wiki rules. --Molobo 12:18, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, althouth the constant incivility Ghirla seems to show to his fellow editors who disagree with him is a matter of increasong concern, certainly against WP:CIVIL.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 16:14, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Recent change

Aside from minor copyedit, I deleted the student poll reference because it is not necessarily representative of the entire Crimean population. A more appropriate poll can be cited, for example: a survey of Crimean residents including students, workers, veterans and elderly.--Riurik 16:19, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Anti-democratic

Stating demonstrations were "anti-democratic" is obvious bias. The demonstrants' goal was to condemn the maneuvres and, more largely, NATO policies and pro-join policy of the government, no banners like "remove the democracy, please" appeared. Political demonstrations and expression of opinion are, after all, the part of democratic process. Garret Beaumain 15:15, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

The political forces in Ukraine are divided into pro-democracy pro-NATO Orange coalition and anti-democratic pro-Russian Party of regions and communists. Those demonstrations were not only against NATO, but also against the victory of the Ukrainian democratic revolution and against the democrats. Note also that NATO consists of the most developed democracies in the world, while its enemies are bloody dictatorships like Belarus and Russia.--Certh (talk) 14:17, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Welcome to Wikipedia, the world of Neutral Point of View and relevant sources, where's no fair angels of democracy, nor bloody commie tyrants, nor any other propaganda chiches. Garret Beaumain (talk) 20:42, 5 March 2008 (UTC)