I won't revert, but hopefully someone else will do something about it. Anyway, "some commentators" is an archetypal example of WP:WEASEL. RGloucester - ☎ 23:44, (UTC) There is nothing undue about mentioning position of the second biggest land neighbor of Ukraine and biggest NATO country neighboring Ukraine.- MyMoloboaccount ( talk) 23:49, (UTC) Yes (I was referring to newspaper opinions), and "international reactions" have their own section. One could include the Polish Minister of Defence's opinion, but that would go in the "Reactions" section, not in the lead. Giving WP:UNDUE weight to random commentators violates WP:SOAP and WP:NPOV. Opinion pieces are only for the sake of determining the position of the author, not for factual events. And Polish Minister of Defense described Ukraine being in state of civil war, explaining that it fits the description as armed groups from local people are using arms and military equipment to fight each other.- MyMoloboaccount ( talk) 23:40, (UTC) I hope you understand that "commentators" and "opinion pieces" have no validity for determining whether the conflict is a civil war.At the moment this doesn't need a name change(perhaps it will in week or two), but this should be mentioned.I added one reliable source, more an be added if needed.- MyMoloboaccount ( talk) 23:28, (UTC) More and more commentators are now naming these events as civil war. The referendum itself is heavily disputed, and isn't a "poll" anyway. They are just different polls taken at different times, with different results. RGloucester - ☎ 19:54, (UTC) Ok maybe then, it should be noted that polls have conflicting results (my excuse for referring Kiev International Institute of Sociology as governmental). Also, certain polls were taken at different periods. There are many discrepancies, and it isn't certain who is correct. We report what the reliable sources say (by the way, the KIIS poll isn't from a "government institute"). Remember, it's a war, and the lies will be a prominent weapon of both sides. Now, don't get me wrong, I am not saying that should not be referred, or to be deleted, but not like it's indisputable, when all it's sources are by pro-Ukrainian institutes (Kiev and Western countries). Decentralization is already announced by Kyiv and happening regardless so 'status quo' isnt really an option - Львівське ( говорити) 16:22, 22 April 2014 (UTC)Īm I the only one that views sceptically a government institute's poll while a civil war is imminent? Even if its scientists are still doing their job, the field workers asking the questions are neutral? Are the questioned people easy on answers to a government institution when a civil war conflict is imminent? And if they are, how am I supposed to receive the 41% support for separation of Crimeans (by government institution) when referendum was in 96% in favor, 83% turnout and "91% of those Crimeans polled thought that the vote was free and fair, and 88% said that the Ukrainian government should recognize the results" according to Pew Institute. Wrant ( talk) 09:18, 21 April 2014 (UTC) it makes sense to merge the united figures together if we're comparing systems. Though I suggest a table for a better overview. Indeed I've overseen it in the text because an author merged the two sections "united" and "united - but with decentralization" into one. Please don't re-add the chart, which is redundant. This information is already listed in the prose. It doesn't reflect the opinion of the militants/protestors, etc. It is not the opinion of the protesters, but the population that live there. Wrant ( talk) 10:16, 20 April 2014 (UTC) Maybe you are misunderstanding something. United - But with decentralization of the power to the regions Following the figure from a poll I added to the article: The main demands of the protestors are not the unity with Russia but federalization and they are not covered by the article.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |