Talk:Oleksandr Turchynov

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Biography (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject Ukraine (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ukraine, a WikiProject which aims to improve coverage of Ukraine on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Shot[edit]

According to this, he has been shotted at the scene of Maidan by sniper. --Norden1990 (talk) 22:59, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm not too sure how trustworthy twitter is... especially from a source that is 100% bias (the account is called Euromaiden). On top of that, "shotted" is not a word: I think they meant "shot". Kndimov (talk) 02:57, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

acting pm in 2010[edit]

I factchecked it and plenty of hits came up on google. Reuters: "Ukraine's acting prime minister and Yanukovich rival Oleksander Turchinov" --Львівське (говорити) 07:07, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

  • I want somebody to read our dispute with User:Lvivske about this issue: User talk:Lvivske#!, diff. I cannot convice him of fact, that Turchynov did not act as prime minister from 4 March 2010 till 11 March 2010, so this erroneous information should be removed from this and other articles. Maybe, somebody else can do it. --Yuriy Kolodin (talk) 08:48, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
    • That information isn't erroneous, Turchynov did act as Prime Minister from 4 March till 11 March 2010. Lvivske presented a very reliable source from Reuters. Also note this sources: Kyiv Post: "Tymoshenko vacates premier's post" and also Kyiv Post: "Cabinet: Turchynov will fulfill premier's duties until new government is formed". Clearly, the information is correct, and it should stay. --Sundostund (talk) 13:32, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • New York Times: "Oleksandr V. Turchynov, a former acting prime minister"
  • Rulers.org "On March 4 Oleksandr Turchynov is named acting prime minister as Tymoshenko takes a leave, although she nominally remains in office until March 11"
I don't see why this user thinks I need to be convinced or everyone should gang up on me. I'm not the one who did the first revert of his blanking, I was requested to come in and comment as an independent 3rd party to this dispute, and after taking the time to do my own fact checking, I see that Yuriy Kolodin here is wrong. On my talk page he plainly states that the media isn't to be trusted and he'd prefer to use original research to prove his point.--Львівське (говорити) 16:49, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Conversation is finished. --Yuriy Kolodin (talk) 21:32, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Is he acting PM?[edit]

I changed the info on the Victor Yanukovych page, but he is prime minister even if his function is only as the speaker of parliament? This source (http://www.euronews.com/2014/02/22/live-updates-protesters-take-over-kyiv-parliament-releases-tymoschenko/) only mentions that he is speaker of parliament currently. That would indicate that the presidency is currently vacant, wouldn't it? Thanks, David O. Johnson (talk) 07:12, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

he is 1 : "Oleksandr Turchynov, the opposition leader now appointed as parliament speaker and acting prime minister" - --Львівське (говорити) 07:16, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you.David O. Johnson (talk) 07:29, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Controversy[edit]

Under "controversy" it states

Wikileaks documents mention Turchynov, then head of Ukraine's SBU, as having destroyed documents implicating Yulia Tymoshenko's alleged connections to organized crime boss Semion Mogilevich.[21]

However, when you open the link (21) all you can read is:

New and conflicting details emerge over Mogilevich’s alleged involvement in nation

and

"Former security service chief Oleksandr Turchynov said he didn’t order the destruction of a case file on reputed mobster Semyon Mogilevich. "

There is no mention of WikiLeaks and/or allegation of Turchynov destroying the documents. If this information is not available, perhaps it should be edited that "Wikileks allegedly mention.... etc.87.110.180.50 (talk) 09:34, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Turchynov[edit]

Turchynov was not appointed acting Prime Minister. The source given is erroneous. Arbuzov was never dismissed from being acting Prime Minister, while Turchynov due to situation in the country, was appointed coordinator of Cabinet of Minister (not Prime Minister). Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 00:07, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

A.h. kingInformation has to be verified before posting it. Is it not the main principle of wikipedia? Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 00:30, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
A.h. king, a simple question. Did Arbuzov resign from his office? Did anybody dismiss him? On February 24, 2014 Arbuzov as an acting Prime Minister of Ukraine released a statement: "Complex circumstances should not prevent economy of the country to work". Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 01:17, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
This RELIABLE source states that Turchynov was named acting PM by the Verkhovna Rada: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26316268 (paragraph 5-6). A.h. king • Talk to me! 10:01, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
A.h. king, how is that RELIABLE? Just because it published by BBC, it is not automatically reliable. Is the information published by the Supreme Council of Ukraine non-reliable?? Wikipedia is not a newschannel to republish some random information from other sources. Wikipedia information should be such that correspond the reality. Information on appointments to government offices is documented with official documents which proscribe those appointments. Turchynov is a coordinator of CabMin (not Prime Minister), yet Arbuzov continues to occupy the office of Prime Minister of Ukraine. If Turchynov would have been appointed acting Prime Minister, Arbuzov should have been dismissed. It did not take place. Please, note that even Vitaliy Zakharchenko has not been completely dismissed from his post, but considering situation in Ukraine and the fact that the head of Ukrainian militsiya is on the run Arsen Avakov was temporarily appointed in his place. Also, look that no ministerial portfolios were switched as of yet, but rather the current ministries are being simply dismissed. The new temporary government should be appointed on Thursday, February 27. A lot of media reporters are rushing with conclusions or assumptions, but instead simplify things when they should be reported the way they are. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 14:58, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Look at the official websites of the Supreme Council of Ukraine, the President of Ukraine, and the Cabinet of Ukraine. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 15:02, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
The reason Turchynov is the acting President due to the Constitution of Ukraine where the Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada acts as the President of Ukraine in the absence of one (ex officio). No one has any intentions to usurp power in the country, yet there are many who portray it as such. There were dismissal and resignation of certain number of officials that was approved by the Ukrainian parliament, any other officials are absent without leave (AWOL) and should be brought to liability as one who left their office or missing from their work without proper documentation. No one dismissed Arbuzov from his office. On February 26 he needs to hold government meeting. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 15:25, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
After signing the treaty with parliamentary opposition the President had to officially address people, yet he chose an alternative way discrediting the opposition, his supporting party and bringing the country on a verge of civil schism. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 15:35, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
The article about Viktor Yanukovych also states that Yanukovych was impeached which also is not true. He was removed from the office due to self-withdrawal (Ukrainian: самоусунення, samousunennia). Even the English article does not mention anything about impeachment which constitutes an original research. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 15:45, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
On February 22, 2014 Oleksandr Turchynov, Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada (note, not an acting Prime Minister), conducted a conference with acting government officials. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 16:04, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
A.h. king, also, please, consider that the fact of the chairman of Parliament coordinating (not chairing) the Cabinet of Ukraine is mentioned by the All-Ukrainian Association Maidan. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 16:11, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Turchynov was coordinator of Cabinet only, not Prime Minister. Arbuzov was dismissed today, on 27 Feb. NickSt (talk) 14:36, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

The first paragraph states that Putin doesn't consider legitimate. How is that relevant? Should we list all the officials who do consider him legitmate? Does Putin decide which foreign officials are legitimate? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.78.176.222 (talk) 23:43, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Rel the use of 50-cent legal terms: 'Need citations or use other terminology cited supported by the sources[edit]

De jure, de facto, and ex officio--fancy legal terms--IMO add nothing to this article. Just make it sound like first-year law review got hold of it. These terms make legal judgments. As such, need to cite sources for the use of the terms or use other plain language actually supported by the sources. Paavo273 (talk) 21:29, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

The terms make no legal judgements, by recognising him as 'de jure' or not governments make legal judgements. I am just reporting how different governments view. I could change them for 'in fact' and 'in law' but the Latin terms are universal in diplomacy. Sceptic1954 (talk) 21:38, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

If you have a valid source quoting or referring to any "government mak[ing] [one or more of these] legal judgment[s]", fine! Otherwise, save the legal vocab. for a law school essay or legal vocab. lesson and just use what the sources say. WP policy, incl. No OR is quite clear about this. In other words, 'need to stay within the four corners of the source material; WP by policy is entirely derivative. We don't add our own ideas. Paavo273 (talk) 21:45, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Have now made the same point in the lead sticking more closely to sources. Sceptic1954 (talk) 08:51, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

There is nothing obscure about 'de facto': the BBC uses it today "Moscow remains in de facto control of Ukraine's southern autonomous region." [1]Sceptic1954 (talk) 09:14, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

  1. ^ http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26444747