Talk:Tatarstan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Russia / Human geography (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia.
To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the human geography of Russia task force.
 

Violation of Wikipedia:Naming_conventions[edit]

The town and city names in this article violate Wikipedia:Naming_conventions. The official names of the cities and towns in English can be found at the official Tatarstan http://www.tatar.ru/index.php?&node_id=791 web site. They are pretty much the same as the most commonly used Englih names. The official/most commonly used name should be used as an article title. Various spellings/former names can be listed in the specific article. It's wrong to name cities by names noone knows or uses. Specifically this applies to: Naberezhnye Chelny (Yar Çallı used in the article), Nizhnekamsk (Tübän Kama used), Almetyevsk (Älmät), Zelenodolsk (Yäşel Üzän), Bugulma (Bögelmä). The towns should be moved to their proper names. Gene s 07:58, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:Naming policy poll. If no one voices objections in the next couple of days, I'll start editing the article and will move the town articles. Gene s 08:02, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Google search for Tübän Kama -nizhnekams didn't get even single article in English. I tried a random ciry, I'm sure the situation with other cities is the same. It's English wikipedia, and names most used in English should be used there, not national ones. It has nothing with Russian chauvinism. Dr Bug  (Volodymyr V. Medeiko) 14:52, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

DON'T![edit]

See here: User_talk:Untifler

Tatar is official language in Tatarstan. Tatar naming could be used also as Russian, which is placed at the official server.

This is not a question of weather Tatar language is official or not. I gave a link to an official web site of Tatar government. It lists the official names of Tatar cities in English. The official names of the cities are exactly the same as commonly used English names of those cities. They have nothing to do with the names of the cities used in this and related articles (probaby added there by you). Thus, the articles are currently wrong and mislleading. Besides, the names used in the articles are not in English. This is an English wikipedia. Article titles should follow Wikipedia:Naming conventionsGene s 14:59, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Bilingualism is not problem for Tatarstan. And all naming is correct!

Dear Untifler,
it's not bilingual wikipedia. It's just an English wikipedia. Articles should be written in English. Dr Bug  (Volodymyr V. Medeiko) 14:37, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)
There's no official language in Russia that allows to spell "Москва" as "Moscow". It doesn't prevent us from writing "Moscow" through the English wikipedia. Dr Bug  (Volodymyr V. Medeiko) 14:52, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)
This is not a question of bilinginism. This is a question of using proper city names inEnglish. Gene s 14:59, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

German, Estonian, French. Is Tatar nedoyazyk?[edit]

Please be corteous. Don't use words not understood by people who can only read English. Use English for discussion. This is an English wikipedia after all.Gene s 06:52, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Hello.

  1. German, French, Turkish names are writen as in their own language. Tatar also use Latin as Cyrillic. Why we could not use our own script (or romanization of our Cyrillic script)?
    1. Wikipedia:Naming conventions is quite clear on exceptions. If you disagree, please petion to change the Wikipedia:Naming conventions, don't just violate it because you feel so.
    2. As far as I know, Tatar officially uses the Cyrillic alphabet. Romanized Tatar is not officially accepted. For example, Tatar-Romanized is not found on the official web site of Tatarstan government http://www.tatar.ru/. Only English, Russian, and Tatar-Cyrillic. In any case, wikipedia is not a political forum. It's an encyclopedia. If you want to write an article on romanizing Tatar language, that's great. But don't just use Tatar (romanized or not) for article titles when there are perfectly valid English equivalents. Gene s 06:52, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  1. Romanization and Latin Script use extra latin letters, no only English letters. (Myakzyum Slakhov - is Russian speeling of the name - Tatar for he is Mäghzüm Säläxev)
    1. This is an English wikipedia. Not a Tatar or a Russian wikipedia. Noone uses Russian (Cyrillic) spelling for article titles. If someone does, please fix them. Article title should be either a common English name, or an official English name. If the transliteraion from Russian is the most common or official, it should be used. If the most common or official is from Tatar, Tatar transliteration should be used. In neither case a foreign character set should be used for the article title. The characters you want to use for article titles cannot be typed on a standard keyboard. Articles like that cannot be found through standard wiki search. Gene s 06:52, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  1. This is English Wikipedia. Not RUSSIAN> . There are no constant official Enlish name for Tatarstan places, so translators mailly use Russian names of Tatarstan Places, but this tradition haven't official base: it's made only by suppresion from Moscow, interested in unification. This names use not truth transliteration from RUSSIAN, but RUSSSIAN names are mostly trnsliterated from Tatar.
    1. This is not a political forum. If you believe that someone suppresses your nation, write an article about it. But that does not give you a right to use fake city names. Make your givernment rename them first. Then transliterate those names into English.
    2. As long as Tatarstan is a part of Russia, the web site of Tatarstan givernment is the official source. Visit it at http://www.tatar.tu/english/. You will find a list of English-spelled names of Tatar cities and towns. If you disagree with this, petition your government for the change. As long as Tatar goverment gives the English names of the towns they should be used. Besides, the name you used for Naberezhgnye Chelny is totally wrong. It's not just a transliteration issue, it's flat out wrong information.Gene s 06:52, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  1. Why Russian name has priority before the Tatar?
    1. English takes the priority. Use commonly accepted English names, not Tatar or Russian names. See above for the rest of the argument. Gene s 06:52, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)

--Untifler 15:22, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Tatar language is a complete language in its full rights. It's why you should not request to treat it in a very different manner. Russian names of course don't have a priority, but most used by English speakers do. Forget Russian, the Wikipedia naming policy doesn't take in consideration if the name is Russian or Tatar. Only the usage in the English language matters in the English wikipedia. Dr Bug  (Volodymyr V. Medeiko) 15:42, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

If you see inappropriate use of German/French/Turkish names instead of English ones, please fix or report for others to fix. Thanks! Dr Bug  (Volodymyr V. Medeiko) 15:44, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Personal names[edit]

see: Gerhard Schröder, Kemal Atatürk, Arnold Rüütel

ü, ö are not Englısñ letters, also as in Mäğzüm Säläxev.

Click on any of the links you provided. See the problem? None of the articles opens properly. This is a perfect illustration why using foreign characters in article titles is a bad idea. Really really bad idea. Gene s 06:54, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
As for place's name - may be you are not wrong... But Tatar names are also to be redirected. As for personal names, some mistakelly translitirated versions are also to be redirected to correct. As for standart keyboard: is it international key board with dead keys or only Enlglish letter keyboard? So redirect is very usefull think - Myakzyum Salakhov can be redirekted to Mägzüm Säläxev, also like Tukai was redirected to Ghabdulla Tuqay.
Sure, it's a good idea to redirect to an article from alternative spellings. But I don't think it's right to host articles under foreign names using non-English character sets. The examples you provided are still wrong. Schröder should be under Schroeder, Atatürk under Ataturk or Atatyurk. The current state is probably tolerated because there are just a few of them AND these poeple are well-known under these names. Two wrongs don't make a right :-)
I think the example with Ghabdulla Tuqay is fine Its current spelling does not use any characters not in Latin-1, and Google gives an approximately the same number of hits for various spellings of his name.
As for Myakzyum Salakhov and similar, think about it this way - do you want to promote Tatar culture to people who speek English, or do you just want to make a political statement? I can't read Tatar, so I don't even know how to read or pronunce Mäğzüm Säläxev. An average English-speaker would read it as Magzum Salaksev which is clearly wrong. But Myakzyum Salakhov is readable. By insisting on using national characters you make it difficult to find articles, to link to them, to read them. Is that what you want? Probably not. If I were you I would try to make it easy for people to read your articles. One part of it is to limit the article titles to the 26 letters of English. Gene s 13:37, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)
May be will be useful to use "Mäğzüm Säläxev" on the page Myakzyum Salakhov, but using transliteration to SAMPA or to English as well as needed... Becose Myakzyum Salakhov is readble, but is also wrong...

I was interested. How could you pronounce Cälil, Djalil, Jalil, Dzhalil words (forget, that it is speelings of one name). He used his name in old orthography as Çəlil, but his friend, prisoner André Timmermans, wrote his name as Jalìl... So, is any transliteration/name is better than another?..--Untifler 19:51, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I am not sure what your question is. Do you mean Musa Jalil, the poet? If I understand correctly, the Tatar Ç is sharp-ch sound, so it's most closely represented as J. The Dzh is a Cyrillic transliteration since Cyrillic does not have a sharp-ch sound. The Dj is the French-derived one because the French pronounciation of J (zh) is not the same as English. There is no reason to transliterate through Cyrillic or French because it just obfuscates the original spelling. Besides, Musa Jalil is more common than either Djalil, Calil (really wrong, since it reads like Kalil) or Dzhalil. Gene s 08:46, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)
By the way, I looked at Tatar_alphabet page. A lot of it has to be rewritten. This statement C – ce as in "jet" but without first [d] makes no sense. Jet does not have the first d. You only get D when you transliterate through Russian. J in jet is a single sound, there is no separate D or ZH in it. J in Jet is kind of similar to the sound ch in the Russian word ch'yi (whos) but sharper. Gene s 08:46, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I didn't wrote that ç is ch without t and c is jet witout d (somebody else did it). There are no such sounds in English. ç sounds like German Ich-Laut, c is pair for this sound. So, Jalil pronounced ad [dZalil] in English, but I think, It is also wrong.
It would be nice if you could fix the tables at Tatar_alphabet page, since you know the language and the correct pronounciations. The second table (with both Tatar Cyrillic and Tatar Latin) seems to be correct, except it does not have examples in English. The first table is redundant and wrong. I can't fix it because I don't know Tatar. --Gene s 12:44, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
As for Cälil - this is official name, used in English texts too. [1] If any person is interested in pronooncion he can look about pronouncion at Tatar alphabet article. --Untifler 12:12, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
You probaly mean name in use, not official name. The official name is something written in someone's papers issued by a government. Anyway, it actually accentuates the problem. If you want to spell his name Cälil, that's fine with me, but you are making it difficult to pronounce his name correctly. What's more important - spelling or pronounciation? I think pronounciation is more important. Most people would pronounce Cälil as Kalil or Kaelil. If you search Google for English pages with "Musa Cälil" you would get about 66 hits. If you search for "Musa Jalil" you get about 3,600. See the difference?
What is your goal? Do you want to promote Tatar culture? What is easier for an English speaker - Cälil or Jalil? Think about it. --Gene s 12:44, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Note that Jalil means afficative pronouncing of J, what is absolutely wrong in Tatar. Russian mostrly transliterated this sound like z, not like dzh. Co, Cälil could be spelled as Caelil. Cae is [si], like in Caesar, so... If I'll make a article about famous Tatars, I'll use national alphabet + transcription to English. And use redirects too.--Untifler 12:29, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

As for officiality of the web-sites, there are now any tradition to transliterate our name to English, like Ronaji for Japanese or... So, all transliteration such as Myakzyum Salakhov are the most commonly English, but not official.

First of all, the article Tatar alphabet is quite clear on pronounciation. You can use it to transliterate into English. And of course you can be the first to apply the standard transliteration rules to Tatar language: Umlaut, International Phonetic Alphabet, SAMPA Gene s 13:37, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

--Untifler 12:30, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Naming conventions (anglicization)[edit]

Look at this for guidance Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (anglicization) Gene s 14:05, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Респу́блика Татарста́н or Тата́рия There is no Tataria or Татария, only Tatarstan.

"Tataria" is listed because it is one of the names that is used. Naming conventions apply to the article name; they do not prevent from listing any other names in the article's body.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) 01:20, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

State or Republic[edit]

"In 1994-2000 Tatarstan was a de facto independent state" is an overstament of planetary, galactic, universal, proportions. Chechnya was a de-facto independent state in 97-2000. Or Kolchak's Siberian republic. But Tatarstan! Please... Gaidash 4 July 2005 08:04 (UTC)

Is Tatarstan a State in the Russian Federation or an Independant Republic? Republic is more usually connected with independant states, rather than federated states. Nomenclature here needs to be specific. Discussion please.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.1.100.8 (talkcontribs)

Tatarstan is a republic within the Russian Federation. It has exactly the same rights as other republics. Republics of Russia possess a higher degree of sovereignty than other federal subjects (such as krais and oblasts), but they are still not considered to be independent states. Hope this helps.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) 18:35, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Grammar/completeness item[edit]

I found it interesting to learn about Tatarstan from the Wikipedia article.

However i cannot understand the following passage which seems ungrammatical and incomplete:

"By Tatarstan Constitution president could be elected only by people of Tatarstan, but due to Russian federal law this law was stopped fo indefinite term. The Russian law about election of governors says, that they should be elected by local parliaments and that the candidate could be presented only by president."

Perhaps it is a literal translation. What is meant is not understandable in English. Hope this helps in some way.

Also, I am new to wikipedia and would be happy to receive feedback about how to contribute. By the way, first i entered above comment in a wrong place, in a new discussion about the Tatarstan history section template. Maybe someone can delete that?

Zalky

Tatar Latin alphabet[edit]

There is no official Latin alphabet in Tatar. Is it really necessary to have it in the title? Kazak 01:17, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Tatar geo-names[edit]

Following this logic, therefore, the geographical names within Tatarstan should be transliterated into English not only from Russian but also from Tatar. In other words, Belaya River should also be complemented by Aqidel River. Volga should be followed or even preceded (since it is the language of the dominant titular nation in the area) by İdel. Leaving intact any ethical issues, a monolingual transliteration of these names (whether from Russian OR from Tatar) is completely against the logic described above and the democratic nature of Wikipedia.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.194.112.127 (talkcontribs) .

Actually, there are two problems with your line of reasoning:
  1. Tatar names already complement names transliterated from Russian (example). They should be mentioned in the intro line, and there should be a redirect from the Tatar version. Nobody had ever suggested this practice should be abolished. Tatar names in appropriate articles may be absent only because none of the editors who contributed to such an article knew the Tatar language. If you see something's missing, by all means go ahead and add it.
  2. Transliteration always comes second when there is a name established and widely used in the English language. The river Volga is known by this name to the vast majority of Anglophones, while "İdel" is virtually unrecognizable. Please see Wikipedia's naming conventions for more details on this policy.
Ëzhiki (ërinacëus amurënsis) • (yo?); 17:29, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
With respect to the first issue, does it mean that Tatar transliterations of geographical names cannot be mentioned in the body of the Tatarstan article?
As to your second comment, while you might be right with respect to the example of Volga, I have deep concerns regarding this claim to the names of some other rivers in Tatarstan. It would be quite a bit of a stretch to claim that to an average English speaker Belaya would mean more than Aqidel. I would, therefore, urge you to add these names. Even, with respect to Volga, there are examples in the Anglophone media where Idel was used.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.194.112.127 (talkcontribs) .
I reviewed (and reverted) your edit to Tatarstan after I provided my comment above, which is why there is no explanation. The reason for the revert was not because I think that Tatar names should not be mentioned in the article about Tatarstan (where, of course, they are the most appropriate), but because your edit broke the links to the already-existing articles. Seeing that some of the links are incorrect anyway, I re-introduced your edit, formatting the entries properly and in spirit with Wikipedia's guidelines.
Regarding your other concern, the official language of a country should generally be used as a basis for transliteration in the English Wikipedia (unless, like I said above, there is an existing common English name, which may or may not be based on a variant used in a territory's titular language). The official language of Russia is, of course, Russian, and as long as Tatarstan is a part of Russia, Russian will take precedence. I realize that the Constitution of Tatarstan gives equal status to both Tatar and Russian, but it still does not trump the fact that Tatarstan is not an independent country. It should also be mentioned that the majority of Western readers usually get access to local news through Russian (federal) channels, which would use Russian forms, not Tatar, thus making such readers more familiar with the Russian forms. The idea is not to offend someone, but to provide maximum convenience to the English-speaking readers.
I hope this answers your questions. Please let me know if there is anything else I can help with. You may also want to contact Untifler, who is the most active editor of the Tatarstan-related articles here in English Wikipedia and is a bureaucrat of the Tatar Wikipedia (you can address him in Russian, Tatar, or English).—Ëzhiki (ërinacëus amurënsis) • (yo?); 20:02, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Information[edit]

What are the major cities of Tatarstan? --McTrixie 22:32, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

See Administrative divisions of Tatarstan. The major ones are those directly under republic's jurisdiction.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 02:57, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Please understand the difference between sovereignty and independence[edit]

A treaty recognising sovereignty does not necessarily recognise independence, and in fact Tatarstan/Tataria is not independent; nor does it claim to be. Sovereignty and independence are different. For example, the Isle of Man is sovereign, but it is not independent and allows the UK to determine its foreign policy.

158-152-12-77 21:03, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Liquidation ??[edit]

According to this article the line: In 1928 the Tatar Union of the Godless were liquidated in the 1928 purges. links to an article about companies being liquidated. Now in modern American English slang liquidated is another word for murdered but shouldn't the phrase be just that, "murdered? Especially since wikipedia is linking to an article about companies violating laws, etc...? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.169.2.116 (talk) 16:17, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not written in "American English slang", it is written in the English language, in which the word "liquidate" has many other meanings.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 14:33, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Parallels with Chechnya[edit]

Some scholars think that Tatarstan has many parallels with Chechnya. In the 1990s there was a real threat, that Tatarstan might try to secede, and that this would result in a devastating war just like in Chechnya. Perhaps the most important factor in avoiding war was the prudent and wise rule by President Mintimer Shaimiev. Maybe this deserves a mention in the article? What do you think? Offliner (talk) 08:55, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Tatars have less in common with Chechens than it seems - maybe the religion only. Tatars have higher education level, lower fertility rate, more democratic culture, they are more tolerant in average - closer to what you call European mentality, as well as Russians.FeelSunny (talk) 23:23, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

It is a very racist statement to write that because the Chechens fought for their independence then their mentality must be at fault. Where the Polish and other European also 'barbarians' given their struggle against Hitler, Soviet Union and Serbia etc.? Are the Republican Irish, the anti-Spanish in Spain etc. not Europeans either? Moarrikh (talk) 00:56, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

You completely misunderstood the editor's point - which was stating that the people of Tatarstan have more identity with the Russian culture, and do no wish to succeed from the union. Also, Al Quaeda-like elements are not prevalent in the same way they are in Chechnya. HammerFilmFan (talk) 17:53, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

GDP per capita[edit]

"Tatarstan's GDP per capita was USD 12,325 in 2004[19], with GDP in 2008 at about 930 bln rubles.[12]"

I don't think it's very useful to quote an old GDP/capita number from 2004, when we already have the GDP from 2008. Anyone who is interested can calculate the pro capita number from the 2008 GDP figure himself. Offliner (talk) 18:06, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree, and the number is especially useless when it's not even compared to the national average in 2004. Do you know where official 2008 GDP figures are or could you post them? Rosstat is acting strange so I can't check it at the moment. LokiiT (talk) 23:23, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Multi-cultural[edit]

I think more emphasis should be put on the multi-cultural aspect of this region. It's a shining example of how Muslim and Christian communities can live side by side happily and without destroying or oppressing each other. One of the few examples of this in the entire world in fact. Here's a quote from the Council of Europe's Commissioner of Human Rights after his visit to Russia:

"10. The example of the Republic of Tatarstan is even more noteworthy. As I pointed out earlier in connection with the rights of national minorities, Tatarstan is a veritable cultural and religious melting pot, in which a spirit of cooperation and dialogue prevail, two values championed by both the President of the Republic of Tatarstan and the Grand Mufti of Kazan, who represents the majority religion in that region. Good relations are in evidence at the highest level. When I visited Kazan's main church, also known as the Old Kremlin of Kazan, I was accompanied by the Metropolitan and the Grand Mufti of the city. All the religious representatives I met emphasised their very good relations with the other faiths and the local authorities. Today Kazan stands out as one of the leading centres of Muslim culture, and the greatly influential Islamic university has done much to cement this reputation. This institution accepts students from all over Russia, and I was pleased to note the presence of a Chechen among the students introduced to me." LokiiT (talk) 21:55, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

RFE/RL correspondents are strongly opposed to this law[edit]

Is it relevant? There may be lots of organizations holding different positions on different laws.--MathFacts (talk) 12:28, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Muslim population[edit]

NO ACTION:

No support--Ymblanter (talk) 17:41, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Lets go over a few things. 1) I myself can find numerous articles that say the Muslim population of Tatarstan is 52.9%, however these are all BEFORE the 2010 census (i.e 2009, 2008, ....) And actually I think the article you all are trying to force might even have been before the latest census as well. 2) 52.9% was from the 2002 census. Hence it is not suprising that number was previously used. 3) The article says PREDOMINANTLY of the 52.9% is Muslim, meaning we don't actually know the actual Muslim population. I'm only updating from what you all are implying. Therefore it is quite safe to assume that PREDOMINANTLY of the 53.2% is Muslim. Also, if we do take the 52.9 stat, then there's two conflicting numbers since the Tatar population is listed just above the religion section. 4) It is only a difference of 0.3% so I don't think it matters that much. 68.149.133.218 (talk) 01:49, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Additional discussion on this topic is available here (archived link). It seems the editors are either leaning to the original version or to the removal of the offending sentence altogether. Further comments are welcome.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); February 3, 2012; 13:03 (UTC)
  • Nobody supported the proposed changes, and I reverted them. This part of the discussion is closed.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:39, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


There is a factual error on the article page in the section called terminology. Ther ending stan in the name Tatarastan, as all other endings of countries of Central Asia e.g. Kazakhstan, Afghanistan and even Pakistan, is not proto-Sanscritic but Farsi/Turkic and should be written as such. It actually is misleading the way it currently written. Please can someone modify this or I will delete it and re-write this section. Moarrikh (talk) 00:48, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

  • Please go ahead if you feel like re-writing it.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:41, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Strange assertion in recent edit[edit]

The user Soffredo edited in a line in the Modern times section, which makes the claim that Tatarstan "declared independence" in 2008 and asked for UN recognition. The source cited does not corroborate this in any way, it merely relays what a group of Tatar secessionists outside of the Tatarstan political leadership "declared", with the apparent support of Vil Mirzayanov who is an outspoken Tatarstan secessionist and Russian dissident living in the United States. Neither he nor the unofficial Tatar Mejlis in question has any political legitimacy in this regard and they do not represent the Republic of Tatarstan.

Ergo, this assertion is factually wrong, though the article should of course note that there are secessionist movements. 78.70.216.65 (talk) 08:04, 30 March 2014 (UTC)