Jump to content

Talk:2021 Russian protests: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
Line 43: Line 43:
::::::::::: {{re|Gnosandes}} I am stating what RS say, you are saying the complete opposite of what they say. WP policy is not something optional for you to dismiss as "misinformation". [[User:Mellk|Mellk]] ([[User talk:Mellk|talk]]) 01:24, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
::::::::::: {{re|Gnosandes}} I am stating what RS say, you are saying the complete opposite of what they say. WP policy is not something optional for you to dismiss as "misinformation". [[User:Mellk|Mellk]] ([[User talk:Mellk|talk]]) 01:24, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
::::::::::: Some examples: [https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-russia-politics-navalny-protests/putin-calls-pro-navalny-marches-illegal-new-protest-set-for-sunday-idUKKBN29U1N0 Reuters], [https://www.hrw.org/news/2021/01/25/russia-police-detain-thousands-pro-navalny-protests HRW], [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-55778334 BBC], [https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/23/international-home/russia-protests-navalny.html NYT], [https://www.dw.com/en/russia-police-detain-thousands-at-pro-navalny-protests/a-56321592 DW] etc. [[User:Mellk|Mellk]] ([[User talk:Mellk|talk]]) 01:28, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
::::::::::: Some examples: [https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-russia-politics-navalny-protests/putin-calls-pro-navalny-marches-illegal-new-protest-set-for-sunday-idUKKBN29U1N0 Reuters], [https://www.hrw.org/news/2021/01/25/russia-police-detain-thousands-pro-navalny-protests HRW], [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-55778334 BBC], [https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/23/international-home/russia-protests-navalny.html NYT], [https://www.dw.com/en/russia-police-detain-thousands-at-pro-navalny-protests/a-56321592 DW] etc. [[User:Mellk|Mellk]] ([[User talk:Mellk|talk]]) 01:28, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
:::::::::::: {{re|Mellk}} I do not consider paid bourgeois media to be reliable sources. The fact that they are building a picture around Navalny's fringe group is obvious. You repeat after the bourgeois media. In doing so, you have designated the bourgeois media as reliable sources. And socialist and anarchist sources are not reliable sources for you. You wrote it from above. You are preventing me from giving a third point of view about protests. This is despotic behavior. [[User:Gnosandes|Gnosandes]] ([[User talk:Gnosandes|talk]]) 01:37, 26 January 2021 (UTC)


== Meduza as a reliable source ==
== Meduza as a reliable source ==

Revision as of 01:37, 26 January 2021

How is Mikhail Kasyanov in the list of leaders?

There are no any references about Mikhail Kasyanov to be a leader of protest. In news also no mentions. Pet92 (talk) 06:31, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure why, I removed him as a "lead figure". Mellk (talk) 15:28, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Equivalent of BY/PL Coordination/Consultative Council?

There now seem to be major street protests in Russia big enough to be wikipediated every year. Is there any project of going to the next step, of developing something like horizontally organised, participatory shadow governments like the Belarusian Coordination Council (Belarus) (and National Anti-crisis Management) and the Consultative Council (Poland)? These are not quite shadow governments, they're more like groups of citizens aiming to discuss and make decisions on concrete actions while avoiding the formal constraints and personal-power-politics and secrecy of political parties.

If reliable sources exist on Coordination Council (Russia), then it would be good to start the article. Boud (talk) 20:45, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Undo edits

@Mellk: Why did you undo edits? Even the fact of administrative and criminal cases indicates a third party to the protest. Gnosandes (talk) 15:54, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Gnosandes: There is no mention of anarchists/communists in the article itself whatsoever, I also do not see RS mentioning them, which is also probably why Russian Wiki article does not include them. These protests are effectively Navalny v. authorities. If you can provide RS (not a YouTube video) which shows there is a third side worth including, then feel free to add those RS. Mellk (talk) 16:00, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Mellk: I have not provided any videos. For transferred it to the third column. Gnosandes (talk) 16:06, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Gnosandes: I understand, however I am saying that the video that was added by another user is not RS in this case (and is a primary source) for this to determine a third side. If we must have a third side included, we need RS (for example reliable news articles) that show there was a third side significant enough to include here. However I have not seen this anywhere. Mellk (talk) 16:13, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Mellk: I canceled your edit and responded to you. Gnosandes (talk) 16:53, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Mellk: I think it is worth distinguishing between bourgeois showdowns from socialist, anarchist and communist ones. It's just that, unlike Navalny's bourgeois party, the socialist movements are united (they all come together) and it is impossible to define who is who. In fact, I did not see the monarchists and fascists, and there are many of them in Russia. Gnosandes (talk) 16:57, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Gnosandes: I removed them in the first place because of WP:VERIFIABILITY and WP:RS, not because I choose to make it about Navalny. Mellk (talk) 19:32, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've already advised about WP:VERIFIABILITY and WP:RS. There are no RS here that show that any of these other parties played a major role in the protests, let alone mention them. Primary sources are not good enough. Unless RS can be provided that shows they were a notable force in the protests, they shouldn't be moved out of the "supported by" section. Mellk (talk) 23:46, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Mellk: Who confuses bourgeois movements with communist and anarchist movements? Only you! The communist and anarchist movements never supported Navalny. You can verify this by following the links that were indicated. That is why I introduced a differentiation according to the flag of Russian Federation and the flag of the Russian SFSR. First you need to provide the links, but you extend this to all people, even those who do not support him. Gnosandes (talk) 23:51, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You present the picture as it is presented by the bourgeois media. Take the same Putin. Where did he say that the protesters need to be dispersed? But, "you" make him the main figure. Wikipedia spreads either disinformation, referring to non-RS? Gnosandes (talk) 00:02, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Gnosandes: I read the links, they supported the protests and were against Navalny's arrest (against political prisoners). They are not a third side. That does not mean they are allies who support Navalny's program. Same thing with 2019 Moscow protests and 2011–2013 Russian protests for example. I don't make him the main figure, he IS the main figure based on any RS. So please, make yourself familiar with WP:RS instead. Mellk (talk) 00:16, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And are you really trying to pretend that Navalny is not the main figure here and that these other fringe groups are equally as important? It seems like you're making excuses for lack of RS with this "bourgeois media". Mellk (talk) 00:20, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Mellk: They are a third party because they had their own slogans and so on. That being said, look at boxing by the February Bourgeois Democratic Revolution. There are two driving forces liberal and socialist. Only the scale is larger. I repeat once again that you have mixed everything. All sources to which you assign RS can also be assigned to the non-RS cliché. You provide misinformation by mixing different movements. In the 2019 Moscow protests, everything is divided by movements. If you are writing an article about Navalny, rename it. Otherwise, it is sheer nonsense. Gnosandes (talk) 00:29, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Mellk: I will also note that Navalny's group is also fringe because it is not registered. Gnosandes (talk) 00:34, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Gnosandes: These protests are pro-Navalny protests, as widely described as in media, and were organized by Navalny's team in the first place. These are not Left Front protests or anarchist protests. Which is why I believed the way you did it looked very misleading. Separating them by ideology is not a requirement, as seen with 2011–2013 Russian protests, 2014 anti-war protests in Russia, 2018 Russian pension protests and so on. This is not comparable to February Revolution. A revolution by the way. That said, the reason these are called "Russian protests" and not something like "pro-Navalny protests" in the title is because of consistency (WP:CRITERIA) with other protest articles. Mellk (talk) 00:46, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Mellk: These protests are not pro-Navalny. The fact that the protests were organized by Navalny's fringe group does not prove that half of the people who do not support Navalny did not follow protests. Socialists and anarchists came out with demands for the release of political prisoners, democratization of the political system, investigation of political murders and corruption, and with typical Marxist demands. This means that separation by ideology is mandatory. Yes, I pointed out that this is a revolution, but the point was in the separation of movements. At the time, the Kadets (liberals) were a slightly larger force, but they were not fringe like Navalny's group. WP:CRITERIA principle is a typical misinformation and substitution of concepts. Gnosandes (talk) 01:02, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Mellk: With all this, the article contains information about protests in other countries. This is inconsistent with the title of the article. In Europe, they may have supported Navalny, but there are other movements in the Russian Federation. This is again absurd. Gnosandes (talk) 01:16, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Gnosandes: I am stating what RS say, you are saying the complete opposite of what they say. WP policy is not something optional for you to dismiss as "misinformation". Mellk (talk) 01:24, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Some examples: Reuters, HRW, BBC, NYT, DW etc. Mellk (talk) 01:28, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Mellk: I do not consider paid bourgeois media to be reliable sources. The fact that they are building a picture around Navalny's fringe group is obvious. You repeat after the bourgeois media. In doing so, you have designated the bourgeois media as reliable sources. And socialist and anarchist sources are not reliable sources for you. You wrote it from above. You are preventing me from giving a third point of view about protests. This is despotic behavior. Gnosandes (talk) 01:37, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Meduza as a reliable source

Just wondering if Meduza is a reliable source for the number of total arrests? It looks like some unofficial, blog type site, which doesn't clearly specify the source of the information it has. BeŻet (talk) 17:36, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Opposition to Vladimir Putin" in the infobox causes??

Seems kinda farfetched. The "opposition to Vladimir Putin" is in fact the current institutes of opposition that exists in Russia (such as Navalny's FBK itself). While the majority of protesters had no political agenda whatsoever, those who had one actually pressured for Putin's resignation. Maybe that should be a cause, i.e. "Vladimir Putin's refusal to succeed/resign"? But also, I think one of the key elements of the protest is the lack of response from Putin's cabinet, there is no reaction to Navalny's documentaries, which, in turn, frustrates a lot of people. Shouldn't that also be mentioned? --Whydoesitfeelsogood (talk) 23:08, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it can be reworded, however these were certainly anti-government demonstrations and therefore against Putin's rule, and anti-Putin slogans were commonly used. Not to mention that Navalny's investigation against Putin played a big part. Where did you get the idea that the "majority of protesters had no political agenda whatsoever"? Mellk (talk) 23:36, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, seems like they've just thrown in all political opponents and supporters of Putin's Government, but the Russian indicate they have participated in the protests. Putting the current ruling party doesn't make sense when they are the government (already mentioned). Alfred the Lesser (talk) 23:13, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]