Talk:Euromaidan: Difference between revisions
→Image removal: Maybe try moving the 'History of the Ukraine' navbox from that section to the top. That might help the rendering on your end without removing the image. |
|||
Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
}} |
}} |
||
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} |
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} |
||
==Not one mention of American involvement== |
|||
There is not a single sentence that mentions American involvement in this coup. Victoria Nuland was there handing out cookies, John McCain was there cheering on the demonstrators. The CIA has offices in Kiev, it is common knowledge. The USA has spent billions of dollars through NGOs in Ukraine to foment the revoltion and now has military advisers training and equipping Ukraine army. Why the silence? All of these are facts. Facts which are KEY to this coup. Oh, I get it: this article isn't actually history in the traditional sense of the term; rather it is revisionist history to hide US involvement in the Maidan coup, and you don't want people to know about it. It's this kind of propaganda shit that makes Wikipedia so shitty and unreliable as a historical source. This article sucks because it is written from a Ukrainian nationalist perspective, deliberately leaving out key facts such as US involvement in the Maidan coup. |
|||
==Image removal== |
==Image removal== |
||
{{ping|Crisco 1492}} Is there an other than aesthetic reason for this image removal [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Euromaidan&diff=661224692&oldid=661221830]? I think it likely that the visual issues are simply associated with your browser. When I look at the before/after revisions the clip fits neatly under the history box and creates no extra white space. If there is an editorial reason for removal would you mind explaining it and if it is aesthetic only would you please replace it? Cheers. [[User:Jbhunley|<span style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:16pt;color:#886600">J</span><span style="font-family:Lucida Calligraphy;font-size:11pt;color:#886600">bh</span>]][[User_talk:Jbhunley|<span style="color: #00888F"><sup>Talk</sup></span>]] 11:32, 7 May 2015 (UTC) |
{{ping|Crisco 1492}} Is there an other than aesthetic reason for this image removal [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Euromaidan&diff=661224692&oldid=661221830]? I think it likely that the visual issues are simply associated with your browser. When I look at the before/after revisions the clip fits neatly under the history box and creates no extra white space. If there is an editorial reason for removal would you mind explaining it and if it is aesthetic only would you please replace it? Cheers. [[User:Jbhunley|<span style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:16pt;color:#886600">J</span><span style="font-family:Lucida Calligraphy;font-size:11pt;color:#886600">bh</span>]][[User_talk:Jbhunley|<span style="color: #00888F"><sup>Talk</sup></span>]] 11:32, 7 May 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 10:03, 27 May 2015
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Euromaidan article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
![]() | This page is not a forum for general discussion about Euromaidan. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Euromaidan at the Reference desk. |
![]() | A news item involving Euromaidan was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 2 December 2013. | ![]() |
![]() | This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to Eastern Europe or the Balkans, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
Not one mention of American involvement
There is not a single sentence that mentions American involvement in this coup. Victoria Nuland was there handing out cookies, John McCain was there cheering on the demonstrators. The CIA has offices in Kiev, it is common knowledge. The USA has spent billions of dollars through NGOs in Ukraine to foment the revoltion and now has military advisers training and equipping Ukraine army. Why the silence? All of these are facts. Facts which are KEY to this coup. Oh, I get it: this article isn't actually history in the traditional sense of the term; rather it is revisionist history to hide US involvement in the Maidan coup, and you don't want people to know about it. It's this kind of propaganda shit that makes Wikipedia so shitty and unreliable as a historical source. This article sucks because it is written from a Ukrainian nationalist perspective, deliberately leaving out key facts such as US involvement in the Maidan coup.
Image removal
@Crisco 1492: Is there an other than aesthetic reason for this image removal [1]? I think it likely that the visual issues are simply associated with your browser. When I look at the before/after revisions the clip fits neatly under the history box and creates no extra white space. If there is an editorial reason for removal would you mind explaining it and if it is aesthetic only would you please replace it? Cheers. JbhTalk 11:32, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
- It has little to do with the browser, and much more to do with the screen resolution. What resolution are you using? At 1366*768, it causes severe white space, which is something we should be avoiding. See Help:Whitespace. If the video I removed is important to understanding the content of the text, and not purely decorative (I doubt that, as watching the video it comes across as a disjointed series of clips without a unifying theme aside from the events it depicts), it can be worked in elsewhere. With a better caption of course... "Euromaidan Kyiv Ukraine 2014" conveys no information about why the video is important in an encyclopedic sense. — Crisco 1492 (talk)
- Hmmm... I have no real attachment to the video, however it has been in the article through a lot of discussions here. When I look at the before/after using 1600x900, 1280x800 and making my browser window different sizes I simply do not see the white space issue you are talking about. For instance when I take the window size down to about 1024x768 and 800x600 there is more white space on the current revision - it starts at note 4 while the old version starts at note 7.
Considering how heated this article has been in the past I would rather see content removal based on something other than, in my opinion (I see more while space in your version on small screens), unnecessary aesthetic grounds. I see no reason to revert your edit but I would be grateful if you would consider that possibly graphic presentation is not the best, or even a good, reason to remove content. JbhTalk 14:23, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
- Ensuring that articles remain in accordance with the manual of style and image use policy ("The purpose of an image is to increase readers' understanding of the article's subject matter, [...] The relevant aspect of the image should be clear and central.") is always an appropriate reason to remove content. Also, the issue showed up not in the footnotes, but in the references—there are nearly four hundred references in this article, meaning that's a heck of a lot of whitespace. Screenshot here, downsampled for size considerations (though it's still uploading; might take a few minutes) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:15, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
- Your screenshot file is corrupted. I believe you see what you see, I am simply saying that I do not see the problem, there is no white space in the References section with or without the file, the number of references makes no difference unless you have a rendering issue or I am completely missing something. The image end before the references section.
I made a simple request that you reconsider the removal of material in an article which has been subject to much discussion. If you do not have a better reason for removing the content than it looks bad on your screen please put it back. Please consider this an objection to your bold removal. The primary issue I see is the 'History of the Ukraine' navbox needs to be at the top of the article rather than the bottom. Adjusting that may take care of the white space issue you are seeing without removing content. That would seem to take care of your objection and mine in one swoop if you would care to give it a try since I simply do not see the same screen rendering you do. Cheers. JbhTalk 17:58, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
- Your screenshot file is corrupted. I believe you see what you see, I am simply saying that I do not see the problem, there is no white space in the References section with or without the file, the number of references makes no difference unless you have a rendering issue or I am completely missing something. The image end before the references section.
- Hmmm... I have no real attachment to the video, however it has been in the article through a lot of discussions here. When I look at the before/after using 1600x900, 1280x800 and making my browser window different sizes I simply do not see the white space issue you are talking about. For instance when I take the window size down to about 1024x768 and 800x600 there is more white space on the current revision - it starts at note 4 while the old version starts at note 7.
- Wikipedia controversial topics
- Wikipedia In the news articles
- C-Class European Union articles
- Mid-importance European Union articles
- WikiProject European Union articles
- C-Class Ukraine articles
- High-importance Ukraine articles
- WikiProject Ukraine articles
- C-Class politics articles
- Mid-importance politics articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- C-Class sociology articles
- Low-importance sociology articles
- C-Class social movements task force articles
- Social movements task force articles