Talk:Vladimir Putin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article nominee Vladimir Putin was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Biography / Politics and Government (Rated B-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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the politics and government work group (marked as High-importance).

This article has comments here.

WikiProject Russia / Sports & games / Politics and law (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 sports and games in Russia task force.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the politics and law of Russia task force.

This article has comments here.

WikiProject Conservatism (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has comments here.

WikiProject Politics (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has comments here.

This article has an assessment summary page.

Economic, industrial, and energy policies[edit]

Under Putin, the economic environment of Russia has changed, partly due to the attempted radical market-oriented reforms characterized as "shock therapy (economics)" under Yeltsin, to a State monopoly capitalism (stamocap) economy, where the state (under Putin), controls all major industries and the overall economy.

State monopoly capitalism (stamocap) theory, also referred to as crony capitalism, refers to an environment where the state intervenes in the economy under an autocrat, or authoritarian dictator, to protect large monopolistic or oligopolistic businesses from competition by smaller firms.

Weight and BMI[edit]

What relevance is there to his weight and BMI ratings? I don't think this is appropiate, as I see no other Wikipedia articles of politicians where their weight and BMI is listed. --Canelo 93 (talk) 11:33, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Indeed. Removed. Can't see any decent reason for having this. Fut.Perf. 12:26, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
With all the talk of his having had (multiple) strokes, perhaps there would be merit in having a section on his health? Eg see here. It's relevant because a) the Kremlin hides it to keep him looking strong, and b) the whole strongman image is to contrast with Yeltsin who was notoriously drunk and frail (had a heart attack before his second election win). Malick78 (talk) 13:05, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
Height restored as fact of note; BMI removed as original research. -M.Altenmann >t
If that section is to be retained, it should be stated why it's significant. AFAIK, 170 cm still isn't somehow abnormal for a man. Compare Dmitry Medvedev's 163 cm, for example. Brandmeistertalk 18:06, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
re: why it's significant, well, for starters, it is in my driver's ID. I guess US government thinks height is important parameter. Second, it is not abnormal, but still people notice (and publish in newspapers, too). -M.Altenmann >t 19:46, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
That falls under WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Check Human_height#Average_height_around_the_world. In Russia it's 176 cm for men, so Putin's difference isn't particularly noteworthy. Brandmeistertalk 20:48, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
How come noticeably below average is not noteworthy? Anyway, this is your personal opinion. Other people found it noteworthy and please don't pour alphabet soup here without reviewing the policy yourself first. -M.Altenmann >t 03:37, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
For example, Stalin was of short stature, and you will find quite a few references about efforts of photographers to conceal this fact. On the other hand, there is a widespread myth that Napoleon was a shorty, while in fact he was of average height. In other words, height of a leader is of note, discussed and inquired. And therefore this info is quite 'discriminate' and encyclopedic. -M.Altenmann >t 03:40, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
I've read news articles mentioning Putin's attempts to hide his lack of height. I therefore concur that it's notable. I'd question though whether 170 is accurate - he was said to be the same height as Medvedev. Malick78 (talk) 22:35, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Александр Чумичев, бывший личный фотограф Горбачева, Ельцина и Путина:

1) правда ли что Путина и Медведева запрещено снимать рядом с людьми выше их ростом?
1. Я уже сказал, что с Медведевым и Путиным практически не работал. Но кто же может запретить снимать, если кто-то из лидеров, с которыми они встречаются, выше ростом? Другое дело, что нужно выбрать такой ракурс, чтобы эту разницу в росте можно было нивелировать. Это очень просто делается. Предположим, они стоят рядом, если вы будете снимать со стороны более высокого, то он будет казаться еще выше, а другой - еще ниже. А если снимать с противоположной стороны и чуть-чуть снизу, то они выравниваются. Я, например, когда работал с Михаилом Сергеевичем, старался выбирать более низкую точку, чтобы быть с ним на одном уровне. С Борисом Николаевичем было проще - мы с ним одного роста. С Путиным я тоже становился пониже, потому что я выше его сантиметров на двадцать.

Рост Владимира Путина и других фигур российской политики:

Рост Владимира Путина нередко является предметом обсуждений и споров в интернете, с которыми предлагаю покончить в этой статье.
Сам Владимир Владимирович никогда не давал публичных комментариев насчет своего роста, но вездесущие журналисты выяснили все, начиная от размера одежды (52-ой) и заканчивая ростом.
Итак, самая большая цифра, которую можно встретить в интернете – 176 сантиметров. Также вы можете обнаружить данные о 175 (разница не столь существенная), 172 и 170 сантиметрах. Самая же маленькая цифра, которую я встречал – 168 сантиметров. Как вы понимаете, такое разнообразие цифр объясняется слухами и домыслами.
Очевидно, рост В.В. Путина не является высоким, что неоднократно отмечалось в СМИ, и что мы можем сами заметить на фотографиях из газет и интернета.
Тем не менее, наиболее часто упоминаемой цифрой является 170 сантиметров. Вполне возможно, что эти данные достоверны.

-And plenty of other sources; none of which claims the data are official. -M.Altenmann >t 07:06, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

"Ещё одна причина, по которой Путин — наш президент. В его личности соединились два любимых персонажа анекдотов — Штирлиц и Вовочка." -M.Altenmann >t 05:51, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Where do you stop with physical characteristics? What about ears that are big and stick out like Obamas? There are constant immature attempts to belittle Putin. Why? SaintAviator lets talk 06:07, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
How Putin is being belittled? -M.Altenmann >t 06:39, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Do a tour of reverts in the archives. SaintAviator lets talk 09:19, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
None of my business of touring. This is your claim to prove. -M.Altenmann >t 15:34, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Putin Troll[edit]

Can you write something about this Putin Troll business?

Super Bowl Ring[edit]

Would it be apropriate to add a section on the super bowl ring Vladimir Putin stole from Robert Kraft? There are multiple references.

Or is this too obscure an event to mention? --Lukejodonnell (talk) 03:43, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Demonisation of Putin by Western Press[edit]

I think its time this Elephant in the room got talked about, don't you? SaintAviator lets talk 09:47, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

In eyes of Russians only. Russians are not used to criticizing their political leaders other than in political jokes (kukish v karmane). By comparison, just you read what is written about Obama in American press. By Russian standards half of Americans must be in (the american equivalent of) Gulag now. Heck, there is even a political joke. "Unlike you Russians, we Americans have true freedom of the word: anybody can come out in a public square and shout "Reagan is an idiot!" and not arrested" - "What are you talking about? We Russians just the same can shout "Reagan is an idiot"! and not bothered either."-M.Altenmann >t 15:12, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Im not Russian and I think its true. I think it deserves mention. Your argument is lightweight that can turn into soap quickly i.e. Obama lies that's his problem. Its verifiable that the MSM has an anti Putin agenda. SaintAviator lets talk 23:50, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
If it's verifiable, then provide sources to verify it.siafu (talk) 07:24, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
This is what this discussion is about. Getting views. Geez touchy people. SaintAviator lets talk 00:17, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
No, talk pages are not here for people to trot out their pet theories. Adding content needs to be discussed based on what reliable sources have published. --NeilN talk to me 01:40, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a forum for discussion of ideas or gathering views. If you want to change the article or add content, particularly in a controversial manner, you need to provide verifiable sources to support the change. Talk pages are meant for discussing improvements and changes to the article-- I wasn't being "touchy" just credulously expecting that you were familiar with the process here. My apologies. siafu (talk) 06:52, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Discussion leads to refs. SaintAviator lets talk 01:14, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Again, you do not seem to understand the process here. If you believe there is an important content change to be made, the burden is on you to demonstrate that through the presentation, and subsequent discussion and review, of sources. It is not the job of others to validate your suggestion. If you do not have any sources (and proposed, specific changes), there is no further discussion to be had. siafu (talk) 02:18, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Again you over react. I know the process. I will present when ready. This thread may attract some additional info. SaintAviator lets talk 02:39, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
So there's nothing to discuss, then. Please try to use the talk page to discuss actual changes to the article. siafu (talk) 08:37, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Clearly with you there's nothing to discuss. Please not try to shut down discussion by filling the space with fluff. SaintAviator lets talk 02:17, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

The demonisation of Russia risks paving the way for war. [1]. SaintAviator lets talk 02:22, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Fresh evidence of how the West lured Ukraine into its orbit The West is demonising President Putin when what set this crisis in motion were recklessly provocative moves to absorb Ukraine into the EU. [2]. SaintAviator lets talk 02:28, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

These are both opinion pieces, and only useful as sources for the opinions of the authors, and not for establishing a pattern of "demonisation" of Putin in the Western press. The only sort of text that could be made based on these would be to say something like "British columnists Christopher Booker and Seumas Milne have characterized Putin's treatment in the Western press as overly negative". At this point, I believe such a statement would be rather undue, especially given that Mr. Brooke in particular is known for holding a number of extreme fringe views (e.g. climate change denial, intelligent design, arguing asbestos and secondhand smoke are harmless, etc.). siafu (talk) 06:46, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
Yes the problem is a planned smear campaign in the MSM means it wont be talking about it in MSM. In time better refs will emerge. The Ukraine war will influence how he is portrayed in the West. On the back burner for now. SaintAviator lets talk 10:20, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Under Recognition Section[edit]

This needs to be in. Vladimir Putin named most influential figure in the world for 2015 by Time 100 readers' poll [3] SaintAviator lets talk 09:53, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Be careful of what you want. There are different types of influence. Hitler was Time's Man of the Year too. -M.Altenmann >t 15:36, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
What on Earth are you talking about? SaintAviator lets talk 23:49, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
And what are you? the second most influential man is a korean rapper; telling about the poll. If you want this kind of glory for putin, I don' see who stops you from editing yourself. -M.Altenmann >t 15:07, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Discussion is good protocol. BTW Obama didn't make the top 10. SaintAviator lets talk 00:16, 21 April 2015 (UTC)