Miscellaneous desk
< September 13	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	September 15 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

September 14[edit]

Russian Presidential election Inauguration[edit]

Im really disappointed in your site for having such a Western opinion of information. I come to your site to get facts yet I find that you don't give the facts, you give Western information propaganda; that is really disheartening. My main concern on this specific subject is you say that in the Inauguration there were 8,000 - 20,000 protestors. Im sorry but there is a HUGE difference from 8,000 - 20,000! Why the heck would you post information if you don't know? Putting that far of a span is just ridiculous! Im sure that you could have come a little closer to the real number if you just did more leg work and wanted to know the truth. If you want people to trust your site, I would suggest you stop supporting anti-Russia, and print the facts instead of getting into the Western pumped up propaganda against Russia.

I am not a Russian, I live in Canada... im just sick of all the anti-Russian movements to propagate what is really not happening. As a Canadian, I JUST WANT THE TRUTH! so I can make an informed decision not one coerced by media such as yourself. Shame shame on you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.218.193.149 (talk) 21:04, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Russian presidential election, 2012 is the relevant article. The current revision of the article gives a figure of "15,000 - 20,000", cited to the Daily Telegraph, an impeccably reliable source. This sort of statement should really be on the article talk page rather than the Reference Desks, and any disputes about article content should be backed up with information from reliable sources, rather than an individual's view of what counts as "propaganda". Tevildo (talk) 21:14, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, for most protests, even in Western countries, the organisers will over-estimate the crowd size, and the target(s) (or police, if it is the state that's being targeted), will underestimate the size. Unless the are good photos taken by independent sources, it is hard to tell what the true figure is. CS Miller (talk) 13:13, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You're looking at the wrong subsection. The sentence the OP refers to is still there "Putin was inaugurated in the Kremlin on 7 May 2012. Massive public protests had taken place in Moscow on 6 May with estimated 8,000[39]-20,000 protesters taking part". As can be seen, it's sourced to 2 different sources. Anyway, what CS Miller said. We do have a Crowd counting article which isn't that great but does have a source and links Nil Einne (talk) 14:00, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To my eyes, the problem with that sentence is the word massive. I've taken part in a number of street demonstrations, and even 20,000 participants fall short of a truly massive demonstration, in my experience. In fact, 20,000 protestors are not terribly impressive in a city with a population of more than 12 million. In any case, the word is completely subjective, unnecessary, and suggestive of bias. It's better to just cite the numbers. Therefore, I have deleted the word massive. Marco polo (talk) 14:36, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with that, I didn't pay much attention to anything besides the numbers since that seemed to be what concerned the OP. Nil Einne (talk) 19:36, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You're writing as though Wikipedia had an editorial board which decides what goes into it. It hasn't. It has thousands and thousands of editors, who are without exception unpaid volunteers, and who work on what they want to work on. The answer to questions like "Why isn't XXX mentioned" is always one or both of "Because there is no reliable source that says so" and "because nobody has happened to want to write that yet". There are certainly a number of biases in what gets written in Wikipedia, not by policy, but by self-selection among the people who choose to edit. If you see something missing, as long as you can find reliable sources for it, you are very welcome to edit the article and add the missing material. --ColinFine (talk) 21:33, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In America, you count on press to control state. In Russia, state-control on press count you. μηδείς (talk) 23:52, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, see order of magnitude--differences in estimates of an order of magnitude are a good sign. When everybody agrees in cases like this it is because Kim or the Ayatollah has spoken. μηδείς (talk) 23:52, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

what is this guy saying at the beginning[edit]

i'm not sure if it goes under language or entertainment or both so i just put it here but this is the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xIEeOMWcJU ~Helicopter Llama~ 22:39, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"To the wears!" 84.209.89.214 (talk) 09:27, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's what it sounds like, but I'm not convinced he is actually saying that - it is meaningless isn't it? Richard Avery (talk) 09:35, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

He is said to be drunk, so his speech is supposed to be incoherent. God did not intend for us to know. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:31, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

oh no D: ~Helicopter Llama~ 16:16, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To me it sounds like "to the world", perhaps in an Irish accent. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 19:40, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]