Jump to content

Talk:State Council of Crimea

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How to name this article?

[edit]

Since yesterday the Crimean parliament renamed itself from Verkhovna Rada to Verkhovny Soviet. — Mariah-Yulia • Talk to me! 07:54, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Page not found 71.235.9.161 (talk) 18:38, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This article makes some claims which I haven't seen made anywhere else. PatGallacher (talk) 18:48, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's because they were removed everywhere else as "irrelevant." USchick (talk) 02:36, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You need to be more specific if you want to claim an article is biased. Just saying it is doesn't make it so. I vote lift dispute unless evidence is provided for review. Jimerb (talk) 04:45, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No name change in english, so vote to lift the dispute 88.250.71.19 (talk) 15:36, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed per anon. DDima 17:33, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Wiki is no place to do politics. So I vote to remove the dispute as well. The article is well written and adressing most points of view. This is a wiki and not a news article. when things really change, it will be changed, but based on the norms of facts, not news thats shifting every minute 195.240.63.18 (talk) 22:56, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but it is obvious that the article was not neutral and quite erroneous. For example, I just noticed that the claim that the Crimean parliament was "under siege" and that their acts were "in violation of all due process" was merely an op-ed piece from the EUobserver. I just made some changes and it should be more neutral now. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 00:35, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I just removed another instance where the article stated that something happened in a certain way but when you look at the reference it's an op-ed. Make sure that the prose reflects that such statements were said by someone rather than treating them like facts. Furthermore, the statement about the fifty gunmen is unreferenced. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 02:12, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not the same article

[edit]

Actually, the Council renamed itself from Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea to a State Council of the Republic of Crimea (Государственный Совет Республики Крым). Proof-link: http://www.vsarc.ru/news/17_03_2014_2 . Seryo93 (talk) 13:15, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the government of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea. If someone wants to start a new article about a new government in a new country, this is not the right place to do that. Please start a new article. USchick (talk) 21:18, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Should this article be renamed to "Crimean Parliament"?

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus. This does not preclude a new article at the proposed title. --BDD (talk) 23:18, 14 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Supreme Council of Crimea → Crimean Parliament

In its current form this article fails WP:NPOV as it bares the name "Supreme Council" while its de facto name is "State Council of Crimea". However, I find it unnecessary to create two articles of the same thing as the only difference between the Supreme Council and the State Council is its name and their disputed authority. I, therefore, believe that what's best for Wikipedia is to keep a single centralized article named "Crimean Parliament" that does not take any sides, remains neutral and impartial, and explains the situation at hand while retaining the entity's history and structure in one single place.

 Question: Do you support or oppose the renaming of this article to "Crimean Parliament"? If so, why?

—Ahnoneemoos (talk) 15:44, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment: This article and its edit history go back to 2007. This article is about the government of the Autonomous republic of Crimea in Ukraine. If a new government has been created in another country, it needs a new article. The State Council of Crimea is how old? It doesn't have an edit history going back to 2007, so why is it attempting to hijack someone else's history? USchick (talk) 15:51, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • How far the history of this article goes is irrelevant per WP:OWN, a policy. Furthermore, per WP:IMPERFECT, another policy, Wikipedia evolves and adapts:

[O]ne person may start an article with an overview of a subject or a few random facts. Another may help standardize the article's formatting, or have additional facts and figures or a graphic to add. Yet another may bring better balance to the views represented in the article, and perform fact-checking and sourcing to existing content.

Wikipedia articles attempt to reflect the current situation of organic entities, such as this parliament, as long as such information is WP:VERIFIABLE. This proposal is verifiable with reliable sources.
Furthermore, the State Council's age, for all intents and purposes, is the same as the Supreme Council's as they are the same entity but with different names and under different authorities. History is the same, members are the same, procedures are the same, location is the same, composition is the same, etc. etc. So why create two articles of the same thing? Just state the dispute and minimal differences in the intro and leave everything else the same without taking any side. For example, the House of Representatives of Puerto Rico was established originally in 1900 as the "House of Delegates" until its structure was changed a little bit and its name was changed to "House of Representatives" in 1917. We don't have another article for the House of Delegates of Puerto Rico: we just write that background in the history section and move on.
Finally, I would appreciate if you refrain from using words such as "hijack" or "attempting". We don't control the world, we just create an encyclopedia based on it.
—Ahnoneemoos (talk) 17:15, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, they are the same parliament but with different names. The Supreme Council was under Ukrainian authority while the State Council is under Russian authority. The same thing happened to the House of Representatives of Puerto Rico: the "House of Delegates" reported to the United States until the establishment of the Constitution of Puerto Rico in 1952 when it started reporting to the local territory. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 18:10, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, the members are still the same: same deputies, same chairman, same deputy chairman, etc. That the authority ("country" as you refer to) and the name is different is not substantiative enough to merit two different articles. Such is the very same case of the House of Delegates of Puerto Rico which in 1952 passed from the United States to the territorial authority; yet we don't have separate articles for it because it just doesn't make sense. We have a guideline for these matters called WP:AVOIDSPLIT which recommends that:

[E]ditors are encouraged to work on further developing the main article first, locating coverage that applies to both the main topic and the subtopic. Through this process, it may become evident that subtopics or groups of subtopics can demonstrate their own notability, and thus can be split off into their own article. If a concept can be cleanly trimmed, removed, or merged elsewhere on Wikipedia, these steps should be undertaken first before some new article is created.

So, we must first find out if there's a solution that can accommodate this new development. That's what this renaming proposes.
—Ahnoneemoos (talk) 23:20, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support renaming if Crimean Parliament is considered NPOV. Since it is neither of the official names but is a common name, Crimean Parliament appears to be NPOV and should avoid some of the inevitable naming contention. However, is there a mechanism for keeping track of the !votes? Robert McClenon (talk) 02:35, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Are people voting based on their own personal opinions? Or on reliable sources? USchick (talk) 20:47, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I guess that sometime in its history the Crimean Parliament issued a law, which states its name. We should use the name from the most recent version of such law. — Petr Matas 16:50, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - I think the article should be split, with this article reflecting the history and now the defunct status of the Supreme Council, recognized by the Ukrainian government and implicitly by most of the international community as the constitutionally defined governing body for the Autonomous Republic of Crimea. -Kudzu1 (talk) 05:49, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The word "peaceably"

[edit]

The statement "the Parliament building was seized peaceably by unidentified pro-Russian gunmen" includes a description of how the building was seized. The fact is, the building was seized. Words like peaceably or forcefully introduces POV. The neutral thing to do is to state the fact, it was seized. USchick (talk) 18:15, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • How "peacably" is it if the building was seized by gunmen??? Carrying a visible gun forces people into submission, even if no shots are fired. Sorry, but I just came by and couldn't abstain from commenting. --PanchoS (talk) 02:09, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be better to create a new article for the people elected in the last Russian controlled Crimean parliamentary elections

[edit]

I think it would be better to create a new article for the people elected in the last Russian controlled Crimean parliamentary elections. (And let this article be about the right now not functioning parliament of the Ukrainian Autonomous Republic of Crimea.) Because under Ukrainian law the parliament for its autonomous republic is dissolved but the institution is not dissolved. From a legal point of view the parliamentarians who use the building of the Supreme Council of Crimea now are squatters. Besides 3/4 of this article is still about the autonomous Ukrainian republic parliament. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 22:12, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on State Council of Crimea. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:00, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on State Council of Crimea. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:13, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on State Council of Crimea. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:15, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Do we have two articles covering the same topic?

[edit]

There also appears to be an article for Verkhovna Rada of Crimea which seems to be the same thing. JASpencer (talk) 21:21, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:State_Council_of_Crimea&oldid=1209361767"