Talk:National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine

Removed Russian name

According to Dilas25 "the Constitution of Ukraine (Art. 10) guarantees free development, use and protection of Russian language" but what the hell has that got to do with editing wikipedia? And why is not the Sorbian name of the German Bundestag included in that article? It is quite obvious the only reason Dilas 25 is editing wikipedia is to Russiafy Ukrainian articles. In my view this guy should be banned from wikipedia cause he is only here to push a political agenda. Let's have a propper discussion first and not let clowns like Dilas 25 (he added the Bellarussian name in Prime Minister of Ukraine...) take over wikipedia. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 13:59, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Accusations of "Russifying Ukrainian articles" and "making political agenda" are so absurd and weird that I don't even want to comment on that (especially taking into account the kind "apolitical" comment "Death to Russian imperialists" made by you, Yulia Romero). Sadly, you are even uncapable of keeping yourself withing the limits of normal politeness. Adding Russian name of Ukrainian parliament (in smaller font than in Ukrainian) would, in my opinion, be ´polite´ taking into account the significant role that the Russian language plays in Ukrainian society (see Russian language in Ukraine) and the fact that Russian is explicitly mentioned in Ukrainian constitution (article 10) alongside Ukrainian language (unlike any other possible minority language like Crimean Tatar). The "free use, development and protection" of the Russian language is guaranteed by the constitution of Ukraine (like it or not!) which may be taken as a certain degree of official recognition. Here you can read the text of Ukrainian Constitution in English: http://www.president.gov.ua/en/content/chapter01.html Dilas25 (talk) 17:09, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The WP:UEIA policy is clear: the lede should contain "common names by which its subject is widely known". I am unconvinced the Russian version is "widely known" (in the English speaking world). I wish the editor does not take edits of others personally as per WP:AGF policy. I regret I did so (at the time); but in my defense your edit summaries at the time where so cryptic I could not make heads or tail of it. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 18:03, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. [see below]

To whom it may concern

The article about the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine needs an URGENT edit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_and_Defense_Council_of_Ukraine

Dmytro Yarosh is NOT Deputy Secretary of RNBO

Current Deputy Secretary of RNBO is Viktoriia Siumar

For confirmation you may check an oficcial page of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine (unfortunately, there’s no English version so far).

http://www.rnbo.gov.ua/content/aparat.html

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.229.226.9 (talk)

Thank you for acknowledging the conflict of interest. I see that IP 91.229.226.9 is registered to "National Security and Defence Council of Ukraine Staff". What we really need here is independent sources. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 16:25, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This request has become too old. Yarosh is not listed in the article. If there are other changes needed, please post an updated request. – S. Rich (talk) 04:37, 10 September 2014 (UTC) ALSO, part of the problem with the source is language. If you can translate, please do so. 04:38, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Small biography of (current National Security Council secretary) Oleksiy Danilov available on the Internet

On the Ukrayinska Pravda website a small biography of, current National Security Council secretary, Oleksiy Danilov is available here (in Ukrainian). That might be useful for a future Wikipedia article....... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 16:41, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New weapon system for ukraine soldiers

Hello I have a suggestion for a new weapon system light weight man portable and far deadlier than any machine gun on earth. The United States is sitting on an ultra modern weapon system unlike anything on earth.this weapon fires projectes at speeds up to 8000 feet per second at rates up to 120 THOUSAND rounds per minute.it uses no gunpowder therefore it fires SILENTLY with no muzzle flash or heat signature.its magazine capacity is 50 THOUSAND rounds or greater.the weapon is jam free and can sustain fire for WEEKS at a time only limited by magazine capacity. The rate of fire is variable from short burst to 120,000 rounds per minute.it can fire various diameters of projectiles. It has zero recoil and only weighs a mere 28 pounds plus ammo.this super advanced weapon system can be programed for less than lethal fire missions such as riot control.if lethal force becomes needed it can instantly be reset to lethal force. At present no military in the world has accepted this new technology.can you believe it ???

It's called THE DREAD WEAPON SYSTEM. the brave soldiers ofUkraine would do well to have this new technology 24.113.212.82 (talk) 19:04, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 11 August 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 02:41, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine → National Security and Defence Council of Ukraine – Even though the official website states otherwise, I would recommend moving this page to a title aligning with British spelling conventions, since we are discussing an institution in a European country where British English is most common and other institutions, like the Ministry of Defence (Ukraine), follow the same pattern. I believe the people responsible for the translation of Ukrainian to English may not be fully aware of the differences between the two varieties, as they frequently confuse them. Several governmental websites use British spelling, while others use American spelling, and some display a strange mixture of both. –Tobias (talk) 12:08, 11 August 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. Waqar💬 15:18, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Having looked over the Wikipedia:Article titles page, it seems like a name change would be inappropriate in this circumstance under WP:TITLEVAR and WP:TITLECHANGES. It's just not significant enough to warrant the trouble, if it was a ministry in an English speaking country then you'd have a pretty good argument, but it seems like WP policy is to avoid squabbles like this and just let the original title stick unless there is a good reason. There's a lot of WP articles we could spend our time arguing over typography or regional-spelling in the title but I think doing so would be one of the least productive uses of an editor's time, best to just let it ride. Gracchus123 (talk) 03:28, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In general, I agree with you that the guidelines make this change seem unnecessary. However, it feels somewhat disturbing, and since we are currently discussing it anyway, there is little reason to keep it for now. –Tobias (talk) 09:52, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there's really a great reason to favor British spelling though. As you say, the US spelling is pretty consistently used on their English language version of the site, despite MoD using UK spelling, if anything, shouldn't we defer to the primary source? If the source used "Dephense" just once at the page header or something, it would make sense to override them for a spelling error but this is a valid way to spell that word. WP:TITLEVAR has a pretty clear policy of avoiding these title changes unless there is significant reason, like the spelling of a UK ministry, but this is Ukrainian. "American English spelling should not be respelled to British English spelling, and vice versa; for example, both color and colour are acceptable and used in article titles (such as color gel and colour state)." Gracchus123 (talk) 05:44, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your point, but we are not discussing a color that is completely language-neutral; we are talking about a country that primarily uses British English, as do other European countries. The issue is that they use American spelling inconsistently, downright randomized, rather than 'pretty consistently'. This suggests that their use of American spelling is unintentional and likely stems from a lack of awareness about the differences between the two varieties. –Tobias (talk) 08:57, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still not convinced that is a good enough reason to change the name though. I sent both titles through a Google Trends search and the American spelling has been overwhelmingly preferred by people searching for this ministry in English, presumably, if someone accidentally misspelled the name in English, they misspelled it over a decade ago and no one in this ministry has changed it despite page revisions. I don't think that it is our place to impose British regional spelling here just because UA is in the eastern hemisphere, they do have very close connections to the US as well. If this article title was originally written in British spelling, I don't think any of the arguments I have made in support of US spelling would be convincing enough to warrant changing the name to US spelling either, it's not necessary for comprehension or research and WP:TITLEVAR discourages it. It's just not Wikipedia's place to be prescribing how language ought to be written. Gracchus123 (talk) 01:53, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak oppose, while it would be nice to be consistent on our part, these are all formal entities not descriptive titles, and when unsure what spelling to use, best keep the spelling the council themselves use. If they themselves are inconsistent, it is not our role to correct them but show it. Additionally, there is no established WP:ENGVAR for British English being default for Europe, each country or in this case an agency can use any variety, as it seems Ukraine hasn't settled on one universal one nationally. Dank Jae 15:24, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.