Talk:Racism in Ukraine/Archive 1

Archive 1

African refugee killed in Kyiv

Does anybody knows what is true about this story African refugee killed in Kiev? I remember reading about it (or a simaliar event on Unian website but it seems to be removed (search function doesn't get it back!). Mariah-Yulia (talk) 23:13, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

This artcle tells: "Early 2008 the Council of Europe reported that the Roma community still faced many inequalities in areas such as education, employment and housing". "Inequalities" are not racism, and not even "discrimination". Either text should be changed and sourced or article renamed.Biophys (talk) 00:37, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually that is discimination, please look up the definition of discrimination.--Miyokan (talk) 01:05, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Inequalities becomes a discrimination only if they are intentional.Biophys (talk) 01:25, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

When a select group within the community faces unqual treatment in education, in the workplace, etc, that means they are being discriminated against.--Miyokan (talk) 01:05, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Early state + African

Well this article is just in a early state. I'll look into all comment's! The goal of this article is to tell the facts about discrimination in Ukraine. All help is wanted! I just think it isn't right to only tell the happy stories about Ukraine, wikipedia isn't a tourist guide! If discrimination isn't big in Ukraine it is better to be said here then let people guess how big it is. BTW nobody responded to my original question about the African refugee killed in Kyiv, it isn't true then? Mariah-Yulia (talk) 01:32, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

storage?

Will storage this here for the moment, although I can find a good source what says people in Ukraine ar'nt openly gay[1], the don't seem to be discriminated (well there not openly gay so it is hard to discriminate then....... In the same research 16.7% Disagreed strongly and 17.6% Disagreed with the following statement Gay men and lesbians should be free to live their own life as they wish. Only 30,2% agreed strongly and agreed with the statement Gay men and lesbians should be free to live their own life as they wish. That was the lowest rating with agreed strongly and agreed with the statement” of 24 country’s investigated (for instance Poland scored 39,9% with that same question). Mariah-Yulia (talk) 02:33, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

NPOV

The recent forking of "Hostility towards Russians" violates NPOV. As it stands, three fourths of the article is about those poor oppressed Russians. Ostap 19:15, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, but there are atleast tensions between Ukrainians and Russians. A friend of mine once complained that if you speak Ukrainian with a Russian accent it is hard to get a job in Kyiv. If thats true that would be discrimination. I dont have any other source so I put it out here! Thanks for making Stefan Banach Polish again [2]! You are NPOVy :)! Mariah-Yulia (talk) 19:25, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree, it is more of WP:UNDUE and WP:FORK as the undue emphasis is placed upon one ethnic group of many and the same material is extensively covered in at least two other articles on Wikipedia. As there seems to be a consensus on that part, I will remove it. --Hillock65 (talk) 12:00, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Just because the Russians information is more developed than the other section is no reason to delete legitimate information, this article is very new and at a stub or START stage. Feel free to develop other information about other groups. The information is sourced and directly relevant to the topic, completely removing it is tantamount to vandalism. Furthermore, 1-2 days is not enough time to end the discussion and 2 editors is not a "concensus".--Miyokan (talk) 04:36, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

It is POV forking. Ostap 05:22, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

A few things. First off, thanks for stopping the revert war and starting the discussion instead. Yes, I agree with the above statement, it is content forking. If you are curious, please read WP:FORK and then compare that section with this. It is exactly the same text forked from there! The first sentence is exactly identical: Sentiment towards Russia in Ukraine varies throughout the country. One to one without a slightest change! Secondly, this article, in spite of your hopes, is not about Russians or attitudes towards Russians. Please read the title carefully. It is about a phenomenon called racism and discrimination, nothing else. Creating a section out of forked material from other articles focused exclusively on one ethnic group is against WP:UNDUE. Thirdly, material in this article represents views from independent third parties, like EU, Council of Europe and others about this problem in Ukraine, whereas you presented one-sided and unbalanced sources from Ukrainian and Russian media heavily involved in politics in Ukraine. Fourthly and finally, please do not turn this article into nationalist battle ground. Please read WP:SOAP. It is here to illustrate a problem in Ukraine and explain the phenomenon, it is not here to offer a launch pad for xenophobes to settle scores with Ukraine and Ukrainians over political issues. Please keep the politics out of this article and focus on neutral content. And lest I forget, please have a closer look, there are three editors against your unilateral move. Sounds like consensus to me. --Hillock65 (talk) 05:44, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

First off, please do not make unwarranted accusations and assume bad faith. Your outlandish accusations that I am a xenophobe and am WP:SOAPing are completely unacceptable, watch yourself or you will be reported. There is no policy that says sources must only be from the EU, Council of Europe, content that is sourced can be included. Please read WP:NPOV and WP:Verifiability. Racism in the United States and Racism in Russia articles list specific groups so that completely diffuses your "focused exclusively on one group" argument. And yes, the information that you deleted is about racism and discrimination, please look up their definitions. Certainly there is a widely held belief that the Russian language and culture are being discriminated against and there is a sect of Ukrainian nationalists that are openly racist towards Russians as the sourced information shows. This sourced information will be reinserted per WP:NPOV and WP:Verifiability.--Miyokan (talk) 10:52, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Please accept my apologies if you took my mentioning of xenophobes on your account, please read carefully, I didn't call you that. It is good that you mentioned WP:V and WP:NPOV, since the text you were trying to insert severely lacked in that respect. It was trying to focus this article almost exclusively on one ethnic group, contrary to WP:UNDUE. Besides, I failed to see any respectable peer-reviewed, academic sources accusing Ukraine of mistreatment of ethnic Russians. If you have respectable, English language sources supporting that accusation, please supply them. You were trying to fork content from other articles claiming that the same is done in other WP articles. As well, I don't remember a WP policy that allowed shortcomings of other articles to be the basis for pushing POV and forking content into others. If you have concerns about Racism in Russia, please address those at corresponding articles and read carefully WP:POINT. Please do not impose your minority view in this article against the consensus of editors, turning it into a wiki battle ground will not lead to anything good. WP topics on Eastern Europe have enough strife and discord besides this, let's look for content that is neutral and not forked from other articles. Sincerely, --Hillock65 (talk) 14:01, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

it is not here to offer a launch pad for xenophobes to settle scores with Ukraine and Ukrainians over political issues - of course you are referring to me here. Wikipedia is not the place to publish your opinions, experiences, or arguments. There is nothing wrong with the sources, we are not stating they say as facts, please read WP:V, WP:NPOV and WP:Source. There is nothing that says sources have to be peer-reviewed academic sources.--Miyokan (talk) 01:30, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I mentioned it before, I will repeat it again, reverting pages will not help, especially when you violate the 3RR. You only make it worse, reverting pages will not lead to anything, trust me. Please read WP:SOURCE to learn more about peer-reviewed academic sources. And while you are at it, read WP:FORK and compare word-for-word text you are forking from Anti-Russian_sentiment#Ukraine. --Hillock65 (talk) 02:22, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Gangbanging an editor like that, accusing him of being a xenophobe like done by Hillock[3], and using double standards is unacceptable. Hillock, speaking of undue, did not you write a lengthy uk-Ukrainophobia article that concentrated exclusively on Russia and, later, adding "Jewish Ukrainophobia" to "widen its scope" filling that stuff with pictures from live-journal blog? That's just an incredible conversion. --Irpen 04:10, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I am not aware of any "gang banging" going on, but don't you agree that adding that copied section is POV forking and a violation of WP:UNDUE? Ostap 04:29, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

In some cases, yes. Not automatically. And Hillock is the last person to talk about UNDUE (see above.) As for this case, the Russian speakers' claiming being discriminated in Ukraine, is a valid part of this article and should be covered. The number of paragraphs that the issue is worthy of should indeed be within reason. I don't see this piece pasted right in as it was done. However, removing it with vandalism summary (or automatic summary which is the same for most purposes) and accusing an editor in being a xenophobe is unacceptable. I am sure the editor's opinion of Hillock is no better. However, he restrained himself. When I will be choosing between two version of the article, with both having reasonable arguments in support, but one obtained through an abusive edit summary, it will be a strong argument for me in favor of the other version. --Irpen 04:37, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I understand when fellow Russian nationalist POV pushers get in trouble, Irpen starts accusing others of "gangbanging". You should be absolutely the last person to talk about gangbangning, you with your Russian nationalist buddies. Please focus on this article, or if you wish to challenge other content do so at appropriate articles. Besides, should I really remind you of WP:NPA — discuss content, not users. If you have comments on content of this article, please express them, otherwise, please back off with you silly accusations. --Hillock65 (talk) 04:42, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I thought you would reconsider your words on your own in due time. Most of this nonsense does not even warrant an answer. Anyway, just one thought. I find it ironic that you dare to even mention WP:NPA within this particular paragraph. --Irpen 19:38, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't think any of that paragraph is appropriate. Remember this is about racism and discrimination. Statistics about people having a negative attitude of Russia is neither racism nor discrimination. This is WP:OR. Ostap 04:59, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, that depends where the information is coming from. I think if Amnesty International or other international body accuses Ukraine of discrimination against Russians, it is valid and has to be included. Please see, Racism in Russia as an example. As well, an accusation coming from the Party of Regions or from one of the local newspapers is hardly a valid source as they are part of Ukrainian politics and are inherently biased. Conversely, Ukrainian Prime minister, for example, thinks there is no issue of language discrimination. So, the burden of proof lies with where the charge is coming from, from inherently biased and politically influenced sources or from neutral international bodies. --Hillock65 (talk) 05:10, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

"Another survey showed that in 2005, compared to the rest of the population, the population of Western Ukraine, Kiev and Kiev Oblast had a less positive attitude towards Russia." - but how is this racism or discrimination? I see no evidence of discrimination or racism. Could it not mean that people have a less positive attitude toward the Russian government perhaps? I think it is OR. Ostap 05:16, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Attitudes towards Russia or Poland or any other country is not part of this article. However, if people are constantly discriminated against or otherwise made uncomfortable just because they are from Russia or speak Russian and this is supported by credible sources, it may be included. I don't recall gangs in Ukraine hunting down Russians like they do to Caucasus people in Moscow. --Hillock65 (talk) 05:22, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Now that we are sort of getting into the scope of the article, will this include religious discrimination? Ostap 05:33, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Basically all kind of discrimination, including homophobia. Compared to trumped up "discrimination" against Russians this one is really a big problem as people very often are really harassed. Whatever is mentioned in respected, international sources should be included, whatever kind of discrimination it is. At this stage it is too early to break the article into subsections, as we need more info on each kind of discrimination, then sections could be created. --Hillock65 (talk) 05:50, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

That's good. I have information about the UOC Moscow Patriarchate's harassment of protestants. Ostap 22:50, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Article structure

I believe we could eventually split the article into several sections like, Racial and ethnic discrimination, Religious discrimination, Gender discrimination, Homophobia, etc. Here are some of the sources I have found: [4][5][6][7]. --Hillock65 (talk) 06:04, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

This document that I have found is very interesting. It is Tolerance and Non-Discrimination Information System. There is a wealth of material in all spheres. Most importantly, it contains in pdf. format a recent report of European Commission against Racism and Intolerance on Ukraine. Its table of contents should serve as a structure template for this article: they clearly outline problem areas. I found discrimination against immigrants, refugees, Roma, antisemetism, conduct of law enforcement officials, etc. That's what WP is all about, taking a neutral source and writing from it an article without political nonsense and POV pushing. Whatever is there should definitely be included. --Hillock65 (talk) 06:17, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Also interesting, a report from Amnesty International:[8]. Mariah-Yulia (talk) 21:08, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Non-sequitur?

Look at the first line: "As Ukraine is a multiethnic and multicultural nation, racism and ethnic discrimination in Ukraine remain largely a fringe issue". But does the second clause really follow from the first? Just in the past month, the continuing relevance of racism in two multiethnic, multicultural nations - the US and South Africa - was underscored, in the first through a speech and in the second with an article in The Economist. I would suggest rewording as follows: "Ukraine is a multiethnic and multicultural nation where racism and ethnic discrimination remain largely a fringe issue" - that eliminates the cause-and-effect implication. Biruitorul (talk) 03:53, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I will change it. Ostap 04:27, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Good, thank you. Biruitorul (talk) 06:18, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

lead

The lead is currently far to long. Half of it should be added to the article. Make a section called Anti-Semitism. Ostap 17:02, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

3RR

Before anyone violates the 3RR rule, lets talk this over. I, for one, applaud Miyokan for not continuing to re-add the entire forked paragraph. I actually think his version is suitable. That said, what are the objections? Ostap 06:02, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, I applaud you for being rational. And now we have anon sockpuppet 86.217.46.177, who has two other sockpuppets (this anonymous user and this) whitewashing it saying that this UNDISPUTED SOURCED FACT is "Russian nationalist view".--Miyokan (talk) 09:14, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I reverted an anon Sock. However, as for the previous edits, there is no excuse to use the v-word in edit summaries. None of the established editors here are vandals. I urge everyone to take this advise. --Irpen 09:27, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

NPOV

I have several objections. First of all this is still a word-for-word WP:FORK from Russians_in_Ukraine#Radical_pro-Russian_movements_in_Ukraine and this is the third article that the marginal party Svoboda and the poster are dispoportionally displayed (WP:UNDUE). Is that really justified for a marginal party with 0.38% of popular vote? Two other articles were not enough? Again the captioning without the slightest change is being plastered (WP:FORK) again, without the slightest change, word-for-word. So, what are we thankful for? That not the entire paragraph is being forked, but a section? Does it make WP:FORK less of a violation? Most importantly, the purpose for these additions is clearly political and does not serve the purpose to inform the reader as exactly the same material is covered in other two articles. There is absolutely nothing new. This addition had only one purpose to inflame passions, attract anons for edit wars and have another exuse to plaster that poster in yet another article. I have no other solution but tag this article until this is cleared. --Hillock65 (talk) 10:16, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to point out that the usage of the poster in this articles violates the fair-usage requirement "to provide critical commentary on the film, event, etc. in question or of the poster itself, not solely for illustration". In none of reliable sources this poster is mentioned in connection to the considered topic. It's used here solely for illustration, and it does violate fair-usage. --Greggerr (talk) 07:03, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Hillock65, probably a formal Wikipedia:Fair use review for this poster should be initiated. All three articles where the poster is used should be listed with the question to check for the failure of the fair-usage requirement. --Greggerr (talk) 07:20, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

How is ultra-right and nationalist is incorrect for Svoboda? Is the "nationalist" considered inapplicable? As for ultra-right, this is what they call themselves as Tiahnybok considers 'Svoboda' as the only truly right-wing party in Ukraine.[9] [10]. How further right can one be? --Irpen 06:19, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Irpen, type in Google "ultra-radical nationalist". You can see that such terminology does not exist. You discovered it based on your logical argument of "how further right someone can be". WP:V is a cornerstone of Wikipedia. Is Svoboda commonly named as "ultra-radical nationalist" in reliable sources? Miyokan failed to find a single source in support. And he was following the wrong root. Instead of looking for the most common description of Svoboda party, he was taking your "ultra-radical nationalist" for granted, looking for references in support. Wrong approach. I don't mind so much if you write "radial nationalist" in one place, and "ultra-right-wing" in the other per two Miyokan's sources. But note that this would be already on the edge of neutrality. We are not writing "pro-Russian Party of Regions" in each and every place where Party of Regions is mentioned. Should we do it? Google produces more than 1,000 references for "pro-Russian Party of Regions". --Greggerr (talk) 07:03, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Please do not put things in my mouth. I asked about "ultra-right" and "nationalist". I did not ask about "ultra-radical". --Irpen 09:12, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

The question of WP:FORK still remains. What new does this poster bring? I fail to see anything new from the other two articles were it is used. Moreover, I have to agree that calling some party ultra-nationalist has to be supported by credible sources. So far, I see with this picture an attempt to malign Ukrainians as:

1. This party is too small on national scale to be prominently featured now in THREE WP articles
2. The party is hardly representative of the discrimination that some Russians may experience. I am just wondering, exactly how does this poster typify the type of discrimination?
3. Most importantly, which international organization singles out this type of discrimination? I am curious to see the sources, not about this party, but of this type of discrimination being a problem in Ukraine.
4. I would like to repeat that I consider persistent inclusion of this picture now in THIRD article about Ukraine as an attempt to malign Ukrainians as its overly frequent and unjustified use betrays an agenda that some users have[11]. I am calling on other users to voice their opinions about this issue as this flagrant violation of WP:FORK, WP:UNDUE is about to sett off another round of edit warring that some users are already engaged in. Please speak up! --Hillock65 (talk) 10:27, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

• "Prominantly featured"? There is only one sentence and image.

• The fact that it is on three articles is not noteworthy, I have seen images on far more than three pages. Its use here is entirely pertinent to this article. It is depicting exactly what the article topic is describing, "Racism in Ukraine".

• Your "it is an attempt to malign Ukrainians" argument has no basis, it is plainly stated that they are marginal on a national scale. And let's not forget that they have suffient electoral support to form factions in several municipal and provincial local councils in Western Ukraine.--Miyokan (talk) 11:22, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Is there anything in Svoboda's party program that is discrimination? Does MR Tiahnybok trys to make it look that Russians are responsible for higher crime rates (like some Benelux (legal) political party's do). 1 poster is not much proof there racist (I saw another of there posters who (in my view) wasn't). Mariah-Yulia (talk) 14:27, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, this answered none of the questions above. There are other movements with far more radical stance, why is Svoboda singled out, just because there is a picture? Is it representative of the discrimination some Russians are experience? In what way? According to what source? Where is the proof of that discrimination, in Amnesty International's report or any other respectable source? It depicts racism? Even if one made this surreal allegation in regards to Russians, where is the proof the Russianas are experiencing discrimination based on their race? How about a source to support that wild accusation? Regarding the use of this picture in the THIRD article, does it feature anything new that has not been covered in in TWO previous articles? I don't see anything new, it is WP:FORK pure and simple with exactly the same wording as in other cases. Finally, this article is not here to settlt scores and inflame passions, if there is a discrimination, please support it with credible sources and write about it. So far I see none. --Hillock65 (talk) 14:49, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I found this piece of work by US Goverment[[12]] (Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2007 Released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor March 11, 2008). There are some interesting things about racism in it (Roma, but not much about discriminating Russians other then that Russian schools disapear (but since Ukrainian is the oficial language I don't know if that's discrimination aperently they are not forced to close). The report has also this information Police in Odesa also failed to protect demonstrators from violence. On September 4, the Odesa city police opened a criminal case after 50 activists from the nationalist Freedom (Svoboda) NGO and pro-Ukraine Enlightenment (Prosvita) NGO were beaten by members and supporters of the pro-Russia Unified Motherland organization while police and city officials stood nearby. So Svoboda might be more a victum of discrimination then a source? Not sure myself. Mariah-Yulia (talk) 20:35, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Hillock, this is an article on "Racism and discrimination", not just "discrimination". Svobodoa is an innocent victim? That's a laugh. Ukrainian Association «Svoboda» («Freedom») headed by charismatic ex-MP Oleg Tyahnybok, who is infamous for his public xenophobic (including anti-Semitic) speeches. Notes, including comments on the hatred toward foreigners, were present even in the election programs of these political organizations. Thus, the program tasks of the UCP included counteracting Zionism and the fight «for the priority of representatives of the Ukrainian ethnos in all power structures». The Ukrainian Association «Svoboda» fought for the racist principle of proportional ethnic representation. While «Svoboda» did not emphasize anti-Semitism in its election campaign (although sometimes it let it slip (especially at the regional level in the west of the country), the UCP made anti-Jewish rhetoric one of the main elements of its campaign. UCP's paper «For Ukrainian Ukraine!» (declared circulation of 1.5 million) was freely distributed all over the country during the elections and contained a lot of anti-Semitic materials. Declarations of the party leaders, broadcast for free on TV and radio, according to the law that made free election campaigning possible in the state's mass media, were laden with the same ideas.[13]--Miyokan (talk) 01:35, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

You are confusing me with someone else, I didn't claim Svoboda was a victim. Please, read carefully. You completely ignored several questions raised above. Most importantly, according to whom Russians are discriminated against based on their race? Just how? I am waiting for a source. Reverting pages will not work, let's discuss this issue. --Hillock65 (talk) 01:48, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Do you even know what racism is? It is "Prejudice or discrimination based on an individual's race". Did you even read the poster? I have already answered your questions, just because you claim that I haven't does not make it so. You keep saying that there has to be evidence of discrimination. Firstly, how is this poster not discriminating against Russians? Secondly, the title of this article is "Racism and discrimination". "Svoboda" have suffient electoral support to form factions in several municipal and provincial local councils in Western Ukraine.--Miyokan (talk) 02:31, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I failed to find any answers, maybe you can point out where they are? I don't see how this poster discriminates against Russians. Based on what is depicted there, Russians are harassed and discriminated, where and how? I am still waiting for evidence of discrimination against Russians based on race, which this poster supposedly supports. Who makes this allegation, what source? So what if Svoboda has factions in several municipalities, how does it affect Russians, and most importantly how does that relate to the poster? I fail to see the connection, maybe you can help. Also, please don't waste my time, if you have credible sources, please present them, please no more "I say so". Again I am waiting for sources to support your allegations. Thank you. --Hillock65 (talk) 03:25, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Well there is definetly something wring with Svoboda, thanks for finding that ref Miyokan (Levko Lukyanenko has felt active politics BTW). Now we just have to find out what they think about Russians. Sorry for making Svoboda look like victims, but fistfights are the wrong way to communicate and Ukrainian police doesn't seem to do much right when it comes to protecting it's citizens..... Mariah-Yulia (talk) 21:36, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Racism isn't confined to actions. A poster can be racist, a passage in a book can be racist, a painting can be racist, just as this poster is racist. Please read the poster. How is ""Remember! Russian mat turns you into a Moskal. In Russia, they do not use profanity for cursing, they use profanity for speaking." not racist and/or discriminating against Russians? You have yet to answer this. The word "Moskal" itself is an ethnic slur referring to the Russians in general. Your defence of this blatant racism is embarrassing.--Miyokan (talk) 09:59, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

You're still ignoring several questions above. Racial slur on the poster is not an example that Russians are discriminated. Just how? They cannot go outside without being discriminated? Single incident like that one does not establish a pattern of discrimination. Please provide sources from respectable sources to the contrary. --Hillock65 (talk) 10:32, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Who said that there has to be racist actions against Russians? This article is entitled "Racism and discrimination in Ukraine", not "Racist and discriminatory actions in Ukraine".--Miyokan (talk) 10:36, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, who makes this allegation about discrimination? WP:SOURCE please! --Hillock65 (talk) 10:40, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

What "allegation about discrimination", what are you talking about? Did you read the poster?--Miyokan (talk) 10:45, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

You don't understand English? Who makes an allegation that Russians are discriminated against? How? The source please. BTW poster is not the source. See WP:SOURCE. --Hillock65 (talk) 10:49, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Wow, I didn't understand at first because that premise was so inane. You're desperate now, aren't you? Who makes allegations of Russians being discriminated against has nothing to do with this poster, you're trying to go back to your previous argument. This article is entitled "Racism and discrimination in Ukraine", not "Racist and discriminatory allegations in Ukraine".--Miyokan (talk) 10:57, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

This poster does not establish a pattern of racism and discrimination. You need a credible source for that. --Hillock65 (talk) 11:01, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

You're inventing parameters again. Who said we have to "estabilsh a pattern of racism and discrimination".--Miyokan (talk) 11:04, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

This discussion is over. You have a problem with comprehension. Please read the above carefully, again. Get a dictionary, maybe that'll help. You are going agaist the consensus of 3 editors. Please see below. Cheers. --Hillock65 (talk) 11:09, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, if you don't want to discuss then yes, this discussion is over, the racist poster stays.--Miyokan (talk) 11:10, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Miyokan, you repeatedly attempted to insert the poster into this article (at least 10 times, I stopped counting, but this is a clear violation of WP:EW). Let's try to go step by step. Why should this poster be in this article. Is it to make a point, or to illustrate a point? --Greggerr (talk) 19:09, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Your most recent edit summary makes no sense, "OR poster" - do you know what original research is? It means no adding unsourced information. The poster is sourced.--Miyokan (talk) 01:07, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Svoboda and Russians

[14] proofs that Oleh Tyahnybok made atleast 1 anti-Russian speech. Feel free to find more refs about more recent speeches Mariah-Yulia (talk) 22:50, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Great, but listing all the anti-Russian speeches made by the man is a pretty serious violation of WP:UNDUE. He is by no means a prominent figure in Ukrainian politics, and despite the desires of some users here, it is incredibly dishonest to portray him as one. Ostap 23:02, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

In fact, this entire fixation on Svoboda party is WP:UNDUE. The party is insignificant. Ostap 23:04, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Your right. (I think) were waisting our time on this Mariah-Yulia (talk) 23:11, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Do you know what the problem is with citation 24 and 25? Something is wrong and I don't know what. Ostap 23:21, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

The refs have names that redirect them to other refs, but those refs don't exist. User:Miyokan placed the refs. Mabey he forgot to place the original refs? Mariah-Yulia (talk) 00:10, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

I removed them for now. Ostap 00:18, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree with the above as well. The only reason the Svoboda party was mentioned in the first place is because this part was forked from another article with the picture and without any regard for the content. --Hillock65 (talk) 01:16, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

To sum up, Miyokan attempts to put a poster into this article by engaging into a revert war, and declines to acknowledge the problems with the poster, which were repeatedly brought to his attention in this talk page. First, the user violates WP:OR. He believes that this poster is racist. No source of such claim is provided. Overwhelming number of users disagree with Miyokan's assessment of the poster. Related to the above, Miyokan violates WP:V. The user attempts to impose the burden of proof on the opposite side. He asks "How is <the poster> not racist and/or discriminating against Russians?" Third, Miyokan violates WP:COPYRIGHT. The poster is a non-free image and fair rationale for inclusion of the poster into this article has not been provided. Fourth, the poster is pasted to this article with ignorance of WP:POVFORK. --Greggerr (talk) 00:39, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

According to WP:Dispute resolution, we can conduct a survey to help users understand consensus. I suggest we do this, because it seems so far all users except one agree that the poster does not belong. Ostap 00:58, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not against the picture as long as it's not distracting from the real racist problems in Ukraine (Roma seem to be in bigger problems then Russians, Russians are not getting atacked on the streets of Kyiv or Lviv). I believe that this poster is racist too. I also believe that this Svoboda party is hardly worth mentioning. I don't believe that all Svoboda posters are racist (cause I got one who isn't (it was a present from a stranger, I de not support Svoboda (but most of you probabley already know what party I support :) ))). Mariah-Yulia (talk) 01:08, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

In Wikipedia we are not drawing conclusions, but relying on reliable sources. So far nobody documented a connection between the poster and racism. But ignoring this for a moment, it looks to me that the poster was written to target Ukrainians rather than Russians. Russians are pictures as guys which use slang rather than proper language. And Ukrainians are advised not to become like them.

There are many cartoons which could be considered offensive. President Bush is often pictured as a dumb guy. Russians by themselves make fun of Chukchi people in their anecdotes. --Greggerr (talk) 02:09, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I don't see a consensus for the inclusion of the picture.

• This poster may be racist alright, but it does not illustrate a problem, but rather an instance. By the same token if there is a swear word on a wall, can we draw a conclusion based on this? Of course not.
• There needs to be a credible source to establish that this particular kind of discrimination against Russians exists and how particularly it manifests itself. The poster is not a source. It may be used to illustrate a problem established by credible sources.
• I agree with three other users that attention to a marginal party like Svoboda is indeed WP:UNDUE and almost identical copy of this picture's captioning from other articles is WP:FORK as well.
• The majority of users discussing this issue are already against this picture's inclusion. Only one user disrupts this article by waging constant revert wars and repeatedly inserting the picture without subsantiating it.
• I suggest a formal complaint should be filed at WP:ANI should that abuse continue. Enough is enough. --Hillock65 (talk) 02:22, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Hillock65 on all points and hope we can soon move on Mariah-Yulia (talk) 16:48, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

"Language discrimination"

What's Language discrimination doing in an aritcle about racism? Where does it say that language discrimination is racially motivated? - Pieter_v (talk) 17:57, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

agree: it's WP:OR - feel free to correct it --windyhead (talk) 19:26, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I also agree. There are several other articles that cover language discrimination. This one is about ethnic and racial discrimination. --Hillock65 (talk) 20:11, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, and if it's not this information is always well archived. - Pieter_v (talk) 20:23, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

The current Interior Minister said:"you may call me a racist"

Does anybody else remember the strange things Yuri Lutsenko said last july? See here:[15]. I not sure what to make of it and if/where it should be in the article. Any sugestions? Mariah-Yulia (talk) 22:19, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

The desire for orderly, legal, and/or restricted immigration is not racism. He is using the term sarcastically. Ostap 23:19, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Yanukovych For Protection Of Crimean Tatars From Discrimination

Yeah! [16]! Mariah-Yulia (talk) 16:54, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

In his opinion, the inter-ethnic problems in Crimea are far fetched. What is that supposed to mean? It's another of politicians' bla-bla-bla without any essence or clear plan. Not worth attention. --Hillock65 (talk) 19:10, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Racism in Ukraine, a natural phenomenon or the result of Russification?

A lot of racist literatures in Ukraine are written in Russian. Actually, most of them are written in Russian. Ukrainians seem to copy their neighbours mentality and apply it to their own country, even though the circumstances differ greatly. Can anyone add an insight to that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.231.169.192 (talk) 12:27, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Discrimination against Tatars

"Conflicts between Tatars and their Slavic neighbors in recent years has led to massed fist fights, vandalizing graveyards and even murders. "

Who is being attacked and murdered? Not clear from the source. Ostap 21:53, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Copyvio in the lead

I took out two paragraphs from the lede because they were copied verbatim from the source, which I believe is a copyright violation. This isn't meant to express any kind of judgment on the content of those two paragraphs. However, it would probably be a good idea to give the article a look over for other copy vios.radek (talk) 06:12, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Intolerance towards LGBT...

I want to avoid an edit war over one word, so let me explain my thinking. First and foremost we have to be true to the policies of wikipedia, which include maintaining a neutral voice, not editorialising, not stating the conclusions of our original research, and representing accurately the claims made in our source material. According to the citation in the article,

...almost 35 percent of Ukrainians disagreed strongly or disagreed with the statement that "gay men and lesbians should be free to live their own life as they wish."

The preceding sentence attempts to paraphrase this. Originally it said

Many Ukrainians remain intolerant toward LGBT lifestyle.

67.191.241.97 changed "lifestyle" to "individuals" stating that

There is no such thing as a LGBT 'lifestyle', this is a fundamentalist 'code word' used by bigots

As a compromise I changed "individuals" to "behaviour" but 67.191.241.97 reverted it saying that

behavior and lifestyle are both used by bigots

I see two issues here:

1. The citation talks of a desire to curtail the freedom of LGBT people to "live their own life as they wish". This is not an attack aimed primarily at the individuals (although they suffer the effects of such an attack) but on their freedom to practice their lifestyle or behaviour. The words "lifestyle" or behaviour" are truer to the citation than "individual".
2. The argument that certain words must not be used because they are used by bigots troubles me. Lots of words are used (and abused) by bigots; but we are not writing bigotry, we are using the words as they are intended and widely understood. If we surrender ownership of mainstream vocabulary to interest groups we abandon our means of communication without resorting to euphamism and analogy with all the loss of clarity and precision that inevitably arises. Stating that these words are bigots' words is itself stating a point of view, and is indicates the influence of personal beliefs. No POV attaches to these words when used properly, which is what we are doing here.

What say others? -- Timberframe (talk) 00:05, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Being gay is not a lifestyle and it is not a behavior. That is not up for debate. People who are gay do not have a choice.

--67.191.241.97 (talk) 03:41, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for joining the discussion. I agree with you 100%, but that's not what the citation is talking about: it doesn't say "gay men and lesbians should not be gay and lesbian" but seeks to constrain how they live and behave. It's like the question of imposing celibacy on Catholic priests: nobody says they are not to have emotional and sexual urges, but they are required to modify their behaviour. We must reflect what the citation says without putting our own gloss on it. -- Timberframe (talk) 08:13, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Arseniy Yatsenyuk parents where Jewish, only Taras Kuzio seems to be sure....

Besides Mr. Kuzio claiming Yatsenyuk parents where Jewish I have not seen any proof they where. In fact I never read Yatsenyuk sais his parents where Jews, instead he said both of his parents are Ukrainian. So I removed the claim. — Mariah-Yulia • Talk to me! 10:01, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Is this institutional racism or just an incident?

Crimea city mayor orders blacks off Black Sea beach. Is this institutional racism or just an incident? — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 16:48, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

RfC

BAn RfC: Which descriptor, if any, can be added in front of Southern Poverty Law Center when referenced in other articles? has been posted at the Southern Poverty Law Center talk page. Your participation is welcomed. – MrX 17:12, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Racism against Poles section missing

Why there is no section about racism against Poles? The Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia were performed by the Ukrainian nationalists, the ex-nazi supporters called the Ukrainian Insurgent Army. The genocide (which is internationally recognized only a an "ethnic cleansing" of minor historical importance) took lives of at least 200.000 Polish women, children, elders and unarmed Polish men. The basis of this massacre was racial hate. The victims were carefully selected on their ethnic surface, not to hurt an Ukrainian. The Volhynian massacre is the world's most cruel act of mass-murder, right next to the Holocaust, the massacres of Native Americans, and the Armenian genocide, however, the cruel Ukrainian methods of torturing and killing Poles were limited only by their sick imagination. You can easily find descriptions. Do you think that it was not racial-based? 192.162.150.105 (talk) 12:02, 24 February 2016 (UTC)