Talk:Valentina Lisitsa

Capsot

Capsot is way out of line. Seems a bit unstable. His last paragraph in intro should be removed.

the 'Justin Bieber of classical music'???

The modern day Saint Hildegard Von Bingen. What... you're implying that she's talentless, fakes her videos and has gathered a following of teen-boppers who have an IQ of 10 or lower???

How about you give her a proper title for goodness sake, instead of slapping 'Biebers' name into this article. She is a world-class pianist with power and drive unlike many other pianists on YouTube, and he's a pathetic troll who fools gullible teenagers into thinking that he is the epitome of the music industry, when all he does is lip-synch.

She deserves more class than this for goodness sake. That makes me sick. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.161.68.96 (talk) 14:00, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Date of Birth?

Reason for not having a date of birth? Lack of sources? Shady sources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lightpuma (talk • contribs) 09:26, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Toronto/Tweet Controversy

I am creating this section as a placeholder for discussion of how to reference the topic in this article. Please keep in mind that Wikipedia Talk pages are for discussion of the article, not for the airing of views on the controversy itself. Let's all try to reach a consensus instead of reverting each other's edits.MisterCSharp (talk) 14:57, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

The problem was (I hope my last edits ended it) that a few user did strayed away from sources and added their own interpretations of her tweets and what the tweets were suposed trying to do. Classic wp:or; wp:or always best avoided of course. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 22:52, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Would User:Alfred Becher please explain his changes in this article. I can not see the logic in them... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 01:07, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Maybe the page should be protected from editing by unregistered and new users.MisterCSharp (talk) 11:25, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

I agree, but when I tried to do that (on an other wikipedia-page) some time ago I was informed the problem had to become really big before they could do that.... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 20:52, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Someone has posted a link to images of some of VL's tweets. Not sure if this would be considered a valid source. http://imgur.com/a/gDJLo?hc_location=ufi MisterCSharp (talk) 14:11, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

I would say not... since this source has no "reputation for fact-checking and accuracy" (see wp:SOURCES). — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 20:52, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

I've tweaked the section a bit, although I've no doubt it will be changed by the pianist's defenders. From what I've seen, there is no evidence VL's remarks were anti-Semitic, she was accusing the Ukrainian government of that. But her use of Holocaust imagery could lead people who look a pictures and don't read context to believe otherwise.MisterCSharp (talk) 11:16, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

I changed the text yesterday. I will number the changes here so that we can best discuss them:

1. The previous version mentioned that the controversy was due not only her criticism of the current Ukranian government but also of separatism in eastern Ukraine. An even earlier version also included "support of pro-Russian terrorism". This is an effort to both interpret and condemn Lisitsa's views and this is not the right place to do this. The conflict surround her opinions on the current government, yes, and also the 2014 pro-Russian unrest in Ukraine and the ensuing armed conflict. If we are to interpret what these opinions are, we may do so elsewhere.
2. I then immediately mention the forced cancellation of her Toronto performance, itself a controversial decision, as this is what turned everyone's attention on Lisitsa's stance on the 2014 pro-Russian unrest in Ukraine and the ensuing armed conflict.
3. The previous version had a very long trail of reasons for the controversy " as well as for allegedly racist, and anti-Ukrainian remarks in her personal Twitter account - along with the use of Holocaust imagery, portraying Ukranians as Nazis." I have taken this part out partly because it is so long and unreadable. What I have done instead is foreground the verbatim accusations by Paul Grod, president of the Ukrainian Canadian Congress. These were buried in the notes in the previous version, but now they are out there and given the importance of Paul Grod's position serve the article better when brought into the foreground.
4. I took out the interpretation made by a previous editor that her comments about satire and hyperbole were about what she wrote about the current Ukranian government. Lisitsa's remark was more generic and they should presented as such with as little interpretation from us as possible.

Miltiadis Kokkonidis (talk) 10:46, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Two additional requests for comments, for changes I have not made:

1. Regarding the armed conflict, according to http://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/music/ukrainian-born-soloist-dropped-from-tso-for-her-political-views/article23812295/ Lisitsa stated that “The worst thing that can happen to any country is fratricidal war,” she says in her statement, “people seeing each other, their neighbours as enemies to be eliminated.” I think adding it may help neutrality in some ways (when someone is accused of some many things it is good to see what they are actually saying) but I am skeptical because, appearing pro-Lisitsa, it may start another wave of anti-Lisitsa edits and the way I want this to go is not this; what I want instead is to have a short, informative, and neutral section saying there is a controversy over both her opinions and the Toronto cancellation, give as many sources as possible and let the fight range on elsewhere, not on Wikipedia.
2. The President of Ukraine made a statement calling a certain group of people 'subhumans', Lisitsa commented on this and now this article comments on her comment trying to establish that she misinterpreted who the President of Ukraine called subhumans. I am not very happy with the fact that we are taking part in this debate here and would have preferred a non-biased selection of external references instead. I feel this is too much detail on but one of the many points that can be made on a very sensitive issue. I also feel the section would have been better if that part had not been added, but given that effort was put into adding it I would not like to delete it myself and would prefer to discuss this possibility here, hoping that either its contributor deletes it or somehow additional content or changes make it fit better into the Wikipedia entry.

Miltiadis Kokkonidis (talk) 10:46, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

• I tend to agree and removed some of this. Perhaps a part of this could be described merely as her political views. This women has certain political views, she does not hide them, and she openly defends her views in social networks (see here). My very best wishes (talk) 14:36, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

• Reverted [1]. Here is the problem. I can see the sources ([2],[3][4]), but they do not really support the claims and the tone. Something can be added, but only if neutrally written and compliant with WP:BLP. My very best wishes (talk) 21:38, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I can see it [5], however Wikipedia is not EuromaidanPress, but encyclopedia. Please pay attention how the story has been described in sources other than EuromaidanPress (three links above, such as this). This is the way a professional journalist describes the story. It can be described here this way, as opposed to propaganda. My very best wishes (talk) 04:14, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Off-topic chat

Extended content

"as well as RACIST, ANTI-SEMITIC remarks" That's just disingenuous anti-Russian propaganda speaking. What did she say racist or antisemtic? Like most Russians, Valentina is anti-fascist. Which cannot be said for most Ukrianians, who are not so secret nazi sympathizers. See http://i.imgur.com/IOHtafB.jpg --74.57.167.219 (talk) 15:23, 8 April 2015 (UTC) You have already been informed not to use Wikipedia talkpages for wp:soapboxing but for discussing improvements to articles only. So stop doing this, and get better informed about what you write about... by start reading this BBC article. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 20:28, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Controversy section POV

I cut out most of the opening and highly biased sentence of this section: "Lisitsa has received criticism for her opposition to the democratically elected Ukrainian government as well as her zealous support of 2014-2015 Russian aggression against Ukraine. "

This cited "Euromaidan Press," which is more of a partisan blog (Ukr. nationalist POV) than any sort of reputable news source. -Helvetica (talk) 23:12, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Quite a bit more NPOV and cleanup work is still needed in that section. IMO, it gives undue weight to a piece published on Examiner.com, which Wiki describes as "a media company based in Denver, Colorado, that operates a network of local news websites which use "pro–am contributors"' blogs for content." So, in other words, perhaps one step above "Euromaidan Press," but still far from being a top of the line reputable source - especially for use in a BLP article. I will try and edit a bit more to note that this was an opinion/blog piece, but def more work still to be done. -Helvetica (talk) 23:20, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

More cut text: "Readers can download the original document here. (PDF Password: “MusicalToronto“)"

This doesn't fit at all with the tone of an encyclopedia entry - with a direct link to a drop-box file and a parenthetical note about the PDF's password. In any event, Dropbox isn't really a reputable source to be citing, and I don't know if a direct link is really needed. I would imagine some of the links already cited link to that same PDF, and should be easy for any interested reader to find it. -Helvetica (talk) 01:18, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

We are not going to cite any blogs, including blogs on Examiner.com. The controversy was described in other sources. Unfortunately, I do not have time and only removed problematic parts of the text. My very best wishes (talk) 01:29, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Just to clarify (as explained above), I think that Euromaidan Press is not an appropriate source in this particular case, i.e. for sourcing a BLP page about someone they consider "an enemy". There are many other sources. It does not mean that Euromaidan Press can not be used in some other cases.My very best wishes (talk) 14:11, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

How can a blog that publishes vitriol like this be used as a reliable source for anything?

Destroy all gas pipelines & bomb the Belarusian gas pipeline, thus launching the boycott of Russian energy that the West has refused to undertake until now. …

Call on Ukrainians in the West to attack and kill members of the Putin regime, their associates and close relatives.

Remove uranium from Ukraine’s nuclear reactors and prepare to disperse it in Russia by all means possible—the Budapest Memorandum depriving Ukraine of nuclear power status is clearly moot now.

Prepare to shell Belgorod with whatever missiles and artillery Ukraine has in its arsenal to flatten that city.

Incredibly, this editorial has never been taken down. That signals that Ukrainian fascists are aware that the US government will let them get away with anything. And yes, this is fascism. Where have we heard such discourse before? Consider this:

Ultimately, Hitler decided to level Leningrad, which he insisted on calling by its former name of St. Petersburg. In a September 29 communiqué to his generals, Hitler said: “The Führer has decided to have St. Petersburg wiped off the face of the earth. The further existence of this large city is of no interest…"

Anytime it cites Euromaidan Press, Wikipedia endorses terrorism and genocide. – Herzen (talk) 18:14, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Herzen, with comments like that (and the blatant misrepresentation of the website) you are just making yourself look more and more ridiculous. Double goes for edit summaries like "Eromaidan Press is openly fascist and advocates terrorism and genocide".Volunteer Marek (talk) 19:18, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I checked again and tend to agree with you that EM Press can be used on this page, as long as the text is adequate. Actually, this source does not tell anything new that has not been already described in other multiple sources. My very best wishes (talk) 19:22, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

You agree with VM! What a surprise!

You need to edit your user page. Here is what it currently says:

I am no longer active in the project for privacy reasons beyond editing my userspace if needed

Given that you persist in tag teaming with VM to revert essentially all of my edits, in order to cover up the fascist nature of the Kiev regime, it is simply impossible to assume that you are acting in good faith. This has been pointed out to you before. – Herzen (talk) 20:52, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

I asked you to stop playing dumb, but you persist in your obfuscation and obstruction. I quoted from an editorial at Euromaidan Press that calls for nuclear and other terrorism against Russians and the "flattening" of a Russian city, which means genocide. Did you even follow that link? Do you deny that that piece exists at the Euromaidan Press Web site and that it says what it says? Your contortions to defend and hide the obvious fascist nature of the post-Euromaidan regime are becoming increasingly desperate and ridiculous. Especially now that the regime has started assassinating political dissidents, with Ukrainian politicians openly expressing approval of these assassinations in social media. – Herzen (talk) 20:52, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

And of course you omitted the disclaimer that's right at the top of the page which says that the views are not those of the Euromaidan Press. Who's playing dumb. Anyway, I've replaced the source with another. And this was NEVER actually about the source, since the term "pro-Russian" is widely used in all kinds of sources, hence you bringing the source up was nothing but a BS excuse to remove a term per WP:IJUSTDONTLIKEIT. Since the source is gone, can you please stop using the talk page as a personal forum? Having to read that stuff - with all the "fascist this" and "fascist that", "regime this" and "regime that" is like reading some 1950's Stalinist pamphlet. It's funny at first but it gets old and tedious fast.Volunteer Marek (talk) 20:57, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

References

pro-Russian separatists

Re [6]. If the issue is that the separatists are described as "pro-Russian separatists" then let's not pretend that this about the source, as pretty much that's how all reliable sources refer to them. So how about not making irrelevant excuses for removing relevant text? Volunteer Marek (talk) 02:23, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Suspicion of Bias

Hello friends. After reading the article and comments, I'm afraid it's hard for me not to conclude that this article is rather biased against Ms. Lisitsa. For one thing, all of the second- and third-party comments cited in the article are from sources critical of Ms. Lisitsa. A few moments search on the Internet, however, shows that she also has a number of reasonable defenders as well:

http://swedhr.org/we-defend-valentina-lisitsas-freedom-of-speech-on-ukraines-hr-violations/ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/classicalmusic/11535562/Censoring-Valentina-Lisitsa-shames-the-Toronto-Symphony-Orchestra.html http://professorsblogg.com/2015/11/02/facts-and-libel-in-the-international-campaign-vs-valentina-lisitsa-analysis/ etc. etc.

Further, while it is true that her alleged Tweets and the like were vulgar, it is also easy to find similar comments made by the other side, meaning the Ukrainian nationalists. Yet only the controversy over Ms. Lisitsa's comments is mentioned. Moreover, I agree that this comments page is to be used for discussion of the article and not for promotion of one side of the controversy. However, we must also remember that Ms. Lisitsa's comments and those of her detractors have been made in the context not only of the Toronto cancellation but the larger issue of a highly charged war in which people have been killed. Tempers are hot on both sides of this larger issue, and this is the background which authors of this article should keep in mind in deciding what content to include and what content to omit. I suggest that, in its present form, this article is highly biased against Ms. Lisitsa. Gunnermanz (talk) 14:27, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Not at all. The article is focused, NPOV, completely unbiased. 98.67.0.138 (talk) 11:48, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Concert on the Crimea peninsula

Recently, she gave a concert in Crimea. I think this is relevant for the article, given the political situation. Chaptagai (talk) 14:55, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia photo

Caption: Valentina Lisitsa beside a piano

Really? Thanks for telling me! I thought that might be an espresso maker. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:643:8104:730:517C:B2FC:F287:EE03 (talk) 03:23, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

missing Critical Reception

This is a blunder! Needs to be a section on reviews of her work. Some of it has been praised, some of it seen as too brutal/hard for the music. A balanced look should be included. 50.111.19.2 (talk) 06:30, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

That is a great idea. Let's do it. We normally use titles like "Reception" or "Assessment" for that type of material. Do you have any references? Burrobert (talk) 07:29, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Birthdate

A user recently changed Valentina Lisitsa's birthdate from 11 December to 25 March without a source for the change. I haven't reverted the change because I can't access the source for the original date. Also, looking through Lisitsa's social media postings, she has clearly stated that 11 December is not her birthdate. Any thoughts on a way forward? Burrobert (talk) 07:49, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

1969 or 1973?

Hi fellow editors, it remains incoherent regarding Valentina's birthdate and birthyear. It is stated 1973 here, but however I do found an online source (which I doubt it's reliable) indicating it is 1969. Check out the link here: https://infofamouspeople.com/famous/valentina-lisitsa.htm, I had also removed any information regarding her date of birth until any editors can find a reliable source. Let me know if there's any further questions. MarkieC07 (talk) 14:45, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Finally, the issue with the date was noticed! :)

In fact, the correct date of birth is neither December 11, 1969 nor December 11, 1973. Lisitsa never gave such information in an interview or in social networks. (The big question is where such information originally came from). On her page in the Russian social network VKontakte, the date of birth is March 25, 1970, as well as in the passport of the DPR, which got into the frame in one of the TV stories about Valentina. UserIVi (talk) 12:29, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

deleted her Twitter acct

After attacking the Ukrainian president/supporting the recent invasion with some pretty disturbing posts. If she's started a new one, I can't find it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.111.36.47 (talk) 11:12, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Lisitsa has previously supported Russia's position on Ukraine and criticised Western interference within Ukraine. It would not therefore be surprising if she commented on the current situation. The twitter account that is displayed at the bottom of her wiki bio is still open but her posts cannot be viewed. She has not listed a twitter account on her home page. She has however provided her Facebook, VK and Instagram accounts. There was no comment about the political situation in her VK or Facebook accounts. She has not posted to her VK account since 2018 but did post on Facebook on 12 February 2022. I have not seen anything in the media. Burrobert (talk) 15:41, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Lisitsa's politics

Editors may be aware that an issue arose in 2015 with regards to Lisitsa's criticism of the Ukraine government and support for pro-Russia separatists in eastern Ukraine. The issue was covered in numerous media outlets and resulted in the cancellation of her concerts in Toronto that year. We have included quite a lot of criticism of her in the article but readers may be confused about what it all means since we hardly mention her views. Ideally, we should expand the politics section to tell readers what she has said. However, despite her strong views about Ukraine, she is best known for her amazing musical talent and it would be a shame to detract from that by overemphasising the politics. Does anyone have views on this? Regarding some recent to-ing and fro-ing in the lead, does anyone have an opinion on whether the view of The Ukrainian Weekly merits a mention in the lead? Burrobert (talk) 17:04, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

She is best known for her hate speech and for the twitter controversy that ended her North American career. She is not a particularly well known or notable musician, despite her big Youtube following. This is not a fan site. The Toronto Globe and other RS report that it was Ukrainian public outcry that led to her being marginalized. Please read the sources. SPECIFICO talk 17:42, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

If you have sources that say the Twitter controversy ended her North American career, they will be quite helpful to the article. Your personal opinion that it did so is not helpful especially since sources like [7] only mention the TSO cancellation and specifically note other Canadian appearances went ahead as planned. (It does mention that the executive directory of Toronto’s Royal Conservatory of Music probably wouldn't book her today, but this is after she went on to play there after the controversy.) Nil Einne (talk) 08:03, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

I believe Nil Einne is correct in saying that Valentina has played in Toronto since 2015. I have not made a thorough search but this source says she played at the The Royal Conservatory of Music's Koerner Hall in April 2016 and, possibly pointedly, played an all-Russian programme. Burrobert (talk) 10:37, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

As follow-up to the BLPN discussion,[8] I've reduced the amount of detail that were cited to WP:RSOPINION that was added after the discussion despite my previous WP:UNDUE concern. Morbidthoughts (talk) 06:09, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

References

Her nationality

I do not want to decide myself, but her page contains a Russian language text https://www.valentinalisitsa.com/ru (I do not see any Ukrianian one). She describes herself there as a 'one more blond Russian pianist'.Xx236 (talk) 06:39, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

We have two sources which describe her as Ukrainian-American. She was born in Ukraine and has spent a significant part of her life in the US. It is unclear whether she has ever lived in Russia. Her connection to Russia is through her mother. She seems to identify with Russia and is sympathetic to its actions in protecting eastern Ukraine but that does not make her a Russian citizen. Burrobert (talk) 06:54, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Do we know her citizenship?

'her father is of Ukrainian heritage' - unsourced. Xx236 (talk) 06:56, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

According to Julia Davies (https://www.thedailybeast.com/author/julia-davis may be unreliable) Lisitsa has US citizenship. Xx236 (talk) 08:17, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

She accepted Russian and DNR citizenship.https://twitter.com/ST0P_PUTIN/status/1514983054779031560?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw She lives in Rome and Moscow (according to her).Xx236 (talk) 08:37, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

"Born in Kyiv when Ukraine was under Soviet rule, Lisitsa has Polish and Russian heritage on her mother’s side and Ukrainian ancestry on her father’s". Burrobert (talk) 06:59, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Exactly, but the quote comes from source 2, not 5,8.Xx236 (talk) 07:04, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

I found it in 8, but it appears 2 and 8 are the same. We should fix that. Burrobert (talk) 07:32, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

You are right.Xx236 (talk) 07:40, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

I am not familiar with Julia Davies. We don't specify in the text whether "Ukrainian-American" refers to nationality, permanent residence or citizenship. It may be best to leave it vague unless there are good sources that provide specific details. We could discuss whether to include nationality in the Infobox as per MOS:INFONAT. Burrobert (talk) 08:36, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

She left the USA. Xx236 (talk) 08:39, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Did she? Where does she live? We should include that in her bio. Burrobert (talk) 08:54, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

'Now Valentina shares her time between Moscow and Rome.' https://www.valentinalisitsa.com/about Xx236 (talk) 09:05, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

That could be added to her bio under Personal life. Burrobert (talk) 09:51, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

"Protecting Eastern Ukraine" ??? SPECIFICO talk 07:38, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

The 'Ukrainian-American' sources are from 2012 and 2015. Xx236 (talk) 13:26, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Right-ho. What is the significance? Burrobert (talk) 14:18, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

MH17

The subject is too difficult for me. She allegedly praized shooting down MH17.https://nltimes.nl/2015/08/28/klm-bans-pianist-allegedly-praised-shooting-mh17 Still the KLM banned her recordings. Xx236 (talk) 08:31, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

The article does not say she praised the shooting down of MH17. It does say that someone else said she said it. A bit convoluted. Note that "the complaint comes from an action group that opposes the pianist". It seems to be related to her support,which we already mention, for separatists in eastern Ukraine, which has obviously upset some people. We already mention that she believes the Ukraine government has Nazi characteristics. We would need to be careful about how we include any of this in the article but could say that in 2015 KLM removed her music from its playlists after receiving a complaint from an action group that opposes Valentina. Is it noteworthy? Burrobert (talk) 08:51, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

I do not know, but this may help https://euromaidanpress.com/2015/08/30/klm-cancels-lisitsa-my-story-of-fighting-hate-and-war-promotion/ Xx236 (talk) 09:07, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Alexander Zakharchenko was a DPR leader, not involved directly in MH17 shooting down.Xx236 (talk) 09:15, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

It is from the person mentioned in the earlier article who made the complaint to KLM. She does clarify that Valentina did not celebrated the downing of MH17. It is an interesting opinion piece but not useful by itself. Burrobert (talk) 09:50, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

John Bell Young controversy

See this article about the incident with Young.[9]. Do we have useful content there? SPECIFICO talk 21:46, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

WP:NYPOST. Is there more reliable coverage of this incident? Morbidthoughts (talk) 22:44, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Not sure. Young was rather an erratic figure in his own right. SPECIFICO talk 23:21, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Date of birth

Every other site says her birthday is December 11th.Why is that? Olimpia709 (talk) 12:53, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Not sure but here is a quote from an earlier discussion about her date of birth:

A user recently changed Valentina Lisitsa's birthdate from 11 December to 25 March without a source for the change. I haven't reverted the change because I can't access the source for the original date. Also, looking through Lisitsa's social media postings, she has clearly stated that 11 December is not her birthdate.

Burrobert (talk) 13:13, 13 December 2022 (UTC)