Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/Podilsko-Voskresenska Line/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

• Comment – It has been noted before that trilingual websites (in English, Ukrainian and Russian) cannot serve as a proof of bilingual status of Kyiv or the country as a whole. If that logic is applied, than English would be the third official language and in our case should also be reflected in station names. This is not the case and this is a false logic. In deciding the status of the Russian language it is better to consult the Constitution of Ukraine, where only Ukrainian is listed as an official state language. Russian does not have any status whatsoever. Not in the country, not in the capital. Even though the president's and the city government's sites are trilingual, Ukrainian is the only official working language in the country and in the capital. --Hillock65 21:43, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

In regards to the number of Russian speakers, let's look at the figures of the latest census: According to the latest census (2001), among Kiev residents, 2,111 thousand (82.2%) identified themselves as Ukrainians, 337 thousand (13.1%) - Russians, and 120 thousand (4.7%) - other nationalities. [1]. Among Ukrainians, 85.2% named Ukrainian language as the native language, and 14.8% called Russian language as native. Among Russians, 95.9% listed Russian as native, and 3.9% - Ukrainian. [2]. The numbers for Ukraine are essentially similar. [3],[4]. So, claims of majority of Russian speakers are not supported by the available data. --Hillock65 21:43, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

And finally, opinions of other users and examples of their edits as well as mine or anybody else's cannot serve as proof of anything either, per WP:Verifiability. There are standards in WP regarding Verifiability. I suggest we follow those. Pictures of signs that remain on the walls cannot serve as a proof of anything. They are part of the architectural composition of the stations and have not been removed because of esthetic considerations. Once again, I suggest we stick to the verifiable and reliable sources in determining the names of the stations per WP:SOURCE. Instead of the old Soviet maps, modern ones should be consulted, the more so, that now there are some in English and without Russian names from trustworthy sources. [5][6] Including the current official map of the Kyiv metro [7]. To see the point of this argument most clearly compare the official map with this one, used in English WP[8]. Why is there such a drastic discrepancy in appearance, where did the Russian names come from? Is this how we treat sources?--Hillock65 21:43, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Reply

• Actually Russian language has regional status in several Eastern and Southern Ukrainian cities and Crimea, however does the lack of an official language make it irrelevant to the context? USA has no official language wrt constitution for that reasoning. As for working language I will provide you with screenshots taken from a Kiev Metro documentary with Russian language documents and machinery on demand.
• WRT census figures (again let's not wander off topic) there is a stark difference between Native language and spoken language. By default most Ukrainians in Kiev would have said their native language wrt their origin, even though they might not speak it at all. In fact this was something confirmed in a long discussion on the talk pages of Ukrainization and Ukrainian language. Also Russian language in Ukraine shows numerous points which give more details than a census figure does. Again using one soure per WP:V, where there are alternatives, in deciding a policy is also unrequired.
• WRT They are part of the architectural composition of the stations and have not been removed because of esthetic considerations. is not also a POV? Where is a WP:SOURCE for that statement? I for one have written hundreds of articles on Metro, and in front of me are a dozen literature books, not a trace. In fact taking that argument, why would the renamed stations not retained their previous names as part of aesthetics?
• Last but not least wrt this map it was not drawn officially, but even more note that the legend is in Russian. (Which is de facto the state of Kiev Metro right now, Ukrainian on the surface, Russian at the very heart of it). As for this current map [9] as of March 2006 it is out of date. Also Soviet time maps illustrate the same point that you raised yourself about stations, whose Ukrainian name has managed to become more prominent even in Russian langauge, as shown by your own examples. --Kuban Cossack 23:01, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

All illegal and unticonstitututional decsions by the local authorities in regards to the language have been overturened by the courts, I am sure you are aware of this. Not that it matters in this discussion about the city of Kyiv, where Russian has never had any status whatsoever. None. As to the arguments on Ukrainization of Russification, let's not stray away from the topic of discussion. We are not discussing language policies here, but rather metro articles. Regarding the current map, even though it is outdated, it is taken from the official Kyiv metro site. I am glad you noticed the legend in Russian on the Ukrainian map of Kyiv metro I provided. That was my point of its inclusion there. If Russian-speaking citizens of Kyiv are still using the only official Ukrainian names on the working document, maybe that suggests something? Maybe those are the only official names, because there are no other? After all, what prevented Russian speaking people from using Russian beyond the legend and naming the stations in their native language? You noticed the language of the map, maybe you will notice the only Ukrainian names of the stations too? That is because they are the only ones official, the only ones real. Maybe we should follow their example and put our political views aside and stick to the true names without the unnecessary duplication?--Hillock65 00:35, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Finally, one important point that exemplifies the way this subject has been treated so far. I would like to turn your attention to that famous Ploschad Nezavisimosti (Kiev Metro) station. Please note, as of now in the lead the invented Russian name Ploschad Nezavisimosti is featured, and yet in the listed sources on the page this name is not even mentioned! Take a closer look: [10][11] It is nowhere to be found among the sources listed on the page! That exemplifies how these names are created out from thin air to suit one's POV. This is not the way encyclopedia articles are written! Just for fun, think of all the WP policies it violates! --Hillock65 02:29, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Kharkov, Donetsk, Odessa, and Lugansk have not been overturned, and legal or illegal is not for you to judge. But for the record the court of Donetsk made Russian quite legal, and de facto it is! As for Kiev never having Russian language then again when does never begin for you? For the record Kiev Metro did not start in 1991 (or to be more precise 1996 when the new constitution was adopted), its history began in 1960, and back then as for hundreds of years prior Russian was quite legal in Kiev. However to all this the Kiev City municipality website features a Russian version, as does the President's website. WRT to your counter-argument of having an English version, then essentially every official body in the world now has one and indeed in all articles which I wrote (and you did not even touch as of me writing this) I fully explain the source of the name, and sometimes give the equivelant English one.

Second of all the track map was not official, it was done by an amateur, and though I will question its correctness, it is not an official source to use. This map here on the other hand says otherwise, so please wrt to WP:FAITH no need for sharp comments such as That exemplifies how these names are created out from thin air to suit one's POV. In fact I would welcome a third party or the mediator to have his say now.--Kuban Cossack 16:55, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

The cited map is from an amateur site /www.metropoliten.kiev.ua and the authors of that site claim quite explicitly that they are not official and are not affiliated with the Kyiv metro[12]. So much for the WP:SOURCE claim! I also have nothing else to add, unfortunately most of the presented evidence have not been commented on. A map with Russian speakers using Ukrainian names will make an excellent argument to the ArbCom as well, should this case wind up there. I also would welcome other comments, as I have nothing else to add beyond the aforementioned. --Hillock65 18:00, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Guys - we've descended into chaos already; can we leave off the discussion until the (majority of the) parties who haven't yet contributed have done so? ~ Anthøny 18:56, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

The cited map has the official logo of the Kiev Metro system, although it is hosted on a non-official site (I would not denote anything amateurish, as that is a POV) however it was probably scanned from a printed source. In other terms until it can be proven that it was an amateurish work,(which you can extend to all of the maps they hold in their collection which is just nonsense) it is a source. Let I remind you that the similar arguments which you presented over a photograph in Russophobia were not accepted by the wikipedian community, therefore whilst you are entiled to believe it is an amateurish drawing, given that you can't prove it, discrediting the host of the source is an equal POV and also ORish.

I also second the mediator's request at remaining calm and civil, threating to wind it to an arbcom at such a premature stage is not going to help us attain consensus, which I trust is something that you seek as a true wikipedian.

I for one forgive you the hate-infested RfC and the failed RfAr which you previously filed against me, delaying this mediation, so therefore I suggest we write off our previous mistrusts and work constructively.

Speaking of which the official website of the Kiev Metro, though out of date in many areas it has a news section which is updated once/twice a month. If one looks at it, they will see that Russian languaged passages are also present there (10.06.07, 28.04.07, 19.04.2007). Thus, not by an amateurish site, but by an official site, we have confirmation that Russian language is used by the Kiev Metro. --Kuban Cossack 19:17, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

I will follow the mediator's advice and will not allow myself to be dragged into another endless discussion. No comment at this time. --Hillock65 19:25, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Very sensible of you. --Kuban Cossack 19:27, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Parties - unless anybody has any huge objections, I'm going to Archive the discussion above until it's needed (I do have a schedule, you know :) Cheers, Anthøny 20:13, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Not knowing much about mediations, does that mean that you are temporarily suspending it? --Kuban Cossack 22:35, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Not at all, just clearing things out to have a neater Mediation page ~ Anthøny 10:07, 26 July 2007 (UTC)