Talk:Ukraine

	This Ukraine related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>

, (new)

multiple oversights

besides the general out-of-date feel of the article, i'd like to offer some criticism of the article in its current state.

not enough is talked about genocide of Crimean Tatar population that fuels the whole Russian nationalist myth around the occupation of Crimea. both genocide of 1944 and the current events with destruction of cultural heritage of Crimea, declaration of representative body of Crimean Tatars (Medjlis) by Russia as "terrorist organization", as well as jailing and torture of Crimean Tatar people are relevant to this conversation.

needs to be some more emphasis on how Euromaidan prevented the rise of the police state akin to ones in Russia, Belarus, and Kazakhstan. it is incredibly important as the contrast to often present propaganda narratives about Ukraine being a "fascist government" despite currently being pretty much the sole non-EU democratic government in the post-Soviet space.

the role of neo-Nazis in Ukrainian politics needs to be more elaborated on and further researched/updated. it kind of suffers from being somewhat overblown in western media despite still being significant, and there needs to be some more talk on surprisingly friendly relationship between Ukrainian and Russian neo-Nazis and how they still remain in fringes despite being drummed up so hard (their perceived power does not translate to electoral influence whatsoever, see 2019 parliamentary election where multiple seemingly prominent parties ran together as one and failed to cross the required barrier to end up in Rada) ^{— Unsigned, by: Red Water / talk / contribs}

GDP

Is the GDP in rubles? ^{— Unsigned, by: Erlend / talk / contribs}

The country uses the Ukrainian hryvnia as currency, so I assume the GDP is also measured in it.

(Also, remember to sign messages with four tildes (~ x4). Jake Holmes^{yell at me} 21:09, 23 February 2022 (UTC

I made the last correction of the GDP. It uses the IMF data and thus is measured in US dollars. Red Water (talk) 09:26, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Defending Azerbaijani genocide

@ApooftGnegiol @A somebody. Defending what Azerbaijan's doing in Armenia and Artsakh is genuinely reprehensible, but I would like to see a citation for this claim. Carthage (talk) 11:59, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm not opposed to adding that with evidence either. On a web search, I saw one search result for a tweet about many NAFO members being pro-Azerbaijan which didn't exist and wasn't archived when I followed the link.

This edit I reverted also wasn't well-edited, duplicating the old mention of NAFO and harassment and making that the main thing. If adding more about NAFO's role, it would be fair to mention that it fundraises for the Ukrainian military, alongside it being involved in online troll battles and shitposting. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 12:38, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

https://twitter.com/csrevolution0/status/1698549418910482546

https://twitter.com/MannekenPisNAFO/status/1696928085071872405

and of course https://twitter.com/Burning12196087/status/1698170579633815627 A somebody. (talk) 19:00, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

OK, you've found a few example tweets of NAFO people supporting Azerbaijan. Maybe there's more (probably, but I don't know whether the proportion of such people in NAFO is bigger or smaller). However, your old edit is still not OK. Your edit specifically claimed (green=added) that NAFO has the "official goal of combatting Russian propaganda and defending the ongoing azerbaijan genocide". That can't be in the article unless you find evidence that it is the official goal. Otherwise something else may be possible to add, if we find it reasonably supported, along the lines that a portion of NAFO members are supporting it.

Also, when you reverted the reverts, the other bad thing I noted was still there, and it's still not good enough writing. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 19:19, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Would you prefer if I put 'official' in quotation marks? And besides Armenia is technically allied with russia so it makes sense as to why they would deny the ongoing genocide. Here's another NAFO guy defending the genocide https://twitter.com/wildherelife/status/1698362210815221789 A somebody. (talk) 19:22, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

A more thorough job of rewriting is needed (that section has more flaws). I just gave it a start. Thoughts, on that as a starting point, and if so on further changes? --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 20:02, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

'fundraises for the ukrainian military', I don't think the ukrainian military needs fundraising, the refugees do. And besides you still need to mention the fact that it's literally just a harassment group pretending to be an online movement, I think you made the section worse by whitewashing them. Also it should make note of the fact that NAFO is comically racist. A somebody. (talk) 21:44, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Is this better? The fundraising seems to often be for things more small or specific but which tie into the war effort. And I think it's fair to refer to NAFO as a troll group, since it does trolling. (More sources added.) However, you're wrong in thinking that it isn't an online movement just because part of what it does is harassment. The two are in no way mutually exclusive. On racism, any sources to cite? --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 06:27, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Crimea poll results

Several polls conducted by reputable outlets from the West (as well as the American propaganda outlet Voice of America News) show that a clear majority of Crimeans supported annexation back in 2014:

[1]

[2]

[3]

While there is more hesitance displayed among Crimea Tatar respondents, there is a clear majority of support for annexation across the board, and a majority of respondents also across all three ethnic groups listed (Tatars, Ukrainians, and Russians) view that the referendum accurately displayed majority consensus among Crimeans. Any thoughts about adding mention of these polls to the Crimea section? Carthage (talk) 15:43, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

There is the usual skeptical response to polls — that there is some inherent selection bias due to polls generally only being answered by those who are willing to spend their time on answering them. --Luigifan18 (talk) 16:19, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

(EC)It's certainly interesting. In once sense it's not particularly surprising that the closer to Russia you get then the more people you find identifying as ethnic Russian and supporting Russian policy, including the annexation. It's also the case that the polls were carried out shortly after the invasion and annexation of that part of the country, perhaps we would have seen different responses if the question had been asked before Russia actually invaded.

(EC)Finally, this data is now around ten years old and opinions can change. I notice that in the Pew story we find Russian opinions from that time: "Putin appears to have scored a political victory at home with his handling of the Ukraine crisis. More than eight-in-ten Russians (83%) express confidence in Putin to handle world affairs. ..... When it comes to Russia’s image abroad, a 43%-plurality of Russians think Putin’s response to the situation in Ukraine has made people in other countries more favorably inclined toward Russia; just 26% think it has had the opposite effect." I'm wondering (In the unlikely event that it were possible to repeat the exercise) if we would find the same opinions today.

(EC)Having said all that, I guess that, with the appropriate caveats these polls would be worth mentioning.Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 16:21, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

So I added some edits. Does this look good to you all:

In 2014 a number of polls by reputable Western outlets, including both Gallup and Pew, that found that a majority of Crimeans across the board both supported the referendum results and viewed the results as being representative of the majority of the Crimean population.[93][94][95] While there is an obvious caveat of selection bias at play here, multiple polls across the board show that the majority of the Crimean population as of 2014 supported annexation.

A report conducted in 2017 found that many Crimeans would vote "yes" again to join Russia if presented with a new referendum, although Crimean Tatars that were interviewed were much more skeptical of the current regime. These same Crimeans also reported an increase in price levels as one of the consequences of joining Russia. There also seems to be a near-unanimous consensus those interviewed that prior to annexation Crimea was marginalized in Ukraine. There has also been a significant exodus from Crimea, and contact with the rest of Ukraine has significantly diminished after annexation.[96]

It is, of course, highly doubtful that another reliable poll will be taken anytime soon.

I think I added the proper caveats. Carthage (talk) 17:08, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

the influence of the far right in ukraine is way overblown by western press

the section on the revolution of dignity needs a lot of revision so its just not parroting kremlin propaganda. ^{— Unsigned, by: Monochromemelo1 / talk / contribs}

Is the Russian Invasion of Ukraine worthy of a separate article?

Personally, I think so; It is a very notable event in Ukrainian history. TheOneAndOnlyCirrusMan (talk) 00:17, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

100% yes ←§ Reichtangle (talk) 01:09, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

There's a draft. The reason no separate article was made earlier, as I recall reading comments about, is simply that it's not easy to do a good job while it's fresh news. Writing to chronicle events as they have unfolded has ended up messy on RW before, and then it's a greater challenge with war given the muddy and uncertain nature of much information about recent events. That's the gist as I recall. But if done well, that's great, and it may be easier now to offer more info. RW simply hasn't had the people and dedication to cover unfolding events near as well as WP does. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 05:18, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

It is very very difficult for us to get articles on fast-changing situations right. Either someone starts live-blogging them and we get a never-ending stream of updates and a massive incomprehensible article; or people lose interest in the topic after creating a big article about the situation right now - and six months later it's almost impossible impossible to bring the thing properly up to date. More commonly both things happen. Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 12:53, 1 June 2024 (UTC)