Talk:Arseniy Yatsenyuk/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

“Massive discredit campaign”?

“Massive discredit campaign” started against “Front of Changes” – Yatsenyuk — Mariah-Yulia (talk) 21:46, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I do not care if he is Jew or German but

political analyst Taras Kuzio claimed Yatsenyuk's Jewish origins could hurt his chance of being elected (Yatsenyuk, a Yushchenko clone, will bring stagnation, Kyiv Post, March 4, 2009). Also in Ukraine some people think he is Jewish (see here). I think some mention of these 2 opinions should be in the article (although I agree putting in a Jew WP:CAT is not right if we are not sure he is a Jew). — Mariah-Yulia • Talk to me! 23:58, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Next PM??

On February 21, 2010 Yanukovych has yet to secure ruling majority in parliament President Yanukovych offered three candidates for Prime Minister of Ukraine: Sergey Tigipko, Yatsenyuk and Party of Regions lawmaker Mykola Azarov. Did Yatsenyuk respond to that already? Late November 2009 he stated he was not interesting in "using his votes as bargaining material" for a high political post.
— Mariah-Yulia • Talk to me! 14:50, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

This is true, but Yatsenyuk didn't give yet an official response. Yanukovych offered to him to be prime minster. A.h. king • Talk to me! 14:55, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Lol, that's why I couldn't find one (his website isn't outdated then!), thanks anyhow! — Mariah-Yulia • Talk to me! 15:01, 26 February 2010

Stupid sentence

I don't really understand this sentence: "Yatseniuk opposes same-sex marriage, which is at odds with his personal beliefs as a Catholic.". The Catholic Church doesn't support same-sex marriage, so this is not a contradiction. Who wrote this sentence? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.183.52.38 (talk) 00:01, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

I noticed the same thing. I removed the part that states ", which is at odds with his personal beliefs as a Greek Catholic"...because it has no citation to back its claim. Kingturtle = (talk) 18:01, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

seems obvious. "which" refers to "same-sex marriage". --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 04:50, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Just removed the Scientology info

I just removed the Scientology info about this gentleman, it wasn't sourced. Basically a line at the bottom of the entry left a title and a gentleman's name, no link. I search Google for it and found nothing at all, with that title, and only wikipedia and a blog site quoting that exact title and author. Without a reliable source, it can't be replaced.  KoshVorlon. We are all Kosh   17:27, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Rumours that Yatsenyuk is a high ranking Scientologist seem to go back several years, but are unknown outside Ukraine. 2010 discussion from an anti-Scientology forum, the first quote from which is identical to the removed piece! https://whyweprotest.net/community/threads/ukraine-presidential-candidate-rumored-to-be-ot6.53056/ --Hartley Patterson (talk) 18:34, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

These Scientology rumours (unknown to me before today) seem to me to be a "variety" on "Don't vote for a Jew smear campaigns" that have been going on in Ukraine for years.... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 18:44, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

For what it is worth, the cited source (in Russian) is available in Wayback Machine. The Russian language Wikipedia article repeats the claim of his sisters connection to the church, so some of this may be supported by WP:RS. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 23:26, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

The corresponding ru.wikipedia article refers to a news article and a somewhat dubious as a source critical biography on an apologetics page dealing with "totalitarian cults" on the website of the "centre for apologetics (...) with the synodal department of youth of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church". No mention of it on the Ukrainian page, but I suppose that this is the sort of information that, were it true, would not be left alone for too long in the current climate of information wars. Might it be reasonable to reinstate the remark framed by something like an "According to Russian media reports"? --4bpp (talk) 10:58, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

This article claims he is a Scientologist. http://www.pravmir.com/acting-ukrainian-president-pastor-prime-scientologist/ It might not be a valid source for Wikipedia, but as it is a Russian source, it might be noted for part of a future article about Russian propoganda regarding Ukraine. --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 04:47, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

While the source is contentious, consider the fact what you say is highly racist by implicating it as automatically dubious due to it's Russian origin. What if you said "this newspaper is Jewish, thus it is propaganda"? Consider that benchmark whenever you're about to say something racist like that. Solntsa90 (talk) 20:47, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

It's not racist at all. It would be biased if it assumed that everything from Russia was a lie, but to be suspicious of claims which are not sourced is very reasonable. It would be racist if a) "Russian" was a race and b) it implied that Russian people - rather than publications from Russia on these matters - are dubious. Being suspicious is not the same as being racist. I'm wondering, by the way, if mention of Scientology has to be sourced, what is the source for listing him as a "Member of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church"? --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 02:37, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Source for listing him as a "Member of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church" is at the bottom of the section Arseniy_Yatsenyuk#Political_positions. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 17:44, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Jew

Извиняюсь что пишу не на английском. Я убрал категорию и "родился в еврейской семье", поскольку во первых вопрос спорен и окончательного вывода нет. Во вторых его дед был дед был бендеровцем, родители потомки крестьян. Вся семья греко-католики. Откуда тут еврейское происхождение? Mistery Spectre (talk) 19:42, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

@Mistery Spectre:i 'd appreciate if you could use English on the English wikipedia. PLease translate the above so all editors may read your contribution. Thanks.--Wuerzele (talk) 02:04, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

This article is almost ready for a Good Articles nomination....

In my view it just needs to have (the new) sections:

• Family and personal life
• Cultural and political image

This is more a note to self, but other editors can start the section if they want . — Mariah-Yulia • Talk to me! 22:07, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

I've just made a translation from the respective ruwiki section about his family (seemingly, it's referenced reliably enough to be present), although I neither take such an interest in current politics nor informed enough about its core figures to conduct a search of other sources on my own. Please, revise the grammar, if it's not too hard. --Microcell (talk) 19:35, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

@Mariah-Yulia: An important feature of a quality article is sourcing. Many references have no publication date. The accessdate is only a mouseclick away, but is of secondary importance. The date of the article/ webpage is the much more important piece.--Wuerzele (talk) 02:47, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

The Ukraina under the bringer of success "Tiger" Zodiac sign.

About 7 - 15 Milliarden USD subsidies for the West - Ukraina has negotiated Mr. Yatsenyuk for the transitional government . Is that supposed to not mean a political success ?Virkadobra (talk) 16:49, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

He was born tо a family of ethnic Jewish-Ukrainian or tо a family of ethnic Ukrainians?

We seem to be in a small wp:edit war about this. Hence I am opening this discussion. (I am not part of the war myself.) Can both sides explain why they think they are right please?

By the way even if we agree to state in the article "He was born tо a family of ethnic Jewish-Ukrainian" that info should be followed by "(currently Yatsenyuk is a member of the Greek Catholic church)". He most not look like anywhere in the article that he is currently practising the Jewish religion (not that I would mind if he did; but he is simply currently not practising the Jewish religion). — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 17:54, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Whether he currently does or does not practice the Jewish religion (and most sources/signs indicate that he indeed does not) is irrelevant to whether or not he has ethnic Jewish heritage, of which almost no one disputes when pressed, and even official/academic sources say that he plays down his Jewish heritage so as to appeal more broadly to voters in Western Ukraine. Did anyone read the sources? Solntsa90 (talk) 18:35, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

User gave official source. Your actions are illogical. Read PDF-file (in Ukrainian) --- Arseniy Yatsenyuk Family Tree. Yatsenuk Family is Ukrainian. It information from official site of Arseniy Yatsenyuk — 109.201.233.133 18:54, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Compromise? How about a sentence (in Arseniy_Yatsenyuk#Early_life): "although the official site of Yatsenyuk stated he was born in a family of ethnic Ukrainians official/academic sources state he was born tо a family of ethnic Jewish-Ukrainian". — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 19:54, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

By the way: I am not sure that the sources (used in this article now) that claim he is of Jewish origin or not just written by people who are to lazy to do their own research and/or copy black PR about Yatsenyuk. They seem to be written by people who are not experts on Ukraine. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 23:58, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Why do some Wikipedia users "force" Jewish identities on politicians or other famous people all the time. If Yatsenyuk has Jewish ancestry then it's probably a grandfather or something, not 2 parents. So it's distant and doesn't mean anything. Yuvn86 (talk) 14:54, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

To ask the obverse of that question, why do some Wikipedia users take it on themselves to obfuscate Jewish identities on politicians or other famous people all the time, and in this case given that there are sources from think-tanks, journals and foreign policy advisories saying Jewish? Solntsa90 (talk) 06:18, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

How about using threads, fellow editors. It's a lot easier to follow. His being Jewish or not is one issue. A separate issue is a journalist editorializing on WHY he may be hiding his Jewish identity. That is editorializing. Being an inclusionist, I'm not arguing here for exclusion, but don't call it "reporting." That's stretching it too far for an opinion piece.

Quoting from my edit summary: The source is a double opinion so needs 2B cited as such. See WP:NPOV#Explanation of the neutral point of view: "Avoid stating opinions as facts..." (What comes after that in the quote is real' important, too.)

This is clearly not "reporting." It's opining, editorializing, speculating, etcetera.

In addition to mischaracterization of editorializing/speculation by one Harriet Salem both as to AY's motive and the personal motivations of his constituency as reporting, the SS "Although..." pushes POV by implying or outright indicating the latter view is correct.

Paavo273 (talk) 06:33, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

As multiple mainstream sources (that I have meticulously provided) have said, He has obfuscated his Jewishness in order to shield his political prospects from antisemitic feeling, but that isn't your right to make a call that this "isn't reporting". That's your unilateral opinion, and you can't go around fundamentally altering the article because you don't like it a certain way. It's only "editorializing" if it comes from an editorial or an untrusted source, but I have not provided editorials, but rather, factual articles intended for both the casual audience as well as those who work within foreign policy.

Please do not change the information in the article again unless you have a source directly refuting the claims of the sources I have provided.

Solntsa90 (talk) 18:20, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

See below. Paavo273 (talk) 07:12, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Does anyone else see a BLP issue rel the claim AY is Jewish?

Usually I’m against WP’s policy of falling all over itself to not offend subjects of its BLPs. In this case, however, if you search under Yatsenyuk Jewish and Yateniuk Jewish, you’ll find some rather unkind stuff that seems to border on hate speech, including some sites that cite THIS article. I’m confident WP policy makers would prefer not 2B a vehicle for that.

• In which case, an argument could be made that the more prudent and WP-policy-conforming decision is to go with what AY calls himself—ethnic Ukrainian--and stick with just that. The part of the BLP policy that is probably most relevant is rel public figures. AY is clearly a public figure, but contrary to what that policy says, there is NO “multitude of reliable published sources” for his Jewish ethnicity. It’s mostly a bunch of cheesy hearsay as far as I can tell. (This article's treatment of it can be found at the moment here, near the end of the article.) The Nazis and Jewish organizations who according to my Internet searches are the main two categories preoccupied with the possibility of AY’s Jewish ethnicity seem rather unexpected topic mates.
• What do you all think--keep or delete? I’d appreciate the input of regular editors to this article as well as passers by. Paavo273 (talk) 07:12, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

There are plenty of sources stating that Yatsenyuk is Jewish (mostly intended for consumption by those in academia and the intelligence community, thus why it seems the sources don't exist) and virtually all of them also say that he downplays his Jewishness, so between those two factors, it isn't surprising you'd say that it seems like an anti-semitic agenda! But don't take my word for it:

1.) http://media.mcclatchydc.com/smedia/2014/03/12/19/02/h10XD.So.91.pdf - sourced from Voice of America and Barcelona Centre for International Affairs, published by The McClatchy Company

2.) http://www.isn.ethz.ch/Digital-Library/Articles/Detail//?lng=en&id=103593 - From the data and intelligence wing of the ETH Zurich

3.) http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/04/who-governing-ukraine-olexander-turchynov - The Guardian (which is the only source you keep mentioning, despite the fact I have posted numerous others as demonstrated for above--I don't know why this is, I guess it's because you don't want to admit I have legitimate, academic sources on my side, perhaps?)

4.) http://www.taraskuzio.net/media18_files/105.pdf - Oxford Analytica

It should be noted that many of these sources pre-date the events of 2013-2014, so I highly doubt or suspect their motives are impure.

2.) your "internet searches" seem to be leading to a lot of wiki trouble, as WP:NOR is a tenet around here. Solntsa90 (talk) 23:18, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

EDIT: Just found yet another document from Oxford Analytica supporting my claim: http://www.taraskuzio.net/media18_files/105.pdf

EDIT: have yet another source claiming or reporting Jewishness: http://www.jta.org/2009/08/10/news-opinion/world/ukrainian-jews-want-mayor-charged-for-slurs It's clear by the context given, that the Rabbi ( who is hardly more of an authority on Oxford Analytica or a University in Switzerland IMO anyway) meant Yatsenyuk was not a practicing Jew; this does not exclude the very realistic and very probable possibility that Yatsenyuk is ethnically Jewish, but has converted to Catholicism. Solntsa90 :: (talk) 23:44, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Solntsa90 (talk) 23:28, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

It would be helpful to READ the rules before citing them. Also to tie your mention of the rule to something specific. Listing here the web addresses of sources already cited by you and me and others in the article is not terribly helpful. I've read 'em.

Any other opinions? Paavo273 (talk) 07:39, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

If it would be helpful, then why don't you read them? I posted them again, specifically because I thought you hadn't read them, seeing as you kept referring to a non-existant "opinion piece" from The Guardian; I think this many sources is more than enough to support my claim, thus I do not expect you to rewrite the article again as you saw fit. Solntsa90 (talk) 20:13, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Alleged Jewish ethnicity should be treated correctly w/ NPOV, if at all. 'Need to follow WP policies cited here rel your edits. Organization needed improvement

Hi User:Solntsa90: I didn’t actually delete your Jewish info, only moved it to its own section and expanded it with new RSs. I guess you didn’t notice that when you did a blind revert. I’m also hoping it was not noticing the changes (even though I explained them in the edit summaries) that caused you to delete RSd info I had added there from another section.

As far as I can tell, only Harriet Salem among any English sources that could remotely B deemed RSs makes an assertion about AY’s MOTIVES for not calling himself Jewish. IMO it clearly IS an opinion. (How can she possibly KNOW what's in the hearts of Western Ukrainians, and even if arguendo he IS Jewish and she DOES KNOW the hearts of his constituents, why would WP accept her “knowledge” as an objective news report?) I, unlike some editors, have NOT been arguing for exclusion of the info. But we all need to follow the rules. As you can see from my post below this one, after reading all the hate speech surrounding the Jewish ancestry assertion while searching for sources, I’m beginning to have second thoughts.

• 0 Repeated blind-reverting suggests an editor may not B familiar with WP’s policy WP:OWN.
• 1. The issue of AY’s allegedly Jewish ethnicity is far from settled. The Harriet Salem piece is IMO clearly opinion--the way the term "opinion" is used in WP policy on point.
• 2. Suggestion: If there’s still a problem, why don’t we work together on this talk page and find terminology depicting HS’s contribution that we can both agree on; If necessary, we could ask for wider input from other editors on this talk page OR send it to an RfC. WDYT? In any case, let’s state this with a NPOV as described in WP's specific guidance rel NPOV.
• 3. One or more sources you have cited appear to say nothing about AY’s alleged Jewish ethnicity, e.g., the family tree in Ukrainian.
• 4. Because AY’s “early life” is not described as connected in any way to any alleged Jewish ethnicity (& because the section is now much longer), it belongs better under another heading.
• 5. Rel the disputed status of PM AY, it is OR (and VP’s spin), based on the source you’ve cited, to say that silence constitutes dispute. I have removed it to an appropriate place in the body of the article and stated what the source actually says. Since the source d/n SAY Russia disputes AY’s legitimacy, I’ve cite-tagged that. It’s too involved to cover accurately in the intro.
• 6. In editing WP articles, editors must stay w/i the 4 corners of their sources; u can’t make your own interpretation or synthesis of the source (or worse, as some editors do, just make up stuff, hoping no one will ever compare their info to their sources). WP’s NO OR policy is very clear about that. Paavo273 (talk) 07:39, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

1.) It's not your place nor concern to arbitrate on sources; saying questioning The Guardian journalist's motives or making a personal investigation souunds an awful lot like you're violating the Wikipedia:No_original_research clause of wiki. Harriet Salem's piece is only an opinion if published as such or framed as such; otherwise, it is up to us to accept it at face value, especially when other non-related publications confirm the source (which I have posted, which you continue to do Original Research into and unilaterally arbitrate by youself on_.

2.) you're making interpretations on the sources, saying they're "opinion" pieces for no other reason than your "hunch". Do not accuse me of what you are doing yourself, please.

3.) It wasn't about Russia disputing the new government's legitimacy, it was about India and China not recognizing Ukraine's new PM, thus putting the government into dispute. Until there is election, Yatsenyuk may remain "disputed".

4.) I've seen your other article edits related to Ukraine.

Solntsa90 (talk) 22:27, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Solntsa90 (talk) 22:26, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

@ User:Solntsa90:

• A. Of the sources you’ve added for AY being “disputed,” only Russia and Venezuela so far are depicted as “disputing” the interim government. The others have not rejected the new UA gov’t; not responding does not equal disputing, especially at this early date. Stuff an editor makes up as well as inferences, esp. bad ones, is OR.
• B. It’s important 2B faithful to your sources. Otherwise, editors will always watch 4 this.
• C. Rel your assertion, “[HS]’s piece is only an opinion if published as such or framed as such; otherwise, it is up to us to accept it at face value,” actually WP policy on point contradicts that: From Wikipedia:NPOV#Explanation of the neutral point of view: “Avoid stating opinions as facts… Avoid stating seriously contested assertions as facts. If different reliable sources make conflicting assertions about a matter, treat these assertions as opinions rather than facts, and do not present them as direct statements.”
• D. You have now twice thrice deleted RSd info that I added. Please do not do that. It’s vandalism.
• E. Am I interpreting your position correctly: Info you post must stay exactly where you put it, verbatim the way you stated it, regardless whether multiple other editors disagree with you? But if you don’t like other editors’ contributions, even though RSd, you’ll just blank them? That’s not consistent with the WP:Policy WP:OWN.
• F. So you agree the Jewish identity is not very important? Then does it need to be in the second sentence of the body of the article in a section called “early life” when nothing there or elsewhere in the article ties AY’s alleged Jewish ethnicity to his early life (or any life)? And why or how is it more important than his Romanian ancestry?
• G. Rel the chief rabbi of UA stating that AY is not Jewish, the rabbi was responding to the smear accusations against AY as being a “criminal Jew”, “impudent Jew”, etc. Your assertion that the rabbi was talking about his religion seems 2B OR, pure speculation. What is the “context” you refer to: that the source is a rabbi?
• H. Could you point out two or more--or ANY--“official sources” stating AY’s Jewish ethnicity. If not, please quit using that term. Paavo273 (talk) 07:36, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

As you say, you have no problem reverting my edits. But you ought not to blank info, including RSs that rebut your poistion AND other info that isn't even related. This is now the fourth time you've removed RSd edits. It seems the only thing you are interested in about AY is his Jewishness and reverting to your exact wording and sources. You are essentially vandalizing the article and violating WP:OWN every time you edit.

QUERY: What specifically about AY's alleged Jewish ethnicity is so important to you?

There's definitely a trend here: If you don't like the wording, don't like the source, don't like the edit, the thing to do IYO is just get rid of it. Paavo273 (talk) 21:12, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

How can I take anything you say seriously when you are guilty of nearly everything you accuse me of, except with a differing opinion? Solntsa90 (talk) 21:25, 28 March 2014 (UTC) (P.S: I'll take The Guardian or Oxford Analytica's word over some proclaimed "Chief Rabbi" (appointed by whom?) of Ukraine who has made wild accusations in the past against political enemies of Yatsenyuk (i.e, that Russia is creating anti-semitism to destabilize Ukraine: http://www.jta.org/2014/03/03/news-opinion/world/ukraine-chief-rabbi-accuses-russians-of-staging-anti-semitic-provocations

P.S: I'll edit your edits any time I see something wrong with them, and you'll see that my patience is rather infinite, if you want to go that far. Solntsa90 (talk) 21:25, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Editing others' edits is always welcome on Wikipedia. But repeatedly blanking RSd info and restoring your version as if you "OWN" the article? Not so much. Paavo273 (talk) 06:41, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

per WP:BLP unreliable material needs to be removed, and considering calling him a Jew was documented part of a smear campaign, one would need very reliable sources to prove he was jewish otherwise that would give in to a form of WP:LIBEL. The chief rabbi says he isn't, he says he isn't, we need reliable concrete sources to prove otherwise, else it would just be tabloid guesswork and conjecture.--Львівське (говорити) 08:36, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

1.) The Chief Rabbi's word should not be considered the end-all, especially when

2.) Are you saying that the Chief Rabbi is calling respected publisher Oxford Analytica and respected university the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology liars? Because If it's not him, then you're saying their facts are simply not good enough for you, and that's unilaterally taking decisions into your own hands regarding facts.

Solntsa90 (talk) 19:47, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

No "official" sources. The real & only notable purpose of raising AY’s ethnicity mentioned in the sources is to ethnically slur

• The verbatim verbiage incessantly restored by the editor's rebuttal-blanking reverts refers always to "official sources" but no such "official" sources have to-date been produced.
• Nearly all these sources raised by the editor explicitly state that the claims of Jewish ethnicity are being used to slur AY and wreck his election campaigns. So if the Jewish ethnicity claims were @ some point adequately sourced, they would need 2B discussed in context of their anti-semitic purpose, the only issue that could make them notable. Paavo273 (talk) 21:31, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

So because Arseniy Yatsenyuk hasn't held a press-conference disclosing his ethnic origins, Oxford Analytica, Guardian, etc. sources are somehow baseless and thus intended to spread slurs?

Nonsense.

Also, your claim that the sources explicitly state that such claims are being used to debase him are simply untrue. Look at the Oxford Analytica source once more, since no one seems to read goddamn sources and I'm starting to get irritated. Do you notice any claims of "anti-semitic" conspiracy there? well? As far as the claim that "claims of Jewish ethnicity are being used to slur AY and wreck his election campaign", "Born in Chernivtsi in 1974 to Jewish-Ukrainian Parents" without any connection to an anti-semitic conspiracy. You're welcome.

Solntsa90 (talk) 22:03, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Solntsa90 (talk) 21:35, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

yes, they are worthless sources. They have already been explained why they are worthless. Please read.--Львівське (говорити) 21:39, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Your explanation isn't satisfactory. Solntsa90 (talk) 21:41, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

I don't need an explanation, you need to prove how hearsay is valid.--Львівське (говорити) 21:44, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Actually, you need to prove and establish that Oxford Analytica, Guardian etc. is in the business of publishing hearsay as fact first. Only then can we go down that road. Solntsa90 (talk) 21:46, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

The Oxford Analytica pdf...it's a consulting firm, we need stronger sources that passing mention on an analysis sheet. There is no author or citation. OA is not a known authority, either.

The Guardian...the journalist says "He has played down his Jewish-Ukrainian origins" - the fact that they admit he downplays / denies it is proof that we need sources proving otherwise since this is a BLP.

The Swiss source sites Kuzio. Please provide the original Kuzio source.

--Львівське (говорити) 22:30, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

• the original source for all the others seems to be this 2009 op-ed piece by Kuzio (admittedly he is a great scholar) in the Kyiv Post here --Львівське (говорити) 22:31, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

YES, Kuzio is a great scholar. Yet that still doesn't change the fact that once again, you're unilaterally jumping to conclusions and making assumptions about the sources (i.e "The original source for all the others seems to be this 2009 op-ed piece by Kuzio", which is 100% baseless as you cannot support this claim with evidence, since you do not know what research the organizations have undertaken) that are not supported. Oxford Analytica is the 2nd opinion, and they do not cite Kuzio.

P.S: By whom's authority does Lvovskiy have to say that Oxford Analytica (which has it's own wiki page even), who's services are contracted by NGO and government alike, "has no authority?" Now you're just violating WP:OR at this point, by drawing your own conclusions without authority. Solntsa90 (talk) 22:48, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

It has its own wiki page with a big warning at the top saying its unreferenced. You say it's on its own, yet it's hosted by Kuzio's personal site.--Львівське (говорити) 22:51, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Hosting the source =/= the source being incorrect or created by that host. A bibliography for the Oxford Analytica has been provided, so if you're going to go down that slippery slope, please try again, as you can easily and independently confirm the existence of this article by yourself if you so wish. Solntsa90 (talk) 22:53, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

It has its own wiki page with a big warning at the top saying its unreferenced. You say it's on its own, yet it's hosted by Kuzio's personal site

Thanks for your interest in this "case", but no one asked you to make an investigation into Oxford Analytica, nor do you have the authority to discredit them based on your opinion or hunch. Solntsa90 (talk) 22:55, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

What bibliography? --Львівське (говорити) 23:18, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

"UKRAINE: Yatsenyuk capitalises on public discontent". Oxford Analytica. March 9. Retrieved 7 March 2014. You can do a search on this to confirm that Kuzio didn't just pull the article out of thin air. Solntsa90 (talk) 23:27, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

There is no bibliography anywhere, I have no clue what you're talking about. Just to be clear, Kuzio wrote the OXA article.--Львівське (говорити) 23:41, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Just to be clear, Kuzio wrote the OXA article.

Proof? Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Solntsa90 (talk) 23:45, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

The reason its hosted on his site is because it's on his list of published works.--Львівське (говорити) 23:56, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Nowhere in the 'evidence' you provided does it say Kuzio had any involvement with producing that Oxford Analytica anaylsis. The link you provided says "Taruskuzio.net/media", not "Taruskuzio.net/published_works", and has multiple links to many different media sources and articles.

Once again, would you like to provide proof that Kuzio published this Oxford Analytica reference work himself? Because you're beginning to dig yourself into a hole here, where you're desperately looking to discredit my sources at any cost, even factuality. Solntsa90 (talk) 00:04, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

It's media he has written. Every single article is by him. Please prove otherwise, or prove that he is publishing random articles by other sources on his site (even though the copyright notice forbids unauthorized dissemination) --Львівське (говорити) 00:08, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

No, There is ZERO evidence that everything on that page is authored by Kuzio (you could draw a broad conclusion based on a 'hunch' such as you are doing, but that is not the same as a factually based assessment) and it's not my place to prove to you that Kuzio didn't author the Oxford Anayltica reference (i.e, you want me to disprove a negative); it's your place to prove this claim without a doubt, which you are of course incapable of doing as it is not true, therefore you're trying to transfer the burden of proof on me.

Now will you please stop doing WP:OR into the sources? No one asked you to unilaterally arbitrate on accepted sources' credibility. Solntsa90 (talk) 00:14, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

It seems you just want to ignore the truth here, that articles published on Kuzio's site are articles by Kuzio. This isnt original research, please reeducate yourself on what OR is. --Львівське (говорити) 00:17, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

If it is the "truth", then where is Kuzio's name for authorship on the Oxford Analytica piece? I'm looking for his name, and I don't see it anywhere on the piece, thus you cannot establish without a doubt that Kuzio is the author of this piece. Solntsa90 (talk) 00:20, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

That's just conjecture on your part, he contributed the piece to the OXA for publishing. The Kuzio site, which hosts the pdf in question, has a copyright notice on the bottom, as well. If you can find a single article on the media section of his site not authored by him I'll drop the issue. We both know that this is a list of collective works, why are you even arguing such a mundane point?--Львівське (говорити) 00:22, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Secondly, Why does it matter if Kuzio is the author? Does that suddenly make Oxford Analytica's published work a rumour or "hearsay", because some wikipedian from Canada who doesn't speak a word of Ukrainian disagrees or has issue with it?

There is no more discussion on this particular matter as to the Oxford Analytica's credibility: It's credible. Solntsa90 (talk) 00:22, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

"some wikipedian from Canada who doesn't speak a word of Ukrainian" is this some sort of dig? I've warned you many times to remain civil and avoid personal attacks. The article is in English, not Ukrainian - do you speak English?--Львівське (говорити) 00:25, 31 March 2014 (UTC)--Львівське (говорити) 00:25, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

why are you even arguing such a mundane point

Because I'm trying to show you that facts can't be unilaterally arbritrated on, no matter how much you'd like to do so. No written evidence that Kuzio wrote the Oxford Analytica piece = Kuzio is not the author. That's just how it works. For then, who is to say that someone else didn't aid him, as they also are not taking credit on the paper? It doesn't look like the kind of article one person can really write by themselves to begin with (and there is my bit of opinion for the talk page) Solntsa90 (talk) 00:25, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Summary of diffs of Solntsa90 blanking my RSd contribs AND My description of the raised sources on the Jewishness issue

[1] Solntsa90 blanked info on parents I had added when he reverted to his original edit. (I had moved to its own section and reworded his info plus added two new sources including one a chief rabbi of UA Yaakov Bleich. First, Solntsa90 said the rabbi was talking only about AY's religion, not ethnicity. There’s no evidence of that. In a subsequent blanking (below) Solntsa90 questioned the rabbi’s credentials on the grounds that the rabbi had been critical of Russia’s (alleged) attempt to use anti-semitism to destabilize UA.

[2] 'Blanked RSd info about parents in the blanking/reverting to his original version

[3] 'Blanked entire sourced discussion of the controversy including two sources stating AY is not Jewish.

[4] 'Blanked sourced discussion of controversy same as above

[5] 'Blanked sourced discussion of controversy again

Rel the sources Solntsa90 has raised in talk (but has only used content from the Harriet Salem piece):

1.) [6]- a tiny newspaper profile from VOA with no by-line.

2.) [7]- This article by Ben Judah citing Taras Kuzio, also refers to AY’s “Judaism,” the only place I’ve seen that alleged so far

3.) [8] - This is the op ed./analysis piece by freelance journalist Harriet Salem

4.) - Oxford Analytica-- this one is BY Taras Kuzio

[9] This is the source quoting the rabbi that AY is not Jewish. It appears Solntsa90 hadn’t connected my source-cited edit that he blanked to this same source. The rabbi was commenting on remarks about AY as “impudent Jew Yatsenyuk” and “criminal Jew”, which I referred to in the article text I wrote (I thought and still think UNcontroversially) as “anti-semitic slurs”. Solntsa90 in one of his blankings/reverts took umbrage with this.

There are hundreds, maybe thousands of depictions of AY, including this one] (previously provided by another editor), almost NONE of which, except for the links above (AND the many sites of a certain persuasion such as stormfront, daily stormer, wideawakegentile, etc.) characterize AY as Jewish. Paavo273 (talk) 06:36, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

He doesn't self identify as Jewish. One would then need to prove he has a Jewish ancestor, none of these sources have attempted to do so. The closest is asking the Chief Rabbi (who would have access to such information / knowledge) and he denied it. --Львівське (говорити) 08:39, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Please read the section I added below. The rabbi was most certainly talking in the context of Yatsenyuk not being an observant Jew (he converted to Catholicism, of course he's not Jewish!) But his parents however, are still Jews nonetheless; I am not calling him a Jew, I'm simply reporting the facts that he comes from a Jewish family; If he didn't come from a Jewish family, then why would JTA report someone as saying he has "Jewish Origins" without any correction on this error?this is outrageous that this is so controversial whe it's really not that big of a deal, especially considering that the government just recently appointed a billionaire Israeli citizen to be the governor of Donetsk, so it's not as if I'm being conspiratorial. I just don't like people hiding facts, either because they're racist and anti-semitic; or the other way, where they go to extreme lengths of political correctness to obfuscate the truth. Solntsa90 (talk) 10:23, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Let it also be said; There is more evidence out there for my position that Yatsenyuk has Jewish origins, than any of the claims that he is a practicing Greek Catholic, and yet I don't see this as so controversial!Please also take note that in the family tree provided, it lists Yatsenyuk's religion as Ukrainian Catholic (though who knows who is in charge of his website, seeing as statements on his religion in public are seemingly nonexistent), though it does not list any religion whatsoever for any of his forebears such as Yevgeniya Petrovna, etc. I think the evidence is tilted in my favour. Solntsa90 (talk) 10:32, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

EDIT: Upon further review, you don't really have a place in this debate, Lvovskiy. You have been accused of violating wiki's principles when it comes to race and ethnicity by an admin before here so I don't think this is your place to edit. Perhaps you should review wiki's rules before continuing, lest you inadvertently get banned? Solntsa90 (talk) 19:52, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Calling me "Lvovskiy" is uncivil, please refrain from disruptive edits and disruptive comments. Saying I have "no place in this debate" is a violation of WP:OWN, as you likely are aware.--Львівське (говорити) 21:05, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

It's only a violation if you haven't been ruled to be in violation yourself already: You're only allowed 1 Ukraine-related edit per 48 hours, so why have you broken the rules so many times while you insist I follow them to your liking? Solntsa90 (talk) 00:50, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Jewish Telegraphic Agency

I hope this puts it to rest. An authoritative Jewish news agency, the non-profit Jewish Telegraphic Agency has reported in the same instance that it has quoted the chief rabbi Dov Bleich saying that "Arseniy Yatsenyuk is not Jewish", multiple quotes on his Jewishness without disqualification, including Ratushniak was commenting on activities of the Front for Change initiative headed by parliament member Arseniy Yatsenyuk, a leading presidential candidate whose parents reportedly [that is to say, as it was reported to the JTA by the Jewish Forum for Ukraine ] were Jewish when he said "Impudent Jew Yatsenyuk, who was successfully serving to thieves, who are at power in Ukraine, is using criminal money to plow ahead towards Ukraine’s presidency.”

Then below, it says:

Political analyst Tars Kuzio has said that Yatsenyuk’s Jewish origins could hurt his chances. Jewish leaders and experts predict that some political forces will play the “Jewish card” during the elections. without disqualification as to the statement and assertion of his Jewish ethnicity. Between this, the Oxford Analytica and Academic analytical articles posted in that back-n-forth between me and Paavo above, I think I have provided more than enough evidence.

What more proof do you guys want? He has Jewish parents, he is not a practicing Jew thus, by the context given, the rabbi clearly meant he wasn't a practicing Frum Jew. As Paavo also said, his ethnic origins aren't important--so thus, if they're not important, why are they being repeatedly scrubbed from the article? I'm not going to accuse you of disliking Jews as that's lowbrow, but really now, why try to scrub his ethnic origins?

Solntsa90 (talk) 10:12, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but how is the following quote (""Impudent Jew Yatsenyuk, who was successfully serving to thieves, who are at power in Ukraine, is using criminal money to plow ahead towards Ukraine’s presidency.") not libelous? How is it reliable? None of these are reliable sources. Your JTA article says "whose parents reportedly were Jewish," meaning they don't know and are going by second hand hearsay. Do you have the original Kuzio quote? Was he referring to the original smear campaign, or does he have authoritative information? Sketchy news sources dont qualify as WP:RS.--Львівське (говорити) 18:47, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

In the Svoboda (Ukrainian Nazi party) POV, accusing someone of having Jewish ancestors is considered a libel. Normal people, of course, do not consider it a libel.--Toddy1 (talk) 19:18, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Toddy, your weird Godwin'ish claim about Nazis has no place in a civil dicussion. --Львівське (говорити) 20:04, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Lvovskiy, do you mind replying to the points I made above in response to your accusations of vandalism? I covered your argument there. Thanks, Solntsa90 (talk) 19:37, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

EDIT: I really don't think I have to answer to you anymore, since you have been threatened with bans repeatedly for making unsavoury edits to Jewish-Ukrainian peoples' pages, most notably Mila Kunis:

Since he has permanently removed it from his page, allow me to post it here in full:

I warned this account months ago for inappropriate conduct on articles with regard to edits (and edit summaries) about race and ethnicity[10]. It seems that this account has returned to that behaviour. This is the final warning you will receive for edits incompatible with wikipedia's core principles, core policies and codes for behaviour. It is, as has been pointed out, recorded in third party reliable sources that your views on Mila Kunis's ethnicity is incorrect.[11]
Your action in revert warring on two articles[12][13][14][15][16] about this (diffs show original edit and reverts), although not making more than 3 reverts this action (across 2 articles) does constitute a breach of WP:EDITWAR, due to repeated reverts without discussion and the spill over from one article to another (something an account with your history of edit-warring should be aware is inappropriate by now) - this has resulted in a 72 hour block. For clarity WP:3RR does not give an automatic right to 3 reverts per day on articles.
Previously I had to warn you that a person being black and English is absolutely possible - it is your problem if you haven't got that message. The fact that you are now edit-warring over your apparent belief that being Jewish & Ukrainian is not possible is pointy, incorrect, and contrary to the core policies of this site (source based, neutral point of view edits). You should be in no doubt User:Lvivske that further behaviour like this will be prevented by block if necessary.
Over the course of years you have been counseled and notified about your improper conduct on this site[17][18][19] - most recently by me - the behaviour of this account since indicates that you are either not learning, or are ignoring these warnings, and are continuing to use wikipedia as a battleground. This sort of behaviour is forbidden on site and is explicitly listed as grounds for imposing sanction at both the Eastern European disputes RfAr and the Digwuren RfAr.
This message is both an official notification of these Arbitration findings in light of this account's edit warring about ethnicity and nationality on an article (Ukrainian Americans) and a related BLP (Mila Kunis) and a final warning generally for edits, comments and other actions on this site, about race and ethnicity, (actions that either constitute POV editing, use of wikipedia to further off site/real world disputes, or push a POV) that are fundamentally at variance from the stated aims, goals and purpose of this project as an encyclopedia will result in this account loosing its editting privelages--Cailil ^talk 13:21, 2 October 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solntsa90 (talk • contribs)

Your attempt to 'dig up dirt' on me is rather lame. For the purpose of transparency, here is the unblock discussion where it was shown at the above material you're quoting was spurious and without basis. Here is a telling quote from when everything was overturned: "Cailil's DIGWUREN warning to Lvivske was handed out for the same "reasons" as the block. After much discussion, these "reasons" were found to be spurious at best. As a result, the block was summarily overturned." - Please refrain from cherrypicking overturned admin discussions against me 3 years after the fact. First you attempt to libel Yatsenyuk, now you're attempting to libel me as some sort of anti-semite. Cut it out. Further, if you choose not to use the talk page and engage in discussion, that is your own choice but will reflect poorly on yourself when this edit war you're engaged in is inevitably reviewed. --Львівське (говорити) 20:10, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Seeing as You were also just recently sanctioned from editing on the closely-related Crimean 2014 referendum issue, It's very [i]very[/i] hard to apply WP:AGF to you. Solntsa90 (talk) 20:58, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

I wasn't blocked, I was told not to re-add a template - please refrain from libeling me on this page.--Львівське (говорити) 21:02, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Do you think people are going to take you seriously when you accuse them of libel for saying that you were "blocked" when I meant "sanctioned" (and to which I quickly corrected anyway)? It was an honest mistake on my part; You however, are even telling me "If you choose not to use the talk page and engage in discussion" despite the fact you're only on this talk-page because I set up the topic on his Jewishness here in the first place. Talk about mistruths. Solntsa90 (talk) 21:05, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm not responsible to fix my comments if you ninja-edit yours. Your change of 'blocked' to 'sanctioned' is duly noted. --Львівське (говорити) 21:07, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Finally there is that accusation of me "Libeling" Yatsenyuk by doing my duties as a wiki editor (do you not see the irony in this?) I think you take this page way too personal to recuse yourself properly as a non-biased editor, and a quick glance at your talk page and it's various comments confirm my suspicion. I stand by my position and my sources 100%, Even if someone is going to incredulously threaten me of libel for editing a wikipedia page. Solntsa90 (talk) 21:09, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Hearsay aren't legitimate sources, and don't qualify for large claims per WP:BLP. They should, of course, be removed ASAP. I'll give you an opportunity to self-revert and make your case on the talk page before they can be re-added if verified.--Львівське (говорити) 21:19, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Are you accusing Oxford Analytica of spreading rumors? Are you accusing The Guardian of anti-semitic libel? Are you accusing an entire university system in Switzerland of having a rogue department dedicated to spreading ethnic rumors based on misinformation? Because, Well, it's their word against yours. Solntsa90 (talk) 21:36, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm vindicated once again in my claim that you aren't even supposed to be here:

"Lvivske (talk · contribs)) . . . placed under an indefinite revert limitation on all Ukraine-related edits: not more than 1 revert per 48 hours per article, with the extra slowdown condition that before they make any content revert (obvious vandalism excepted as usual), they are required to first open a discussion on talk, provide an explanation of their intended revert and then wait 6 hours before actually making it to allow time for discussion. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:30, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Solntsa90 (talk) 00:38, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Why am I not supposed to be here? --Львівське (говорити) 00:43, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

You've been editing Yatsenyuk's talk page consistently for the last few hours, despite only being allowed one Ukraine-related edit per 48 hours until further notice, as per your admin ruling. Solntsa90 (talk) 00:48, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

It appears you made that rule up right now. Good luck with that. I'm not going anywhere. --Львівське (говорити) 00:51, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

A simple question for you all re: Yatsenyuk, Jewishness and the sources stating such (JTA, Oxford Analytica, The Guardian, etc.)

Are these anti-semitic publications intended on spreading libelous rumours to hurt Yatsenyuk's presidency, or what? Because I've seen that accusation verdantly lobbied over and over without so much as evidence.

Solntsa90 (talk) 21:40, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

I don't think that's necessarily true. But I think except for the short newspaper article sourced to VOA, all the sources discuss the Jewish ethnicity in the context that OTHERS, e.g. his adversaries in UA, are using it to hurt him. Paavo273 (talk) 17:17, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Settling confusion

I think what is making a lot of confusion here is the claim that 'Yatsenyuk is Jewish' which is not true; what would be true would be to say that his parents are Jewish, as this is what sources are reporting; to say Yatsenyuk is Jewish is incorrect (thus, the rabbi Dov Bleich quoted before would be correct), but The Guardian and the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Article say he has "Jewish Origins", while this article from Oxford Analytica says he was born to "Jewish Parents" and so I'm restoring this mention, as it's one thing to say in the article Yatsenyuk is Jewish (which isn't true), but to remove all references of his parents or family's Judaism when numerous sources exist for it to be quoted, and I'm not going to suddenly accuse The Guardian, Oxford Analytica, etc. of Anti-semitism, so I'm adding it back in. Solntsa90 (talk) 14:47, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

The problem is that is an interpretation of the sources that goes beyond what the sources actually say. As to whether his alleged Jewish ethnicity should be discussed at all, that is something for the wider editor community to decide, or if necessary administrators. I would certainly be willing to abide by consensus, both as to whether to discuss and if so, what to include. Because it's a BLP, the rules are somewhat different. There was a decision by a WP policy-making committee involving what the subjects of BLPs themselves say. (I'm trying to find it and will cite it here when I do.) Paavo273 (talk) 17:20, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

I think the article with your additions, without the mention of him as a Jew in category sections, and the blurb about how his official website says his parents are ethnic Ukrainian (though it doesn't make mention as to whether this is Ukrainian Jews or not, since religion is absent from the family tree) and how the Guardian and other sources report him as having Jewish parentage or "origins" is a good settlement on the issue, and no more should be said as to his ethnicity, as it isn't important elsewhere except his early biography. But let's not include him under category: Jewish Ukrainians or Category: Ukrainians of Jewish descent, just to be on the safe side. Solntsa90 (talk) 17:24, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi User:Solntsa90: Rel your edit summary today "No RSs on Yatsenyuk being Romanian descent makes this an extraordinary claim without extraordinary evidence", are you maintaining the Romanian source is not a RS? This is what that cited source (within the first ten lines) for that info said (translation with help of googletranslate ):

original--"Unul dintre bunicii lui Arsenie Iațeniuc era etnic roman și cetățean al României Mari interbelice. Este familiarizat cu problemele românilor din nordul Bucovinei și înțelege destul de bine românește."

translated--"One of Arsenal's grandmothers was ethnic Romanian citizen Yatsenyuk of interwar Greater Romania . [Yatsenyuk] is familiar with the problems of Romanians in Northern Bukovina..." Paavo273 (talk) 18:55, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

I found another source that says this: "In a country where there is an undeniable link between anti-Semitism and some sectors of the far right, his supposed Jewish ancestry became a campaign issue."

Can we agree that

A. the vast majority of sources say NOTHING about AY's ethnicity?

B. Of the sources we've discussed supporting AY Jewish ethnicity, three of those (Judah, Kuzio-OA, and rabbi piece) either are Kuzio or cite Kuzio as the authority for Jewish ethnicity?

Besides that we have the Harriet Salem Guardian article and this one more from the Jewish Weekly that I don't think has ever been discussed, although posted and blanked multiple times:

"Sergey Ratushnyak, the mayor of one western Ukrainian town who was running for president, engaged in smear tactics against another candidate, Front for Change leader Arseniy Yatsenyuk, over his alleged Jewish roots.

"Ratushnyak, the mayor of Uzhgorod, portrayed Yatsenyuk as a “brazen Jew” serving “the interests of thieves who dominate Ukraine” and using money obtained from criminal activities to capture the presidency. Others also attacked Yatsenyuk as a thieving Jew.

"Ratushnyak garnered less than 1 percent of the vote, and Yatsenyuk, whose hypothetical Jewishness was never established (my emphasis), won nearly 7 percent.

Paavo273 (talk) 19:49, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm reading a lot about 'alleged' Jewish descent but nothing that confirms explicitly that he has a Jewish parent. Is this not the case? If not, please provide the source which proves without doubt he has a Jewish parent.--Львівське (говорити) 23:24, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm not reading any actual evidence at all that he has Jewish ethnicity, whether mom or dad or babushka or dedushka. Taras Kuzio + Harriet Salem, and the short VOA-sourced n.p. article are pretty much the only ones who make the claim of his Jewish ethnicity. Paavo273 (talk) 23:48, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Salem says "He has played down his Jewish-Ukrainian origins" - has he 'played them down' or has he denied them? If he denies outright, exceptional evidence is needed to prove he is lying. He has produced his own family tree, yes? --Львівське (говорити) 23:55, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

• 1. Can we just agree to hash this out here or if necessary at WP:DRN to avoid all the rapid-fire reverting and blanking?
• 2. What was the objection to the Romanian ethnicity info--that it really is not an RS or that it's stated in the wrong voice or what?
• 3. As noted B4, I'm uncomfortable calling someone's personal website "official." To me that has connotations of government-sponsored. Whaddaya all think? (I'd be okay with, "According to his "official" website..."; that says it's only HE who calls it that.)
• 4. Speaking of which, I did just today write to what IMO is AY's "official" website, that of the prime minister of Ukraine. IMO if his rep. writes back and says he has Jewish ethnicity, the matter is settled. If not, then what? Paavo273 (talk) 08:02, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

I apologise for deleting the Romanian source, my language expertise are Japanese and Russian, I know almost nothing about Latin-based languages (unless you would like to include English) and I thought that was a reference for Yatsenyuk's language abilities in Romanian alone, not a reference to his grandparent. I guess I should investigate foreign sources more closely before editing them next time.

As for the other sources, we do not know their known primary sources, we can only rely on their expertise and data until someone from Yatsenyuk's people officially discredit this rumour being reported as fact by some outlets, or lend credence to it. Yatsenyuk's parents are Jewish is the claim, not that Yatsenyuk himself is of Jewish ethnicity, and so you may get a response similar to the one Dov Bleich gave us without mentioning his parents in your inquiry.

If he says that neither he nor his parents are Jewish, then that pretty much settles the debate once and for all, and would show that Oxford Analytica really ought to do more research before giving their paid clients bad info. Solntsa90 (talk) 19:14, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Proposal (Protection)

protect this article.--109.201.253.86 (talk) 18:55, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Agree that restricting editing to auto-confirmed users would help.--Toddy1 (talk) 20:02, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Ironic that Toddy would say this after reverting the user who proposed the restriction. --Львівське (говорити) 20:41, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Not at all - it would have stopped the IP editor from Lvov from making deletions of cited material from the article.--Toddy1 (talk) 20:53, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

The POV content that was added by an IP user who both you and he are ignoring the ongoing talk discussion on that very source? Hmm. --Львівське (говорити) 21:00, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

I think you are probably mistaken.--Toddy1 (talk) 21:09, 5 April 2014 (UTC)