Talk:Communist Party of Ukraine

Transition to modern CPU

There must be a large block describing the revival (or rather birth?) of the party in 1990s. Ukrained 20:22, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Merge?

Some question has emerged on how to deal with parties that were merged into and/or emerged out of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. I suggest a centralized discussion at Talk:Communist_Party_of_the_Soviet_Union#Separate_articles. --Soman 11:08, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

In Ukrainian Wiki Communist Party of Ukraine and Communist Party (Bolsheviks) of Ukraine is one party, one article.--Юе Артеміс (talk) 22:38, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Simonenkoposter.jpeg

Image:Simonenkoposter.jpeg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:29, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

For later expansion of this article

Communists demand official status for Russian language — Mariah-Yulia • Talk to me! 22:00, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Why do you think this party has ideology "eurocommunism"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.30.194.72 (talk) 12:23, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Disputed ideology: "Pro-Russia"

User:Trust Is All You Need removed the ideology "Pro-Russia" from the infobox, because "Its not pro-Russia, its pro-Soviet, its anti-Russian bourgeoisie (which is mentioned in the article!)" Because it was becoming something of an edit war, I'm starting a discussion here to look at it in more detail and hopefully attempt to reach consensus.

First of all, yes, the party has a nostalgic view of the Soviet Union, which is established in the article. However, that does not mean the party can't be "Pro-Russia" in a contemporary context. I'll need Trust Is All You Need to clarify what they mean. Today, the CPU desires closer economic integration with Russia via the Customs Union, and opposes further integration with the EU. This (i.e a "pro-Russia" foreign policy orientation, as opposed to "pro-European") is what the sources seemingly mean by "pro-Russia" and thus it has nothing to do with bourgeoisie anything. I can find numerous sources citing the party as "pro-Russia" in this sense.

Given that this is also overwhelmingly the single most dominating issue in Ukrainian politics today, I think this easily merits inclusion in the infobox. More relevantly, it's also found to be a key element of their ideology by third-party sources. Thus, I see no reason for it not to be included.

Thoughts? --4idaho (talk) 22:53, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

The pro-Russian/pro-European dichotomy is in itself politically charged. But the more problematic semantic spin is that in Ukrainian politics, there is an argument that pro-Russian forces would be anti-Ukranian. Yes, KPU supports economic cooperation with Russia, but the notion that it is ideologically pro-Russian opens a pov interpretation. For me its simple, the ideology of KPU is Marxism-Leninism, and in the ideology line in the infobox we don't need to list all positions taken by the party on contemporary issues. --Soman (talk) 00:39, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

I don't think it opens POV interpretation because we're not looking at the fact that KPU supports greater economic cooperation and drawing the conclusion they're "pro-Russian", the sources explicitly describe the party as "pro-Russian." Also, it seems clear the opposite of "pro-Russian" in this case is "pro-European", I don't think it implies "anti-Ukrainian" at all. I mean, I'm sure "pro-Europeans" have all sorts of bad things to say about the party's "pro-Russia" orientation, but that doesn't change it. That's like saying we shouldn't call the party Marxist-Leninist because the capitalist parties have bad things to say about Marxism-Leninism!

Also, it's worth noting Party of Regions is described as "pro-Russia" in its infobox, and Fatherland and UDAR are both described as being "pro-European" on theirs. I don't think we're overcomplicating the infobox -- KPU's "pro-Russia" orientation is a key part of understanding the party's contemporary political maneuvers, and, more importantly, third party sources also seem to find it important. --4idaho (talk) 15:12, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

@Soman and 4idaho: First, the KPU is anti-Ukrainian since they oppose nationalism. In recent years (as the article mentioned), the party has slowly evolved into a pro pan-Slavic party. However, saying they are pro-Russia misses the point, they've stated that they would not join a union with Russia since Ukrain would be turned intoa "a protectorate of the Russian bourgeoisie"... Its more correctly describing them as Soviet nationalists who seek to reestablish the Soviet Union through a union with Russia, but they are not pro-Russia, they are pro-Soviet in this sense. Economic cooperation with Russia is supported since it will strengthen the possibilities of establishing a new Soviet Union, Ukrainian membership in the EU would on the other hand hurt these goals... Pro-Russia is a simplification. --TIAYN (talk) 09:20, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

But that's what "pro-Russia" means in this context. In a contemporary context "pro-Russia" is (again, reading the sources) juxtaposed against "pro-European", with the "pro-Russia" side wanting to join the Customs Union, ect. Geopolitically the party is "pro-Russia." Yes, it does not fully express all the nuances of the subject, but that's why it's the infobox. It presents the key information. And, most importantly, we have third party sources presenting it as such. If people want to look deep into the party's ideological foundations, that's why we have an article!

Also, wouldn't third party sources trump a statement from the party itself anyways? --4idaho (talk) 13:03, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

@4idaho: I don't use the party's own sources. See, I would support that someone write a section on the KPU's relation with Russia, but pro-Russia, is, I believe to easy.. A section on their stance on the Customs Union, Russia and the Russian language should be written... The infobox should be similar to the one found in the Communist Party of China article. --TIAYN (talk) 18:10, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

On reflection, I think you're right. I'll get to work on a section like that. --4idaho (talk) 15:09, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

It makes sense to add pro-Russia. The central cleavage in the Ukrainian politics is pro-Western (incl. nationalist) and pro-Russian. That's why the Communist Party was allied with the Party of Regions, although from the economic point of view they are very different - the PoR being vaguely centre-right and uniting some of the richest people in the country, while Yulia Timoshenko bloc also included social democrats and yet KPU remained staunchly opposed to BYuT. Also, I'd add that the Progressive Socialist Party goes further in the pro-Russian direction but it's still similar to the KPU. Lokalkosmopolit (talk) 19:22, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Not banned

I am removing a section that has been added which mistakenly claims "Following a vote on July 22, 2014 the party has been banned from Ukraine pending a signature from president Petro Poroshenko" offering a link to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTWeN-8WX6g . The party has not been banned, the party's status as a fraction in the parliament has been removed: that is clearly explained in the video. This is not a ban on the party, on or its deputies taking part in parliament, but a rather less notable removal of some of the resources available to larger parliamentary groups in the parliament. --Duncan (talk) 19:42, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

A press release on the webpage of the Ukrainian parliament only indicates that is is the parliamentary faction's status as such that has been revoked. It doesn't seem to be a ban on the party itself. [1] 95.166.21.98 (talk) 22:30, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

I again removed such a section today. The party is not banned today There is talk about it being banned in the next election, but that seems to be wp:crystal by Radio Free Europe. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 17:58, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

As of today the party is barred from Elections, but not legally banned yet. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 20:49, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

PS Radio Free Europe today was not so clear on the matter as the sources I used today that you can find in my message of me on this talkpage of 20:49 today. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 21:07, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Number of seats won during election or number of seats of the current faction in Infobox; or both?

In response to the question of Everyking here. We at WikiProject Ukraine use the "Verkhovna Rada" section in the Infoboxes of political party to show the reader how many seats the parliamentary faction of the party has in the national parliament of Ukraine. (See Party of Regions.) For smaller parties we use the section to show how many seats the party won at the last election. (See: United Centre.) So since the Communist Party of Ukraine used to have a big faction that was dissolved on 24 July 2014 (+ this faction was 1 seat bigger then its election result) for me it makes sense to put the current number in the "Verkhovna Rada section in the Infobox" as "0 / 450".

This might be confusing... Maybe we can start including an additional new field in the Infoboxes of political parties in Ukraine that gives the number of the parties faction in parliament? This is actually interesting because in Ukraine these factions tend to be a lot bigger or smaller then the seats won. Per example: Party of Regions won 185 seats in the Ukrainian parliament in the October 2012 Ukrainian parliamentary election, on 12 December 2012 it formed a parliamentary faction of 210 deputies and it currently has a faction of 78 seats. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 16:56, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Well, if they still hold their seats, it seems misleading to say that the party has no seats. That would mean they are unrepresented in the legislature, which apparently isn't the case. Everyking (talk) 21:37, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Communist Party of Ukraine

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Communist Party of Ukraine's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Olszanski":

• From Party of Regions: Olszański, Tadeusz A. (29 Sep 2010). "The Party of Regions monopolises power in Ukraine". OSW Commentary. Centre for Eastern Studies (OSW). Retrieved 3 Aug 2011.
• From Strong Ukraine: Olszański, Tadeusz A. (17 September 2014), Ukraine’s political parties at the start of the election campaign, OSW—Centre for Eastern Studies

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 17:13, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Communist Party of Ukraine

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Communist Party of Ukraine's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "CpvIU271804":

• From Volia (political party): Poroshenko Bloc candidates leading in 64 single-seat constituencies - CEC, Interfax-Ukraine (27 October 2014)
• From Self Reliance (political party): Poroshenko Bloc candidates leading in 64 single-seat constituencies - CEC, Interfax-Ukraine (27.10.2014)
• From Ukrainian parliamentary election, 2014: People's Front 0.33% ahead of Poroshenko Bloc with all ballots counted in Ukraine elections - CEC, Interfax-Ukraine (8 November 2014)
  Poroshenko Bloc to get 132 seats in parliament - CEC, Interfax-Ukraine (8 November 2014)
  Poroshenko Bloc candidates leading in 64 single-seat constituencies - CEC, Interfax-Ukraine (27 October 2014)

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 19:07, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

The party will rename in an attempt to overcome the ban on communist symbols?

The Communist Party faction in the Dnipropetrovsk city council changed the name to "Democracy". This is something the national party could also do.... to overcome the decommunization in Ukraine-laws — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 17:19, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Apparently they're going by KPU now. Their website is still up and active. To say that they're dissolved would be a bit hasty. (http://www.kpu.ua/) 100.14.87.173 (talk) 00:59, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Communist Party of Ukraine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140529212731/http://www.nrcu.gov.ua/en/148/566632/ to http://www.nrcu.gov.ua/en/148/566632/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121030190210/http://www.cvk.gov.ua/vnd2012/wp300pt001f01=900.html to http://www.cvk.gov.ua/vnd2012/wp300pt001f01=900.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121105073259/http://www.cvk.gov.ua/vnd2012/wp039pt001f01=900.html to http://www.cvk.gov.ua/vnd2012/wp039pt001f01=900.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140312210622/http://w1.c1.rada.gov.ua/pls/radan_gs09/ns_golos?g_id=3863 to http://w1.c1.rada.gov.ua/pls/radan_gs09/ns_golos?g_id=3863

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:33, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Communist Party of Ukraine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130515074305/http://www.taraskuzio.net/media20_files/8.pdf to http://www.taraskuzio.net/media20_files/8.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120314010307/http://www.interfax.com.ua/eng/main/21363/ to http://www.interfax.com.ua/eng/main/21363/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cvk.gov.ua/vnd2012/wp300pt001f01%3D900.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cvk.gov.ua/vnd2012/wp039pt001f01%3D900.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:12, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Communist Party of Ukraine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150506213331/http://shehui.daqi.com/article/3409264.html to http://shehui.daqi.com/article/3409264.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:51, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Consensus not to merge. Felix QW (talk) 18:44, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

---

I propose merging Communist Party of Ukraine (Soviet Union) into Communist Party of Ukraine. Because of the same article on the Russian Wikipedia, the 1917 CPU was merged with the 1993 CPU in 2002. In the interim, the 1917 CPU article will be edited until the merger is done. 184.146.39.97 (talk) 15:01, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Oppose: The two parties are seperate. Soviet Union era party was banned and the current party was set up 3 years later as a successor to it. Separate and distinct. Lankyant (talk) 02:58, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Oppose: The Soviet era Communist Party and the current Communist Party of Ukraine are two distinct parties; there is no direct continuation that would make a merger necessary MogasTheThird (talk) 15:25, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Oppose — Even if the two organisations were concretely the same, the subsequent article would be far too large after the merger. CentreLeftRight ✉ 08:39, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

oppose they're two separate things, and this isn't russian wiki—blindlynx 17:51, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.