Talk:Euromaidan/Archive 12014/January

A big concert program is planned on New Year's Eve on Maidan Nezalezhnosti

......

"Also, a big concert program is planned on Independence Square on the New Year's Eve. Modern Talking and Pink Floyd, as well as various Ukrainian bands and performers, have been invited to perform on Independence Square, Blavatsky said."

I imagine planning going down something like this. --Львівське (говорити) 21:00, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Modern Talking and Pink Floyd appeared to have been a no-show; since it seems only some local popular Ukrainian artist did perform. Can't say I am surprised.... The world record for most people singing the national anthem simultaneously might have been broken. But results of that not announced yet... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 16:49, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Saakashvili

Visit of an ex-president sure is an event. You guys might wanna add this pic to the article. --Երևանցի ^talk 04:47, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

This seems to have been his last visit to Ukraine for now... since the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry and the Security Service of Ukraine have satisfied an inquiry of Party of Regions MP Oleh Tsariov to deny entry into Ukraine to 36 people, including Saakashvili. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 16:36, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean by his last visit. --Երևանցի ^talk 04:01, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Well people who are denied entry to Ukraine, can not visit Ukraine.... I did wrote "for now". It seems that for the time being; he can not visit Ukraine... I am not sure how long that time will be. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 16:44, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

A death?

1, 2 - guy was allegedly beaten by Berkut, then died. Police are saying cause of death was pneumonia. What does everyone think of this and how should it go into the article? --Львівське (говорити) 17:17, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

I propose we include it in the article but use the same wording as is done in Wiki-article Bonus Army:

When 12-week-old Bernard Myers died in the hospital after being caught in the tear gas attack, a government investigation reported he died of enteritis, while a hospital spokesman said the tear gas "didn't do it any good."

Of course there must be such hospital spokesman (or somebody else saying something similar). — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 17:43, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

This interfax article on it has all statements and timeline, he did sustain injuries...I don't feel confident translating this, Google is giving me too many weird words I feel I may flub to put in proper context.--Львівське (говорити) 19:42, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

That death is not related to the protests although it did happened at the Independence Square. However, there was another death of a man who died in hospital due to severe beating by Berkut riot police. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 03:12, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

now they're reporting about 3 protesters from lviv who are presumed dead from the Nov 30 attack. --Львівське (говорити) 03:15, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Amnesty for Berkut...

POR is trying to get a bill through that will give berkut officers who beat protesters amnesty from the law 1. Should this be in the article / where? Or is this 'domestic response'?--Львівське (говорити) 23:09, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Until it is an actual law it is 'domestic response'. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 16:46, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Name for anti-protest category

• Colleagues! What do you think, what is the correct category name for anti-protest figures? "People of the Anti-maidan" or "Euromaidan anti-protest figures (people)"? Maybe another name? It will be the subcategory of Category:People of the Euromaidan. NickSt (talk) 13:38, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

ive been using 'pro-government protesters' for...pro-gov guys, and antimaidan protesters for the other ones like cossacks and russian bloc guys.--Львівське (говорити) 15:56, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Another MUST-HAVE subarticle

Ladies and gentlemen, ongoing Kyiv Hrushevskoho Street riot is a spontaneous, out-of-Euromaidan-control event that can be developed in a separate article ONLY. None of the leaders endorsed or claimed control of this riot. The only movt. role is to provide paramedic help - something they were already doing all across central business district. Besides, the riot is an event so huge it wouldn't fit in this overgrown article anyway. Wishes, Ukrained2012 (talk) 18:48, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

it's very much part of euromaidan and within the scope of the maidan protests, but i agree we can split it. I do not agree with having it in a separate article "only". All of the leaders are involved in the riots and are there, all are involved in the titushky situation, klitschko went down there and got sprayed, etc. --Львівське (говорити) 18:54, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm glad you agree on article-building, though your factual remarks are far from being correct( None of "leaders" is "involved in the riots" conducted by mere hundreds of mostly unidentified people. Those leaders visited events in purposes of countering and observing it (just like I, and many thousands of Kyivites did). Please bear in mind the utter sensitiveness of the issues you're commenting on) Thanks, Ukrained2012 (talk) 19:51, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

the leaders were there, taking part in the protest, just not the rioting. There are thousands there, not just a few hundred. The degree of the involvement doesnt matter, just that euromaidan leaders are there in a capacity, seeing as the riots were a result of maidan and people left maidan to go there. It's not like it's in another city. --Львівське (говорити) 19:56, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

• The Dec 1 riots were just as related, as they occurred when maidan marchers went to parliament and a small group of maybe 300 started causing a ruckus. Then most of the violent spilled out into adjacent streets. Actions were disavowed by leadership as well. Both riots are as much a part of Euromaidan as the other. --Львівське (говорити) 20:14, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Nope. "Being part of" and "being related to" are things WAY too different for such a sensitive topic. Remember: we're developing article on a topic quite possibly leading to a civil war and, eventually, the World War III. Ukrained2012 (talk) 20:26, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm just failing to see the disconnect where euromaidan people and leaders go from maidan to another street and it stops being 'a part of the euromaidan protest movement'. Protests in Kharkiv are part of 'euromaidan', and so are protests a street over. Especially when maidan medics are the ones tending to everyone there.--Львівське (говорити) 20:43, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

FWIW, the official euromaidan twitter posted this, seems they consider the events on hrushevsky to be part of #euromaidan --Львівське (говорити) 15:39, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Splits

regarding the splits of the major demonstrations, I think the way it's being handled isn't the best (with regard to the previous riots article) - since the articles are smaller than the sections on this page. Might be better to just cut/paste the large text from here to make the new article, and just do a 1 paragraph summary in its place on this page. I'm going to do that with the new riot article. --Львівське (говорити) 18:48, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Do you mean that splits are necessary but nobody simply finishes them? Ukrained2012 (talk) 19:39, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

kinda, im not sure if you worked on the other split or not so not trying to be critical --Львівське (говорити) 20:10, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Overnight titushky hunt

That is the issue concerning BOTH the Euromaidan and the separate Hrushevsky St. riot. It appears that titushky's night raid aimed at co-timing with the riot in order to blame the Euromaidan activists. Euromaidan (or Automaidan, to be exact) acted openly against - which makes the whole issue relevant. However, neither titushky nor activists chasing them never approached the ongoing riot, nor did both officially participated in that rioting. In fact, titushky made their own small riots elsewhere in downtown Kyiv. Ukrained2012 (talk) 20:09, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

yes, okay, just copy and paste the relevant stuff over if you want. --Львівське (говорити) 20:11, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Deaths

Might be helpful to coordinate: another body found, the activist who was abducted from the hospital with lutsenko ref --Львівське (говорити) 17:54, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

article currently states 4 shooting deaths based on the KP report, WSJ is saying 3 shooting deaths: here --Львівське (говорити) 22:28, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Ultra

Putting some links together in case we get confirmation of participation. I know FC Dynamo ultras has been on the scene for sure, spraypainting FCDK n stuff on the burning busses.--Львівське (говорити) 20:02, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

FC Dynamo

FC Dnipro

FC Metalist

Shakhtar

• Ultras spraypainted on the side of the bus (think there's also a FCDK beside it) --Львівське (говорити) 06:37, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Still does not prove anything. Neither your link of FCDK calling for mobilization. Please, note that clashes are being taken near the Dynamo Stadium, so it is no surprise that there some spraypaintings like that. It is all your assumptions and nothing more. Just because Ultras issued statement to mobilize does not automatically mean their participation. Plus in the statement, there is no information of their participation in the particular clashes either. The statement says about mobilization against other hooligans who are in the city, not Berkut or government forces. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 23:28, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

But there is a popular pro-government propaganda that government forces are fighting out-of-control and nationalistic soccer hooligans. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 23:29, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

well between them issuing support and RS's saying soccer fans are involved, I don't see what's missing --Львівське (говорити) 00:04, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

"no state officials were held responsible"

Aleksandr Grigoryev This phrase is completely POV. One would ask why should state officials be held responsible? Nobody is blind here and we all understand that the government is brutally suppressing a popular uprising, but we're not judges here and we're not to blame everything on one side. Let's stick to WP:NPOV, please. --Երևանցի ^talk 22:32, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Did you read the article? It was officially announced soon after the incident of December 1 that people responsible in violent disperse of Maidan were Popov (head of Kiev city administration), Sivkovych (deputy chairman of Security Council), and chief of city police. Yet none were prosecuted in any way. How is that POV? Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 22:52, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Except may be for Popov who was dismissed as the Kiev city administrator. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 22:54, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

"officially announced" by whom? --Երևանցի ^talk 22:57, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

I am quoting the bottom portion of the article "On December 14, 2013 General Prosecutor of Ukraine Viktor Pshonka announced that direct orders to "Berkut" to disperse Euromaida on November 30 was given by police leadership, who were pressed by Popov Sivkovych. He also promised then that in a few days a court had to approve a decision to provide a preventive measure to Popov and Sivkovych. However, a month later there was no information ever received." Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 23:28, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

These officials were suspended from their positions "on suspicion of abuse of power" and the prosecutor said they will "be placed under home arrest", but no one was prosecuted, so why mention it? If they were not prosecuted then it's not upon us to decide who should be held responsible. Saying "no state officials were held responsible" automatically suggests that they are responsible for something. --Երևանցի ^talk 00:34, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

self defense units

Why is UNSO is oscillated away from self-defense units? UNSO stands for self-defense. And identification of it with far-right is POV. In that matter the whole Euromaidan could also be considered as far-right. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 23:43, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

UNSO fights against pro-Soviet sentimental elements, Russian expansionist foreign policy and is anti-Communist. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 23:46, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

UNSO is far-right. Though I argue a lot that calling svoboda far-right is a POV thing...UNSO...it's a military wing of radicals who have very extreme views. Don't think it's a misnomer. But they aren't the self-defense units - that refers to the guys on the street who were armed at St Mikes cathederal and armed with sticks. UNSO is a very specific formation separate from the civilian self defense units. --Львівське (говорити) 23:56, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

No, it appeared initially exactly as a anti-Communist self defense unit. Later some former leaders such Dmytro Korchynsky has given it some poor reputation. Russian propaganda against it also made it look as extremists, yet the government of Georgia recognized them as heroes. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 00:36, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

well they fought with the communists against moldova for transnistria, so I wouldn't say they were formed on that purpose. They are definitely far-right though, propaganda aside. Any paramilitary organization that acts outside the law would have to be considered extreme or far or some sort of adjective outside the norm of moderation. Anyway, I think they make their stance here - they are against joining the EU but are in favor of favorable integration with the European market. They want a sovereign, independent country. The protests at Euromaidan were for free trade and regulations that would benefit the country, so to label them anti-EU would be false, since they aren't anti EU in general - just being a member state. They are Eurosceptics --Львівське (говорити) 02:01, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

There were incidents of attacks on Ukrainian population and the whole conflict in general is very complicated. There were volunteers led by Yuri Tyma. In 2003 there was a split in organization. There are three organizations in fact: UNA-UNSO Tyma, UNA-UNSO Shkil, and UNA-UNSO Shukhevych. Also Korchynsky created his own organization Bratstvo. The website you picked is website of UNA-UNSO Tyma (unaunso.org) and it simply contains articles from Donetsk based newspaper Segodnya (part of Rinat Akhmetov's SCM) which is usually pro Yanukovych. Other websites are una-unso.org (UNA-UNSO Shkil) and una-unso.in.ua (UNA-UNSO Shukhevych). Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 02:33, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

i had no idea there were 3 branches, just about the bratsvo craziness --Львівське (говорити) 02:38, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

The whole history of UNSO is very confusing. It is interesting that in 1994 Shukhevych resigned. It wasn't until 2005 when he was elected the head of organization once again. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 02:59, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Far right organizations

Where is information that all organizations in the "Far right organizations" list are anti European Union? Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 23:54, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

it was a POV push by a user, I vote to have them re-integrated since there is no citation that they are anti-EU (UNA-UNSO for example is in the Euromaidan protests...but they hate Euromaidan secretly? no, need a citation for that). Same with Patriot - they like Svoboda but would be against their euro integration? A lot of even the right knows that lack of western integration would mean russian dominance, which they hate more. Lesser of two evils, and all that. --Львівське (говорити) 23:59, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Svoboda has never stated that they are against Eurointegration that is absurd. Claiming that UNSO is against European integration is also pure speculation. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 00:53, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

I never said Svoboda was against Euro integration. I said Patriot likes Svoboda, so why would they be counter to Svoboda's platform. I agree that it's speculation. Feel free to fix any of this stuff, I have no objections.--Львівське (говорити) 01:53, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

• Right Sector is a coalition of far-right groups who are pro-revolution but anti-EU. Here's an interview with one of their leaders. So yeah, we should make the 3rd section again. --Львівське (говорити) 20:41, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the link. It was interesting. However, please, note the first few words of Tarasenko. He says that Europe is not an issue and he expressed his personal criticism of joining Europe. There is no clear statement of European integration despite the title of the article. Also, importance of national revolution is the main priority of any nationalist organizations. Wouldn't you agree? People are getting tired of empty promises and pointless speculation that in recently are being heard way too often from government. The way one of Berkut servicemen acted with the flag of Ukraine and the way police acts generally with the Ukrainian citizens only portrays the true underlings of current government towards national symbols and country's population. What is the 3rd section? In the infobox? Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 23:03, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Tarasenko never clearly said that Right Sector is against the European integration. I understand how his statement does imply his opposition to integration process, but let's not make any assumptions. Instead first his words were "not an issue". Not an issue means not important, indifferent. Tarasenko said that the priority is national revolution. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 23:20, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

he very clearly states they are against euro integration, ""For us, Europe is not an issue, in fact joining with Europe would be the death of Ukraine. Europe means the death of the nation state and the death of Christianity. We want a Ukraine for Ukrainians, run by Ukrainians, and not serving the interests of others."" --Львівське (говорити) 00:07, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Did Tarasenko use a word against? No, he implied that he personally is against. Did he say: "Right Sector is Against"? No, it is simply in the article's name. I am a person that follows BLUF principle. And Tarasenko did say that European agenda is not an issue. Also Tarasenko is not even a leader of the Right Sector. He is a member of the Bandera's Tryzub. Tarasenko also states that Right Sector does not have one leader and simply an association of several nationalistic organizations. Therefore, it is wrong labeling everyone just because Guarding took interview. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 01:18, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

fair enough, i think it can be summarized as "i am personally against EU integration, but our platform has nothing to do with the EU, only revolution" - so they would still be a third party, pro-revolution but not pro-EU - but then again, the euromaidan has little to do with europe at this point on the whole. Euromaidan is 'euro' in name only.--Львівське (говорити) 01:25, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Well, there is no definite information about, so why don't we simply restrain from labeling before anything would actualy form. Moreover, it looks kind of confusing as well. The right sector organizations are kind of unpredictable. Let's use the information that is solid. It could be however noted about the interview and political views of selected protesters. I personally also not very eager supporter of European integration, but I do support Ukraine joining NATO block. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 02:41, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Shooting deaths 3 and 4

KP is saying 4 shooting deaths, WSJ is saying 3. We already know #1 was the Armenian, and #2 was the Belarusian; who were 3 and 4? - Львівське (говорити) 02:15, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

I am still looking. No info I found yet. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 23:04, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Merge from 2014 Hrushevskoho Street riots

I don't think that the 2014 Hrushevskoho Street riots have separate notability; they seem to be simply another phaase of the Euromaidan protests and thus should be merged here. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 14:33, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose. Looking at this article I'm seeing a huge amount of information about what is obviously a major historical event. You might as soon merge the Kent State Shootings into Hippie. Wnt (talk) 16:08, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose - a lot of notability and a TON of content just on this one street's riots, and as above, kent state shootings...the first shots were fired here so its notable. Also, the street is mentioned by name in virtually all news articles (in ukrainian at least, but also KP) --Львівське (говорити) 16:13, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose - separate event. and anyway tons of content to be used which is to heavy for the other article.--BabbaQ (talk) 17:35, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose - It's a different event than Euromaidan and would cause clutter in the Euromaidan article as BabbaQ mentioned above - MameTozhio (talk) 21:26, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose - Same as in the previous section. I support any split of Euromaidan article which became way overgrown. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 23:08, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

The result was: Not merged. NickSt (talk) 00:41, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Split Euromaidan from nationwide protest movement

according to this, "Protests in Ukraine are not pro-EU (as it is written in most of international news agencies). The disruption of the association agreement with the European Union in November was only cause for local rallies. But after a peaceful student protest was violently dispersed by the 'Berkut' [special police] in Kyiv on Nov. 30, a million angry people took to the central square of the capital. Since then rebellion has not gone away; instead it turned into an anti-government uprising" - it seems wrong to label the entire protest movement as "euromaidan" for non-EU rallies. Obviously, the protests now have nothing to do with the EU at this point, especially since the Russian pact has been signed. Protests have to do with A LOT more thing than just EU ties. What does everyone think? --Львівське (говорити) 21:11, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

New article of Interest

I start Media of Ukraine. It needs expansion, both of regular content, and timely for the section in "Politics and media". Could also discuss freedom of press in Ukraine (an article that needs to be created). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 20:38, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Map for occupation of administrative buildings

Would it be possible to create and include the map showing in which cities/oblasts were administrative buildings occupied and also indicating (perhaps by color) when were they occupied? Something like the map showing peak numbers of attendees of Euromaidan.

Currently, those cities and oblasts are only mentioned by their name, so a reader unfamiliar with their names has to open the articles about each of them to get the better picture of where within the Ukraine did occupation occur. --94.253.159.135 (talk) 15:05, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

im making one, give me today, i'm all over the place. we had a map already showing which cities were occupied. --Львівське (говорити) 19:10, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Map of the Ukraine in terms of protest occurrences and previous election results

This may be quite useful for placing the protests in context, from the Washington Post. N2e (talk) 17:15, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

in fairness, it's a good idea - but that map in particular is really inaccurate - there have been many mass protests in the east (as documented on this article and our map)

seconded. But the concept is sound (overlaying protest locations on top of election state results...--Львівське (говорити) 15:43, 30 January 2014 (UTC)