Welcome!

Hello, NickK, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Victuallers (talk) 10:01, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not restore removed "prod" templates like you did at Shamota Tala Rinpoche. If you still think the article needs to be deleted, please take it to WP:AFD. Thank you, either way (talk) 16:59, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'll send this cross-wiki spam there — NickK (talk) 17:20, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is it with this guy? Ostap 23:45, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. May be it's some form of protest, but he has a long history of blocks in Ukrainian Wikipedia for personal attacks and is blocked in Albanian Wikipedia because he sent their administrator who wrote I assume good faith in Albanian — NickK (talk) 23:53, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I am ok! Something wrong with you! -- Whiteroll (talk) 23:47, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you are the only user commenting in this topic who constantly attack others. So think who is wrong and who is not — NickK (talk) 23:53, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He certainly is persistent. Ostap 00:02, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it looks like he knows only two arguments - his and wrong — NickK (talk) 00:18, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Silin2005 (talk) 04:45, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome— NickK (talk) 16:25, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your msg (16 Jan 2011) about deleting the article 'Parks of Ukraine'. I can't remember where I got the info from, and, anyway, there does seem to be a duplication. However, it is also possible that 'Parks of Ukraine' is different from 'National Parks of Ukraine'! However, doubtless there are thousands of parks in Ukraine, so I doubt that my list would have been THAT comprehensive! So deletion is fine. However, the current article says there are 35 national parks in Ukraine. But I can only find a handful of parks that are described as 'National Parks'. Maybe the editor is also including Nature Reserves of various types. Any thoughts on whether 'National Parks' should include national nature reserves? Regards... (PS If you write and I don't reply promptly, it's because I am an infrequent user on Wikiedia!)--Observer6 (talk) 16:02, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, Parks of Ukraine is a very different topic from National Parks of Ukraine, as there are much more parks with the status other than that of national park, however, the articles were almost exact duplicates. It's true that there are many national parks that are poorly described on the Internet, it's because of the creation of more than a dozen of new national parks in 2009 and 2010 which may still be badly described, and now there are something like 42 of them. In Ukraine national nature reserves are different from national parks and have different status and conditions, so they should not be described as the same thing. Regards — NickK (talk) 18:48, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Nick! If the two articles were almost exact duplicates, it is possible that, in my ignorance, I inadvertently created both of them! I really don't know, I can't remember the detail. I do know at some stage I took up the gauntlet of adding Ukraine National Parks to WikiPedia (or, at least, I THINK I did!) because it seemed to be needed. And I very much doubt that I would have copied someone else's Wiki entry! If someone else started the Ukraine National Parks article, maybe I was unaware and simply got my Ukriane Parks material from similar sources. However, Ukraine NATIONAL Parks was my special interest at that time, so, if I really did create the anomaly of 'Ukraine Parks', it was by mistake!!! Or maybe I hadn't gotten the hang of creating 'Lists'! Anyway, congrats to the eagle eyes who spotted it! And thanks to everyone for fixing it! As to 'completing' the National Park list, hmmm, looks too tricky! Thanks also for your clarification of definitions (park v. national park v. nature reserve).--Observer6 (talk) 21:02, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I don't remember the exact content of the article either, but I remember it was pretty short and included only national parks and nothing else. The only thing I am sure is that article on Parks on Ukraine were not informative, but I am not sure if it was you who made it the duplicate of the article on national parks or someone else. If you need a list, Ukrainian Wikipedia has one which seems to be complete here: uk:Шаблон:Природоохоронні території загальнодержавного значення в Україні. Природні заповідники means national nature reserves and Національні природні парки means national parks — NickK (talk) 21:22, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Nick. Looking back, I see that the National Parks of Ukraine list was started by me! But, if I recall correctly,I must have inadvertently also created the Parks page in the process and probably didn't know how to 'uncreate' it! I know I should have asked! but, for some reason, I didn't. Apologies! If I have time, (and the inclination!) I might return to the National Parks list and translate and add info from the link you have given me. спасибі & побажаннями. --Observer6 (talk) 09:43, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome, good luck! — NickK (talk) 16:02, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done! (May not be 'perfect', but I reckon it is pretty close!)(transliterations are not easy, for one thing!)--Observer6 (talk) 22:55, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've checked spelling and corrected some translations — NickK (talk) 16:00, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Go for it! I've done a few too. However, I can see you are on the case, so I'll keep out of the way!--Observer6 (talk) 16:12, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am not that interested in National Parks, so I'm not going to continue in the near future, so I don't prevent you from this topic in any way — NickK (talk) 16:24, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No worries! Thanks for all your help! I can also see that it is not easy (i.e. impossible?) to accurately represent Ukraine phonemes with English alphabet letters or letter combinations! But any improvements to what I started have been and are welcome. Thanks also for your two 'very kind' welcome messsages on my talk page. найкращі побажання.--Observer6 (talk) 08:48, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I used Wikipedia:Romanization of Ukrainian/National transliteration table or, more generally, there is Wikipedia:Romanization of Ukrainian. It's quite algorithmic, there are not too many rules there, and it represents Ukrainian quite well. You are welcome for welcome messages :), nothing special, it's just a standard welcome message — NickK (talk) 16:50, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great stuff! I also found (I think!) that some park names seemed to have 'traditional' Romanized spellings which differed slightly from a strict transliteration. However, it is also unlikely that I'll continue to scrutinize the present answer, because (a) I lack personal knowledge of the subject, and (b) Ukriane National Parks is also not my special interest!--Observer6 (talk) 17:28, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

for your participation in Interstate Aviation Committee. I'm counting on further cooperation with you there and elsewhere on Ukraine-related articles. Wishes, Ukrained2012 (talk) 09:46, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues#Azerbaijan regarding deleting the entry for Azerbaijan Premier League at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues which you added in 2010. It seems the issue is the lack of verifiable evidence that the league is fully professional. Are you aware of anything? Nfitz (talk) 23:39, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for notifying, I have left a comment there — NickK (talk) 01:24, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nick, thank you for your acknowledgement. I appreciate Czolij. Another user wiped out the category "politician". I think he is a political activist and consequently a politician. What do you think? --Stonepillar (talk) 14:57, 12 September 2014 (UTC) The same is about Paul Grod, this article I also wrote. Have a look!--Stonepillar (talk) 15:02, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Stonepillar:, I am not sure what is the criterion for inclusion into this category, but depending on definition he may or may not be classified as a politician. He does have a certain impact on politics of both Ukraine and Canada, but probably his activity falls in the same category as lobbying, i.e. participation in political activities without holding any political office. Thus I believe it may be correct not to classify him as a politician — NickK (talk) 18:32, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:56, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@MCruz (WMF): Thank you for the information, but I can't help quoting my comment from the campaign: Do not make wrong assumptions or generalisations: yes, there are "non-English Wikipedias". You even cited my comment in the presentation attached... and still, you left this message on English Wikipedia, although I stated my homewiki is ukwiki. That's a small detail, but in my view it is a good illustration of the problem with community health — NickK (talk) 01:12, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@NickK: I'm sorry about this confusion. It's my mistake, I misunderstood your entry on the participants' list. I actually intended to deliver this message (although in English) to each participant's home wiki, as you can see on this list. Sorry again, and thanks for pointing that out and taking part in the campaign! María (WMF) (talk) 13:00, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the discussion on Myrnohrad/Dymytrov and other related changes. After having seen the discussion, I'm happy and I think you should feel free to carry out more of the same type of renames. Sorry for the inconvenience I caused. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 04:39, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Good Olfactory: Thank you, I see Ymblanter has already started renaming some, I will probably complete with what is not done yet — NickK (talk) 17:06, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Great, sounds good. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 21:29, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi mate,

Now I'm beginning to write Kotliarka article here, which I wrote in UkrWiki. Actually I've found a few my ridiculous mistakes in uk:Котлярка#Історія.

Could you please correct it, instead of 1878-1979 must be 1878-1879 and Баладинсько -> Баладинського?

Thanks in advance, --TimeWaitsForNobody (talk) 09:51, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Done — NickK (talk) 10:57, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot and sorry to bother you again but it seems that it should be 1878-1879 році -> 1878-1879 роках there. Overall the whole paragraph doesn't look nice. I must have neglected checking its orthography for some reason. --TimeWaitsForNobody (talk) 13:30, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi partner, and don't worry for the topic. I don't want an awful, useless and lively debate like the other guy. First at all, not all Spanish citizens are like those, that's why I feel sorry for that poor image (as troublemaker) could we give to Ukrainian cityzens. I'd be like to ask you for help with the Spanish version of the article (I'm improving it according what I had read at the discussion page).

Well, now, as Jack the Ripper said "Let's go by bits"

• I saw a link about Zozulya's Twitter. The Bandera's one. I don't know Ukrainian, so i'd be like to know what it say so I can put it in the Spanish article as reference.
• Also, you were talking/writing that Zozulya with other footballers went to gave to soldiers some supplies and football merchandising. Besides he did took a picture with a gun. I'd be like that link too and some information about that. It could be interesting.
• By the moment, that's it xD. Thank you very much, and answer as soon as possible. Bye and regards

. --Ravave (talk) 11:58, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ravave: Hi and thank you for your encouraging message . Glad to know you want to improve the Spanish article, last time I looked at it yesterday it was pretty bad as it stated that Zozulya is a Nazi, period.

• Twitter. I translated the original post on the talk page, it says (in Russian and not in Ukrainian, a horrible crime for a Ukrainian Nazi!) Ох и похожи, which means something like We look alike or So much alike. I don't really think this photo is worth citing beyond the fact it exists: one might also cite that that photo included not just Zozulya and Bandera but also a Minion, and Zozulya's joke was that all three look alike.
• Regarding the visit to soldiers, I could find just one source in English: one paragraph here. Still, they do show a photo of Zozulya on the same day, but with supplies instead of a weapon. There is a better source in Ukrainian. The main idea is simple (well, simple for Ukraine where many volunteers are helping military in this way): Zozulya with other footballers bought a minibus of water, hygiene products, food and cigarettes, took some football merchandise and visited military of the uk:Донецький прикордонний загін (Donetsk Border Brigade) of the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine. The first source shows a picture of this minibus with a logo of Narodna Armiya fund, the second one shows Zozulya with soldiers. I also gave three more links (here, here or here) about Zozulya helping families and children of military. There are more interesting facts there like Zozulya selling his UEFA Europa League medal in order to help children from the war zone (a pretty poor news item in English is available, and it is mentioned in the uacrisis one above).
• In addition, there is some information in Spanish on the Ukrainian fact-checking site StopFake: here (August 2016) or here (February 2017).

Good luck and please do not hesitate to ask me if you need any further information — NickK (talk) 13:44, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the info. Those links were useful. Now I did the changes, I hope is better now than how it was. I think it's OK now. Bye and regards. --Ravave (talk) 09:05, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi NickK, I see that you are a professional economist. I wonder if you could help with Trickle-down economics. There has been a fairly long-running dispute as to whether anyone has actually argued for trickle-down economics, i.e. giving money to the rich through tax cuts, as opposed to hoping that the rich will invest more if they are taxed less. Most RS on the page say that it is a theory, but they are all from sources critical of trickle-down economics. In contrast, a few sources say that no economist or politician has ever proposed this theory, but there are not very many of these. I wonder if you knew of any more sources that would help either way, i.e. either a source arguing that giving the rich more money through tax cuts would help poorer people, or one saying that no one had proposed it. Thanks! Absolutelypuremilk (talk) 08:39, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Absolutelypuremilk: and thank you for asking. Unfortunately I am not exactly in political economy, thus I am not an expert on this topic. I am not aware of sources with any of these statements, sorry — NickK (talk) 15:49, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

The Anti-Harassment Tools team is seeking input about building User Page (or category) blocking feature.

We’re inviting you to join the discussion because you voted or commented in the 2015 Community Wishlist Survey about Enhanced per-user / per-article protection / blocking.

You can leave comments on this discussion page or send an email to the Anti-Harassment Tools team.

For the Anti-Harassment Tools team SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 23:01, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.

@SPoore (WMF): Thank you for your invitation. And sorry but I will grumble a bit: I was interested in a global context, not in enwiki one. I will still comment here but my comment may lack context — NickK (talk) 23:10, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@SPoore (WMF): Oh no, sorry, I read it and found out that I really lack enwiki context to participate in this discussion (well, I don't know even a half of the list AN, ANI, AIV, ANEW, RFA). I can add one important thing: please do not develop a new AbuseFilter as AbuseFilter is quite efficient in banning a user from doing some very specific things (such as editing a page or a list of pages, adding specific words to articles or talk pages, moving pages etc.). It is clearly not very user-friendly (one should be quite technically savvy to write the right filter) but it works. Thus if the goal is to develop a tool to ban specific users from editing specific pages, there is no point in investing too much in this as AbuseFilter already copes with this (that's what I wrote on Meta). On the other hand, it would be much more important to develop tools for something that is not technically enforceable yet, i.e. bans on specific behaviours (such as editing <articles related to topic>, or adding <non-neutral pro-something material>, or interacting <with a specific user>). All these parts within <> are difficult to model with AbuseFilter, and I would be glad if we would have a tool for it, basically like an AbuseFilter with ORES — NickK (talk) 23:28, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

NickK, Thanks for your comments. I'll point them out to Trevor (teams' Product Manager). We are trying to sort out the appropriate case uses so your comments are helpful.

The Anti-Harassment Tools team developers have evaluated the functionality and capacity of the abuse filter to some extent in order to get a better understanding of how that it could potentially be used in the future.

And we're going to have a similar non English Wikipedia specific discussion on Meta, too, starting the next few days because there is so many different case uses depending on the different wiki community. I'll send you an invitation to that discussion when it starts, too, so that you can comment or follow along about what other people are saying. SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 23:53, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@SPoore (WMF): Thank you. My understanding of the context is that AbuseFilter is not used enough for banning specific users in English Wikipedia, while it could be a tool at least for simple bans (such as preventing users from editing specific articles). It might make sense to promote AbuseFilter in this context — NickK (talk) 11:26, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello :-) The Anti-Harassment Tools team at the Wikimedia Foundation will start building these granular blocking tools in a few weeks and we've asked WMF designer Alex Hollender to help us make some wireframes so the tools are intuitive to MediaWiki users.

We have a first draft of how we think this tool should work. You can read the full proposed implementation here but here are the significant parts:

• Granular blocks (page, category, namespace, and file uploading) will be built on top of Special:Block. These blocks will function as if they were regular blocks and allow for the same options, but only take effect on specific pages.
• We will add a new checkbox for "Block this user from the whole site" which will be checked by default. When it is unchecked the admin will be able to specify which pages, categories, and/or namespaces the user should be blocked from editing.
• Granular blocks can be combined and/or overlap. (For example, a user could be simultaneously blocked from editing the articles Rain, Thunder, Lightning, and all pages inside the Category:Weather.)
• Only one block is set at a time, to adjust what the user is blocked from the administrator would have to modify the existing block.
• Block logs should display information about the granular block
• When a blocked user attempts to edit an applicable page, they should see a block warning message which include information on their block (reason, expiration, what they are blocked from, etc.)
• If a category is provided, the blocked user cannot edit either the category page itself and all pages within the category.
• If the File: namespace is blocked, the user should not be allowed to upload files.

We like this direction because it builds on top of the existing block system, both a technical and usability wise. Before we get too far along with designs and development we'd like to hear from you about our prosposal:

1. What do you think of the proposed implementation?
2. We believe this should be an expansion of Special:Block, but it has been suggested that this be a new special page. What are your thoughts?
3. Should uploading files be combined with a File namespace block, or as a separate option? (For example, if combined, when a user is blocked from the File namespace, they would neither be able to edit any existing pages in the File namespace nor upload new files.)
4. Should there be a maximum number of things to be blocked from? Or should we leave it up to admin discretion?

We appreciate your feedback on this project's talk page or by email. For the Anti-Harassment Tools team, SPoore (WMF) (talk) , Trust and Safety Specialist, Community health initiative (talk) 20:54, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2018–19 UEFA Europa League qualifying phase and play-offs (Main Path), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Serravalle (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1996–97 UEFA Cup, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John McDermott (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:54, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As I see, you are taking this personally. For all I know, you are a decent person. I did not call you personally, nor WMF-Ukraine ukronazis. Now, are you denying or confirming the existence of ultraradicals in the Ukraine?

Historically, an aggressive minority can easily overrun a big number of decent people simply because radicals are organized and active. You know a couple examples from the 20th century, right? Now, if (I say "if" as a hypothetical assumption) you are denying the existence of ukronazis, how can you defend against their organized influence?

Case to the point of recent events. I am absolutely sure that that the May 2nd events were triggered by the works of Russia to expand the "Novorossia", with an ultimate goal to connect Donbas and Transnistria. But... what will you say about people who came to Kulikovo Pole a couple days ago with shashliks? Staszek Lem (talk) 18:46, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I am talking to you because you wrote you are form the uk: Charter. This makes you kinda official person, hence I would like to know where you stand when it comes to defend the neutrality of en:wp. (IMO uk:wp was turned into a hopeless shit when it come to Ukrainian history, but I do not care). Staszek Lem (talk) 18:53, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Staszek Lem: Given your generalisations, of course it sounds offensive. Ukrainian WMF chapter is obviously just the same overrun by ukronazis is kind of insulting when you are a member of that chapter and it most likely does not have even a single Nazi member.

Of course ultraradicals exist in Ukraine, like they exist in most countries, who would deny that? What explains some sort of influence is that in 2014 Ukrainian neo-Nazis happened to fight against Russian neo-Nazis (like this) because, yes, they were organised and active on both sides. When a bad guy saves your life, he is a bit less of a bad guy.

Regarding shashlyks on Kulykove Pole a couple days ago, I found zero reliable sources on this. It is most likely just another fake.

On Ukrainian history on ukwiki, there are two types of biases. There is a majority bias, shared by mainstream historians who describe the history of Ukraine from Ukrainian perspective. A typical example is the name Volhynian tragedy (uk:Волинська трагедія) which is the mainstream names in Ukrainian-language sources. This is typically a scientific consensus of historians which might be hated by neighbours. And there is a minority bias, frequently coming from low-quality biased or conspiratorialist sources. A typical example is a rubbish website stating that Jesus was Ukrainian. This bias should be obviously eradicated.

Regarding neutrality, I would say that I am pretty sure that key English Wikipedia articles are neutral enough owing to the high number of users. I don't see major issues in, say, War in Donbass, although there might be minor issues (say, Minsk was formally signed by rebels but not by the rebels, Ukrainian officials insisted that they did not sign an agreement with official rebel representatives but just with some rebels). I would say that I would be more worried by an article title like pt:Guerra Civil no Leste da Ucrânia — NickK (talk) 22:47, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

shashlyki: newsone.ua reliable enough AFAIU: Трагедия в Одессе 2 мая - активист Демьян Ганул показал, как ест шашлыки возле Куликова поля . Staszek Lem (talk) 23:01, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It was a year ago and not a couple days ago. The fact that there is next to no coverage approving this action and an abundance of coverage criticising it speaks for itself — NickK (talk) 23:14, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I do not really want to chase the facts; "a couple of days ago" this bozo posted a photo with shashliks clearly indicating what he meant. This year there was a different provocation at Kulikovo. The fact there was next to no coverage of this and other cases means that this is a commonality in modern Ukraine not worth discussion.

So, if you are denying the fact that despite being a marginal fraction of the society, ukrainian ultras exert a significant pressure (or have a high influence) on/in the current government. I will not be arguing with you, because I have no intention editing in ukrainian politics, especially keeping in mind that there is close no none objective sources, because "the West" keeps a blind eye as long as Ukraine is their tool in combatting Russia. Staszek Lem (talk) 21:03, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Staszek Lem: Ultras have clearly no influence in the current government of Ukraine, they are pretty much all having a big-tent populism as an ideology. On the other side, populism means that the active part of the society does have an influence on the government. Overall since Euromaidan governments tend to take into account the opinion of the vocal part of the society. However, this is way more complicated than just ultras.

• Sometimes right-wing groups are indeed the main group promoting a decision and the government goes their way, e.g. on the Crimea blockade.
• Sometimes it goes the opposite way, e.g. on the case of that diplomat fired for his Nazi views: he was fired because of the pressure from civil society, but this pressure was clearly not coming from the far-right groups.
• Sometimes far-right groups are putting significant pressure but the government is acting the opposite way, e.g. ultras want the government to fire Arsen Avakov since his very appointment and never succeeded.
• And in most cases the main pressure is coming from completely apolitical or cross-party movements, be they successful (e.g. an apolitical movement for the reform of car import taxation) or not (e.g. a cross-party movement to change pro-Rinat Akhmetov energy laws, equally supported by far-right and left-wing groups and not successful so far).

I honestly don't know where you find reports on some marginals posting provocative photos or comments. I found ukraina.ru/news/20200502/1027598475.html only one source, on a blacklisted Russian propaganda website. That guy has 5000 followers and his post got 500 likes, so the most obvious solution was to ignore him and not promote him. However, promoting him in Russia is useful for increasing hatred — NickK (talk) 11:40, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Here you are repeating the favorite ukrainian cliche: if something went wrong then Russia is somehow guilty, if someone criticizes ukrainian establishment, it must be Kremlin agent. Did Russian propaganda site force this ukronazi do what he did? By the way, do you know what Shevchenko is doing on his t-shirt? Do you think this t-shirt was made on his individual marginal order?

"active part of the society" is a bunch of crazy bozos today. Clearly, today is not a maidan-type situation, yet the govt is afraid of them.

I am not going to search all the internets for all ukronazis to show them for you. If you (and all Europe) close a blind eye, I cannot help. Meanwhile killer sternenko is spreading his venom, crazy marusia zvirobij may utter threats to President, and many other things interesting for russian propaganda are happening. Good luck. Staszek Lem (talk) 02:13, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What? Thank you for moving me from a ukronazi to a crazy bozo category. The fact that I am Ukrainian and I am not passive and indifferent does not make me a crazy bozo. Your hateful generalisations are just disgusting — NickK (talk) 02:33, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for insulting you. I made a common mistake of non-native Engluish speakers in the construction "A is B". I wanted to say "A bunch of bozos is the active part of the society today". In my impression, this bunch is most often seen in Kiev pressuring the government nearly every day, with some notable exceptions. I admit I may be mistaken because I do not live in Ukraine, nor I am monitoring its political life.

Surely, there are lots of good people in the Ukraine, but I do not hear them fighting these bozos. A telling thing that you grabbed the chance to feel insulted so that not to address the rest of concerns expressed. The fact that you are an Ukrainian and not passive does not prevent you to tolerate former C14 ruling kiev as minicipalna warta. I didnt hear much about a single puhishment of ukronazis. For example, what's new about C14 attacking Roma several times (besides being appointed muni warta, probably for their success in cleaning kiev of Roma)? (a rare case when ukronazis made it into international press). Staszek Lem (talk) 16:34, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

{lost in edit conflict} If you are an active and good part of the ukrainian society, go ahead and update the over 10 years outdated Racism and discrimination in Ukraine. I will lend you a and with anti-Polonism in the Ukraine today.

@Staszek Lem: I can tolerate it once, but now your hateful generalisations are becoming systematic. This discussion is going nowhere as we are not discussing encyclopaedic content, and while I would happily explain Ukrainian context in a calm discussion, I am not interested in a discussion full of hate — NickK (talk) 16:51, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A am citing the specific examples. You are refusing to comment on them preferring to play personally insulted. I am drawing a sad conclusion about your political stance. Good bye. Staszek Lem (talk) 17:11, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would have answered if it were relevant to any Wikipedia content. It is not, so I would rather spend my time on something not involving name calling, good bye indeed — NickK (talk) 17:26, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:44, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of busiest railway stations in Europe, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page RATP.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of sports teams named for the phoenix, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of sports teams named for the phoenix until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this is an automated reminder as part of Global reminder bot to let you know that your WP:IPBE right which gave you the ability to bypass IP address blocks will expire on 22:01, 30 November 2024 (UTC). If your IP is still blocked (which you can test by trying to edit when logged-out), please renew by following the instructions at the IPBE page; otherwise, you do not need to do anything. To opt out of user right expiry notifications, add yourself to m:Global reminder bot/Exclusion. Leaderbot (talk) 04:49, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]