Talk:Ukrainian Wikipedia

This article was nominated for deletion on 19 September 2013 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

This article was nominated for deletion on February 18, 2007. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Reference works, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Reference worksWikipedia:WikiProject Reference worksTemplate:WikiProject Reference worksReference works articles

Wikipedia Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's encyclopedic coverage of itself. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page. Please remember to avoid self-references and maintain a neutral point of view, even on topics relating to Wikipedia.WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject WikipediaWikipedia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ukraine Mid‑importance

	Ukraine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ukraine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ukraine on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.UkraineWikipedia:WikiProject UkraineTemplate:WikiProject UkraineUkraine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

First article

The special page Ancientpages says:

Фобос ‎(09:18, 15 грудня 2004)

I.e., December 15, not January 30. What the heck?(I mean, please comment). `'mikkanarxi 23:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Must be according to the old-style calendar. First Wikipedia article is a religious holiday, no? —Michael Z. 2006-11-30 17:29 Z

It's software problem. See the first article history --Ilya K 18:54, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Ukrainian Wikipedia. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

Attempted to fix sourcing for http://archive.nbuv.gov.ua/portal/SOC_Gum/ukr/2012_3/91.pdf
Attempted to fix sourcing for http://archive.nbuv.gov.ua/portal/soc_gum./Ukr/2012_4/48.pdf

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: 5 June 2024).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:33, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Russian wikipedia

The stats here suggest that of all the internet traffic to wikipedia from Ukraine, many more Ukrainians read Russian Wikipedia than Ukrainian Wikipedia. Is this likely to be correct? It would be helpful if we could explain this dynamic in this article. Oncenawhile (talk) 11:01, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This has now been mentioned, as well as the tendency for increased use of Ukrainian Wikipedia compared to Russian Wikipedia in recent years. --Very trivial (talk) 05:40, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Vaguely attributed criticism and claim sourced to facebook

[1]

Dear User:Escape Orbit, the criticism is quite clear: Valentyna Kodola, an ex-member of Wikimedia Ukraine and productive ex-editor claims that some Putinists are present among the administrators. It is claimed in the article[2]

Another claim is from the Ukrainian Wikipedia Facebook blog[3]. Here Ukrainian Wikipedia also mentions the author: [4] It is quite famous user Ата: Congratulations to Vira Motorko (User:Ата), Functionary of the Year!. So the famous Wikipedian claims that despite public outrage, Ukrainian Wikipedia uses the Polivanov system created for the Russian language, which is exactly what I am saying. Criticalthinkerua (talk) 17:45, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The problems are with your addtion are;

The first claim is attributed to "A banned member". It doesn't explain who this person is or why their thoughts are notable. This should be made clearer.
Nothing form a Facebook blog can be considered a reliable source. "Wikidrama", Facebook gossip and X posts shouldn't be considered a reliable source for "Public outrage".

I'm not saying that the content cannot be on the article, just that better sourcing is needed to demonstrate it is not just a temporary and minor dispute, and is significant to the overall subject Ukrainian Wikipedia. Thanks.

Dear User:Escape Orbit, I have already explained that "a banned member" is Valentyna Kodola, and "a gossip" was published by Ukrainian Wikipedia, and its author is famous user Ата. Thank you for understanding. Criticalthinkerua (talk) 11:31, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Ukrainian Wikipedians don't like criticism of Ukrainian Wikipedia. OP is globally banned. MonX94 (talk) 13:30, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Please add with appropriate sources that demonstrates this was published by Ukrainian Wikipedia (why is this not on the Ukranian Wikipedia? Why is it being posted on Facebook instead?) Also a source to explain what makes user Ата "famous" (that is, an authority/expert whose opinion is notable) , and not just another editor of Wikipedia. Thanks.--Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 11:56, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear User:Escape Orbit, I have already explained that user Ата is the "Functionary of the 2024".

"Why is it being posted on Facebook instead?" It is a strange question, because we are talking about public outrage. Because of public outrage, Ukrainian Wikipedia posted her opinion on social media. I have already added the Twitter blog of Ukrainian Wikipedia and the Facebook blog of Ukrainian Wikipedia. Thank you for understanding. Criticalthinkerua (talk) 12:17, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here you can see that those are authorized accounts: "У соціальних мережах ::LiveJournal · Facebook · Twitter · ВКонтакте" Criticalthinkerua (talk) 12:44, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not asking you to explain what makes user Ата famous, I'm asking you to cite what makes her opinion notable.

I also think that if the issue was notable, it would be on the Ukrainian Wikipedia as an official statement. Does the Ukrainian Wikipedia usually conduct its business on social media instead of on its own website?

If there was "public outrage", then there should be suitable third-party Reliable Sources discussing that. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 12:56, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear User:Escape Orbit, if we are talking about Ukrainian Wikipedia, its social media could be a reliable source. User Ата's opinion is notable because it was cited by Ukrainian Wikipedia, and plus because she is the "Functionary of the Year 2024".

"Does the Ukrainian Wikipedia usually conduct its business on social media instead of on its own website?" -- І'm not sure, whether its own website is a reliable source, but it has a manual of style for using Japanese transliteration. Or what are you asking about?

"If there was "public outrage", then there should be suitable third-party Reliable Sources discussing that." -- There are a lot of discussions about the Polivanov system problem, and its use by Ukrainian Wikipedia is considered part of the problem.

Thank you for understanding. Criticalthinkerua (talk) 13:20, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, there is no reliable source that Ukrainian Wikipedia has to use a system for the Russian language. Criticalthinkerua (talk) 13:47, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear User:Escape Orbit, what about Valentyna Kodola? In that case we have an article, so I think we can add it to the wiki. Thank you for understanding. Criticalthinkerua (talk) 13:25, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear User:Escape Orbit, to be honest, I have a strong impression that you are saying something without taking into account the information. E.g. I provided the official social media of Ukrainian Wikipedia, and you said that it was "a gossip". I am sincerely asking you to be productive. Thank you for understanding. Criticalthinkerua (talk) 07:17, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So we have two cases here. I propose to discuss the following editions (Dear User:Escape Orbit, if you don't have reasonable objections, I will add them to the article. Thank you for understanding. Criticalthinkerua (talk) 07:17, 3 September 2024 (UTC)):[reply]

@Escape Orbit is not a criticism in terms of terminology at all, but only separate statements by Wikipedians on some issues that have been highly debated, with disputes. There are so many such discussions in the Ukrainian Wikipedia that the article will become one of the largest. Valentyna shared the insults she constantly wrote, for which she was finally blocked. The people who are offended by wikipedia sometimes write bad words. Such criticism in the article is nothing but WP:POV 『Shiro Neko』^Обг. 01:44, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism: the Polivanov system

Ukrainian Wikipedia published on its social media an article by Vira Motorko (user Ата), the Functionary of the Year 2024, saying that despite public outrage, Ukrainian Wikipedia cannot change its Polivanov system developed for the Russian language.

Criticism: Putinists' fifth column

Valentyna Kodola, an ex-member of Wikimedia Ukraine and productive ex-editor, claims that some Putinists are present among the administrators. That is why she was banned for her patriotic position.