Talk:2010 Ukrainian presidential election

2009→2010
Should we move the article to reflect 2010? --Irpen 23:27, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, thanks for pointing this. I just moved the page, and will work to disambig pages previously linking to the "2009" article. --Riurik (discuss) 03:16, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

(1) The presidential elections in Ukraine are called by Verkhovna Rada (Article 85 of Constitution of Ukraine). As of now, neither in 2009 nor in 2010 the presidential elections have been called.

(2) According to Article 103 of Constitution, "Чергові вибори Президента України проводяться в останню неділю останнього місяця п'ятого року повноважень Президента України". Does it imply that the next presidential elections should be scheduled for January 2010? Likely so, but official interpretation of Ukrainian law can only be given (if necessary) by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine (Article 147 of Constitution). Also, "у разі дострокового припинення повноважень Президента України вибори Президента України проводяться в період дев'яноста днів з дня припинення повноважень".


 * article 85 of Ukraine's Constitution states Article 85 (7) states...

The authority of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine comprises: ... (7) calling elections of the President of Ukraine within the terms specified in this Constitution

Article 103 (English) The President of Ukraine is elected by the citizens of Ukraine for a five-year term, on the basis of universal, equal and direct suffrage, by secret ballot. ... The President of Ukraine shall not have another representative mandate, hold office in bodies of state power or in associations of citizens, and also perform any other paid or entrepreneurial activity, or be a member of an administrative body or board of supervisors of an enterprise that is aimed at making profit.

Regular elections of the President of Ukraine are held on the last Sunday of the last month of the fifth year of the term of authority of the President of Ukraine. In the event of pre-term termination of authority of the President of Ukraine, elections of the President of Ukraine are held within ninety days from the day of termination of the authority.

The procedure for conducting elections of the President of Ukraine is established by law.

(3) Neither a member of the parliament Yuryi Kluchkovskyi, nor the head of CVK Yaroslav Davydovych are given power to determine the date of the next presidential election. Thus, the source cited in the article is not reliable.

Concluding, it’s likely that the next presidential elections will take place on Sunday, January 31, 2010. Yet, until the elections are officially called, I see little sense in speculating about something that yet to happen, and in creating articles about that. -- 23:27, 31 October 2006 (UTC)


 * You make good points. Don't hesitate to incorporate this into appropriate articles on wikipedia, including this one.--Riurik (discuss) 01:11, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * First of all, elementary act of reading comprehension of what's written in constitution does not in an absolute majority of cases constitute the original research. Nor does it require an assertion of constitutional court. As such, I am inclined to have the article stating the election date as end-January 2006, with constitution and Davydovych's statement being mentioned in refs.


 * Secondly, even if we imagine the date's uncertainty, this by itself does not disprove the rationale for this article to exist. Analysis on who might run for this election, what party will support whom and how well are the candidates positioned for the run are occasionally given in the media. There is no better place in Wikipedia for this info than this article. Future election is a legitimate topic and we have articles about such. --Irpen 02:12, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * The January date is pure speculation and citing one publication that is not an official source is fantasy. The end of January would place the elections in the coldest month of the year with temperatures as low as -25 or below.  I know Yushchenko is a desperate man and will do anything to hold on to power (He is known to illegally interfere with Ukraine's Constitutional Court to avoid judicial review of his actions).  Odds are that Yushchenko will not be president for much longer.  If his party fails to win the election that should not have been there will be pressure for him to resign. Already the polls are showing 64% of Ukrainians think the President should be impeached. With a review of the constitution also expected to be undertaken now is the time to consider a change in the date for the election.  April 1 would be a suitable date. UkraineToday 07:50, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

If the election's date is uncertain, this should be at next Ukrainian presidential election, similar to next Serbian presidential election, next Thailand legislative election and next United Kingdom general election; if it's indeed certain, it's fine where it is. &mdash;Nightst a  llion  (?) 18:18, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

We should most certainly not be basing the date on an article published in one news journal.

Article 103 states That Regular elections of the President of Ukraine are held on the last Sunday of the last month of the fifth year of the term of authority of the President of Ukraine. The president was elected in 2004. His fifth year will be on 2009.

2005 was his fist year Second 2006 third 2007 fourth 2008 with 2009 being his fifth year

The last day of the last month of the fifth year would be December 27 two weeks before Christmas.

It would be wrong and misleading to assume that the election date will be on January 2010 the coldest month in the year. It would be tagged Yushchenko's Cold War.

Public Opinon Polls
With polls showing 64% of Ukrainains wanting the president impeached chances are Yushchenko will face relection this year or early next year.

UkraineToday 16:24, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Seems like you forgot about the Orange Revolution. Yushchenko was inaugurated in January, which means the elections will be held in January.
 * By the way, I'm sure the poll you're referring to was wrong: most people who vote for Party of Regions don't want Yushchenko impeached, and they make up about 30% of voters. the other 30% is BYuT + NU. 30 + 30 = 60, which means that the amount of people that want Yushchenko impeached is 40% or less. Please verify your facts. — Alex(U 03:01, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Someone removed the reference to a public opinion poll in which 64% of Ukrainains supported the impreachment of Ukraine's President. WHY?

A public opinion poll published as recent as August 14 shows that less then one third of Ukrainians trust their president. The citation reference to the missing post can be found here. http://www.regnum.ru/english/859835.html in fact the poll is widely reported.

A poll conducted by Ukrainian Center for Sociological and Marketing Research SOCIUM,published on July 23, involving 12,690 respondents from all over Ukraine reported that:

56.8% of those surveyed believe that the extraordinary elections to the Ukrainian Verkhovna Rada are not needed now, 30.9% think the opposite, 12.3% found it difficult to answer.

63.7% of the respondents support the idea of impeaching president Viktor Yushchenko. 27% oppose such initiative, 9.3% found it difficult to answer.

55.4% of respondents assessed negatively consequences of the Orange Revolution. 11.4% have the opposite view. 14.1% are more negative than positive about the outcomes of the Orange Revolution, 11.1% are neutral, 8% are more positive than negative about it.

On the question of Trust for political leaders

The poll shows little change in voter sentiment in comparison to previous polls undertaken by Ukrainian Institute of Social Studies (UISS) in June 16 to June 23 and also in a recent poll undertaken by the Sofia Social research centre in which over 52% of those polled between July 27 and August 7 distrusted Ukraine's president

Looks like someone is trying to censor and prevent this information from being published. UkraineToday 19:23, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

If you want the information you found to be included, look for sources which can be included in Wikipedia and which have transparent surveys. I don't consider the 64% survey you included transparent, as far as I can tell there's no mention of it on the survey agency's page. And Interfax has strict copyright policies. Also, please look up the correct citation format for web pages, just saying the page exists isn't enough. There needs to be a link. — Alex(U 20:48, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * full citation and links have been provided.


 * No they haven't. All you did is undid my edit. Everything stayed the same. — Alex(U 23:22, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I nor you are in a posituiion to be a judge of the quaility fo teh seuirvey. The opublciation source of thsi iformation are establihsed news agencys and the conopanies refered to are regully quoted in public opinion surveys in Ukraine. Your mathematics and assumptions based on your limited orginal research is seriously flawed. UkraineToday 22:07, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * In addition to all that, it is too early to conduct public oppinion polls for an election three years away, therefore they're irrelevant at this point. All that is known about the election right now is the date. — Alex(U 20:50, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * In fact everything that has been added to the article except for the date is irrelevant at this point. — Alex(U 20:52, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

The fact that the date has not been set is one thing but the campaign is well and truely open to bebate and presentation of information. The citation is news reports widely publihsed within and outside Ukraine. I suggest you read more about fair use and reporting on news items. The polls in question directly relate to the next presidential election in Ukraine. Just because you do not agree with the results of the poll is no excuse or justification for you to remove this information. Similar results have been reported by more then one professional polling agency. If you took time to read the information before you sumarliy removed it from public view you would have noted that there is more then one citation and report. Are you falsely suggesting that the various news agencies and the polling services are involved in a conspiracy, do yob have proof to substanciate your claims? Wher is your citations that back up your asertions? Please stop vandelising this article by unilaterly removing information relevent to the topic of the article. PS The president if Ukraine might readily be facing re-election next year. After all he has violated Ukraine's Constitution and laws providing ground for his impeachment. UkraineToday 21:47, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I'll try to be as clear as possible: 2007 is way too early to be posting opinion polls. The campaign has not started yet and will not for a few years. Therefore, the information is irrelevant in this article at this point in time. If you have the urge to post it, post it somewhere else, including your user page.
 * Also, as DDima stated, Interfax doesn't allow its material to be used on websites such as Wikipedia, which makes it a copyright violation. — Alex(U 23:22, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * As for re-elections next year, you're not a political analytic and Wikipedia is WP:NOT a crystal ball. — Alex(U 23:24, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Dima is wrong. Fair usage rules allow repoorting on public opinion polls.  Ands I disagree the debate about the next presidnetial election is very much alive todfay and teh poll is a reflection of fact.  and yes I am a electional analyst, over 30 years experience in the conduct, scruting and analyst of public elections. not that that matters. UkraineToday 00:37, 23 August 2007 (UTC)


 * The content on Wikipedia is not under fair use, it is under GFDL. Therefore the Interfax material doesn't belong here. — Alex(U 00:51, 23 August 2007 (UTC)


 * And you didn't address my other concern, you do not provide links to your sources. — Alex(U 00:52, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Why never a split vote in Novorossiya?
Yulia Tymoshenko & Arseniy Yatsenyuk seem to split eatchothers vote. Why don't the votes in "Novorossiya" never split(?), in other words how come Viktor Yanukovych (and "his" Party of Regions) never has any competition there? Fraud and bribing of possible competitors by Party of Regions?

Not sure if this is wiki-related but if someone has good refs it could be a good improvment of the article. — Mariah-Yulia (talk) 08:55, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Because of absence of pro-Novorossian rhetorics from other candidates. All others have either pro-western nationalistic position or centrist one. Yanukovych is the only non-radical pro-Novorossian User:Chudinho  —Preceding undated comment added 07:57, 25 May 2009 (UTC).


 * there are many articles on Wikipedia about gaming the vote. See first-past-the-post voting and Preferential voting. Had Ukraine adopted a single round Preferential voting system not only would the cost of holding the election be considerable less minor candidates such as Yushchenko would not play a negative role in the outcome of the ballot. Under a preferential voting system if no single candidate has 50% or more votes then the candidate(s) with teh least number of votes are excluded from the count and their votes redistributed according to the voters nominated preference of choice.  Minor candidates can have a positive influence on the outcome of the election by advocating a preference for other candidates.  One of the main criticisms leveled at the first-past-the-post voting system is that candidates which have a similar agenda work against each other they are also referred to as Spoiler candidates.  Candidates designed to take votes away from opponents.   Australia is the main country that uses preferential voting. It was introduced to prevent spoiler candidates.  The high deposit fee also is designed to try and limit spoiler candidates from nominating.  There is a serious of article on http://ukrainetoday.blogspot.com/search/label/Electoral%20Reform that address this issue in relation to Ukrainian Politics.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.190.40.8 (talk) 01:32, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Expected participants
Has Petro Symonenko a.k.a. Beaker said anything about him participating in the election yet? Aperently Tymoshenko said "someone from our team" will participate. — Mariah-Yulia (talk) 08:20, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


 * He and the Party are in best candidate decision phase, just like JT and guys from her Bloc ;) User:Chudinho —Preceding undated comment added 10:19, 27 May 2009 (UTC).

Yushch in infobox
I think Viktor Yushchenko should not be in the infobox, but instead of him Arseniy Yatsenyuk. Cause Yatsa has a change of winning and Yushch has not! The days of administrative resource is long gone in Ukraine I do hope. Without using that Yushch has no change of wining the election.... polls suggest.

I think the order should be the outcom polls suggest: 1. Yanuko 2. Tymo 3. Yatsa

— Mariah-Yulia (talk) 21:10, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The main reason why he should stay is because hes an incumbent seeking re-election. No matter whether or not he wins. And adding Yatsenyuk wouldn't be bad too, just add some other candidates like Hrytsenko and the like. ddima.talk 22:45, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Content
President of the Academy of the Ukrainian Press Valeriy Ivanov claims "subliminal suggestion technologies and bribery of the press might be used during the next presidential election in Ukraine". Worth puting this info in the article? —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  10:36, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Candidate fee
What about entrance fee for candidates? I heard that it is 500.000 hryvnias and it will not returned to candidates after election. If so that, bureaucrats, judges, professors, generals that did not have any corruption in their career can not enter the election. Only rich people or backed by parties or companies can enter. --91.124.196.216 (talk) 14:39, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The deposit is set at 2,500,000 UAH The election is expected to cost over 1 billion dollars.  If you want highly respected judges and the like then you should support the proposal to have the parliament elect the head of state as is the case in Greece and Moldova and the European Council. You hold an election you will get a politician, It costs billions so of course those that have the money win. A collegiate system of appointment is by far better and more democratic.  Even the US uses a collegiate system in electing its head of state.  The main problem with teh US system is the college is undemocratic in its representation —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.190.40.8 (talk) 00:43, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Law on Presidential Elections ''Article 49. Cash pledge'' 1. Cash collateral paid party (parties, members of the unit), which nominated the candidate for President of Ukraine, or a candidate for President of Ukraine in cashless special account of the Central Election Commission in the amount of two million five hundred thousand.

2. Cash collateral is returned the party (parties, members of the unit), which nominated the candidate for President of Ukraine, or candidate for President of Ukraine, which is included in the ballot for re-vote. If a candidate for President of Ukraine is not included in the ballot for re-vote money deposit not refunded and transferred to the State Budget of Ukraine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.190.40.8 (talk) 06:07, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

The deposit is refunded to those candidates that progress into the second round of voting. The use of a deposit is common in many Western democracies. It is designed to try and limit the number of minor candidates that have no real prospect of winning the election but in nominating act as spoiler candidates who take votes away from other candidates seeking election. This is a known problem with first-past-the-post voting systems.

For example: Both A.Yatseniuk and V.Yushchenko belong to the same political party "Our Ukraine" Yatseniuk has 14% and Yushchenko less then 4%. Yushchenko has no real prospect of winning the first round of voting. Yushchenko in nomination is reducing Yatseniuks chances of outpolling Yulia Tymoshenko and progressing into the second round of voting.

Alternative voting system
The costs of the two round election is budgeted at around 1.5 billion UAH (Approximately 100 Million Dollars per round)

A better alternative would be for Ukraine to adopt a single round preferential ballot as is used in Australia and Ireland.

Voters rank candidates in order of preference (1,2,3, etc) Votes are distributed according to the first preference. If no candidate has 50% or more votes then the candidate(s) with the least votes are excluded from the count and their votes redistributed according to the voters' nominated preference.

Yushchenko supporters would have a direct say in who would be elected as their votes can be transferred to Yatseniuk.

One round at half the cost, results known within days of not months after the first round.

Opinion polling chart
I believe Tymoshenko and Yanukovych should swap places in the chart since the latter is regrettably leading in the overwhelming majority of polls. Now the very order of the candidates in the chart is misleading and POVish. Garik 11 (talk) 21:20, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Alright, I know, "If you want something done, do it yourself":)Garik 11 (talk) 12:38, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

The order should be on the basis of highest to lowest. to rearrange the polls to suit anyone's bias assessment would be more misleading.

The current poll table is messy and does not contribute extensively to the current article. I suggest that the list be reduced to include the last Presidential election and only recent polls. Also the candidate list will change. Already Kyiv's Mayor has pulled out of the race and no doubts faced with the prospect of losing their deposits more will join him. There will also be pressure on minor candidates to also withdraw as time progresses.

The official campaign is expected to start on 19 October 2009 (90 days before January 17 excluding the first and last day)). It would be then appropriate to reduce the list to only the poll during the official campaign.

We need to distinguish the basis of each poll. It would be best of the polls totaled 100%. It is important to know the participation rate. Those who will not vote do not count in the outcome of the election. (Unless the turn out is below 50% in which the election fails). If the poll shows the percentage of all respondents then this can be misleading when compared to polls that only indicate the percentage of actual voters. . —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.91.116.174 (talk) 03:56, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

It is suggested that once nominations are closed that the Poll list be edited to only include those candidates that have actually nominated. (The remaining values to be rolled up into the "Other" category. Reported polls should be complete showing the likely outcome of a the second round of voting based on Polling results. If possible links should be made to the Polling Company web sites not news articles.


 * To begin with I propose we remove the following polls


 * USS 16-Apr-08 (reason only one-off poll)
 * Institute of social and political psychology 24 Nov 08 (reason One off poll)
 * KIMS 3-Apr-09 (reason only one-off poll)
 * Ukrainian Project System 21-Jul-09(reason only one-off poll)
 * FOM-Ukraine 25-Jan-09 (reason no citation)
 * Razumkov Centre 31-Jan-09 (reason no citation) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ukr-Trident (talk • contribs) 03:58, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Progressive opinion polls table
Ukr-Trident (talk) 03:44, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Maintaining a NPOV
There is concern that the text and photos are beginning to demonstrate a bias in its content. Wikipedia is not NEWS.

Time Table
Wikipedia is an virtual encyclopedia. The 2007 Election is past, this is a current event. The time table as such should be higher then the subjective discussion on the campaign. Its category title is "time table" the article already refers to the election. It should also only list official dates and events. Not partisan information. Its not a time line of events that have happened its a time table of events to be actioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.190.40.8 (talk) 01:19, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Why is the "Time Table" so high up in this article and not below as in Ukrainian parliamentary election, 2007? This is not that important (and in my opinion one of the least interesting of all) info. Furthermore it should be named "Election time line" (as in Ukrainian parliamentary election, 2007). Hence I do not agree. I got the feeling most readers will not bother to read it, so it's place now makes the article less inviting to read the whole article. Wiki articles should also (in my view) be consistent, hence the same events should have the same names. Please don't use this "How could you ever think otherwise"-tone, I find it annoying. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  01:37, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * because people want to see the time line of events. You generally have an agenda before the content This is a live event it is not in the past. When it is in the past then by all means move it.  The article already has a title :"Election" We do not need to pump it with useless wording in the title.  I suggest you change the wording on the past listings if your that concerned about it.    Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia it is not a "Election manifest" for one party or political opinion ahead of another. It is also not a News site.  Many of the comments do not warrant comment or listing as they are subjective and lack substance.  124.190.40.8 (talk) 08:48, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Shuster interview
I reinstated the mention because (1) it is well referneced - I don't see anything "vague" about the reference and the content is not "subjective", being an accurate synthesis of the cited source's content - and, more importantly, it touches on the perception that Yanukovich is not a competent speaker; this is inevitably going to be an electioneering issue and an illustration of it seems to me appropriate and not disproportionate. -- Timberframe (talk) 09:58, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It was a con. A production trick to generate auidiance. It is not well sourced. It is not of encyclopedic  The producers invited the all participants and it was sold in the media as being something that it was not.  If anything this should be n item in the discussion pages but odes not warrant inclusion in the main article it has no bearing on the election itself. To include it would diminish the value and quality of article.  Wikipedia is not NEWS or Gosip. much more discussion should be made before it is included, 124.190.40.8 (talk) 12:39, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * To prove the point here is a news article that user Timberframe failed to mention...

Shuster cheated both Tymoshenko and Party of Regions members -German

Television anchorman Savic Shuster calls upon his colleagues to unite against politicians, who attack on freedom of speech.

It is said in the statement of S. Shuster passed to UNIAN.

“On Friday, on September 25, there was an attack on freedom of speech. Politicians tried to dictate their rules of game to journalists on the air of “Shuster live” program”, said television anchorman.

In her turn, lawmaker from the Party of Regions Anna German said in her statement that “an attempt of S. Shuster to cover by words about freedom of speech his personal dishonourable behavior drives him more into a corner”.

“It is necessary to admit honestly – S. Shuster, for the sake of reaching rating of his program, cheated Yu. Tymoshenko, having not said to her that he invited opposition’s representatives to discussion. And us, the Party of Regions lawmakers, tried to present in a light as we came on the air without his knowledge and derange his program”, said A. German.

According to her opinion, “it is non-transparent and unfair”.
 * UNIAN. http://unian.net/eng/news/news-338554.html 124.190.40.8 (talk) 12:51, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the source. (I didn't fail to mention it, I simply wasn't aware of it. Please keep your tone WP:CIVIL). In light of the alternative view of the episode present in the UNIAN article I agree to removing the item which, taken in this context, at best illustrates the dirty tricks the accompany the election campaign. -- Timberframe (talk) 13:02, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The Jamestown Foundation made a big deal out of it so I included it in the article, I later read the UNIAN article to and after that I agreed with the removal (even before cause it's not that encyclopaedic). I'm a bit disappointed in Jamestown, I hope it was a one time mistake (of them). —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  20:22, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Official start of the campaign
I have removed the citation reference as it is misplaced and does not add to the content of the article. The official date is nominated in the legislation and the timetable both are already listed. We must avoid making to many citations that are not needed.124.190.40.8 (talk) 19:39, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Ballot order
The Kyivpost article on Yatsenyuk's registration states there were three candidates that had registered. The Law on the Presidential election places ballot papers in alphabetical order based on surname. There was some discussion to change this to a lot. But until the ballot papers list is finalized then we should use alphabetical to avoid and disputation as to who registered first. Registration is a process that continues until November 6 and they have until November 11 to finalize documentation and payment of deposits. A candidate can pull out of the election up until January I think. The CEC has not yet published a list of candidates. Ukr-Trident (talk) 23:08, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Agree! Thanks for your work on/updating the article! —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  14:29, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * On reading the CEC timetable (In Ukrainian) It lloks as if December 21 is the cut off date for pull outs. I expect many will pull out as it is their only chance to regain their deposit. For Yushchenko to survive and mount any real challenge he would need to force Yatseniuk to pull out. Yatseniuk does not look like going any where his rise in support has declined and he is now stuck below 10%. Ukr-Trident (talk) 05:07, 12 November 2009 (UTC) It will be a race between Yulia and Yanukovych.  Personally I think the whole Presidential system is a joke and a waste of money.  Better off having the Parliament elect a head of state as is the case in the EU. Ukr-Trident (talk) 05:07, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

International Observers
This section will expand as the list expands. Should we move it up to a higher position? 124.190.40.8 (talk) 19:39, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * This is al pretty standard (in Europe), there where international observers in the last election in Germany aswell. See here. Of course since the played (the international observers) a big role in the last presidential elections in Ukraine they should be mentioned. Let's what and see how big there role will be. Lytvyn invited observers from parliamentary international organizations at election of President of Ukraine and European Parliament to send its representatives to Ukraine to monitor presidential elections By the way. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  15:17, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Election Campaign
This section is becoming unwieldy and bias (towards one candidate - see photos) with much of the content not being of encyclopedic interest. Wikipedia is not News..

Maybe when the nominations are finalized we should provide a breakdown categorization by Candidate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.190.40.8 (talk) 20:01, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Having read the section (since a while) again. I see you are right (in my opinion of course). This chronologic order does not make it a great read:


 * A sentences like: "Ukraine has proven more than once the degree to which the success of an election campaign depends on the level of professionalism and political spin techniques applied in election campaigns" are vague and not understandable for English readers who never heard of Administrative resources (I asume it refers to that...)
 * The fact that the working relationship between President Yushchenko and his Prime Minister Tymoshenko are bad could be said in 1 sentence (still think it should be stated in this article since they where allies the last presidential election)
 * But yae lets wait till the nominations are finalized so we won't write things in vain... —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  00:39, 20 October 2009

For future expand of this article: Tymoshenko hired AKP&D Message and Media to support her campaign. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  17:44, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Yatseniuk Photo
Does anyone have a better photo for Yatseniuk same format size as the Yanukovych and Tymoshenko? Ukr-Trident (talk) 23:52, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Please see:

and other Wikipedia Commons photo's; or make one yourself of him :) —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  00:44, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Artek
It seems that the sexual abuse of children in the international children's camp Artek is starting to play a role in the electoral campaign since three parliamentarians from the Bloc of Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko are named as accomplices which according to one of them is a dirty trick of the Party of the Regions (See here). More info here here and here. This has not made international headlines and I do not know if/or it has an impact on the election. It does look like an old KGB trick to me and the people who poisoned Yushchenko are probably capable of doing even worse "tricks". Of course the biggest victims are the children involved in this tragedy. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  15:43, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Update here. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  16:48, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe we should wait for a while till the case evolves into something definite. No need to mention in the article about the election thus far. Garik 11 (talk) 18:33, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Totally agree. The EU recently released a statement advising that names not be be published until this matter is fully investigated.  There is much about this that stinks. There was talk that it is also part of a plan to try and privatize the site which is prime development land. It is not part of the campaign until charges are laid and an application made to have Parliamentary immunity removed. Ukr-Trident (talk) 08:27, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
 * OK. I'll archive relevant references on 1 of my 2 sandboxes. In case an article about these tradic events will be written. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  16:48, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

According to a Poll published by Kyiv Post this scandal wont effect the choose of the Ukrainian voter. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  14:25, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

''The Ukrainian media faced great challenges in covering the story of a journalist who allegedly sexually assaulted his own kids for three years, enlisting other acquaintances – including parliamentarians – to do the same. They had to weigh the obligation to inform society against the harm of spreading confidential and compromising information.''

Media fails its first campaign test in coverage of sex abuse scandal

The drama was worsened by the lack of trustworthy sources: Every power institution in Ukraine is capable of falsifying documents and testimony in the interests of political expediency and self- protection.

Overly pluralistic, but passive in their attempts to search for their own information sources, Ukrainian media have long trained their audiences to accept the idea that every conflict has two sets of “truth.”

''In this particular story, the horrific accusations against a journalist, three parliamentarians and managers of the Crimean children’s camp, Artek, proved believable to many people. It’s not difficult for Ukrainians to believe that politicians are capable of any perversion. On the other hand, it is also not difficult to believe that this kind of case could be a fabricated show to assassinate political careers.'' Media fails its first campaign test in coverage of sex abuse scandal There was also in interesting tell tail interview by Shuster. Ukr-Trident (talk) 03:13, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

"i" or "y" Translitation
Readers should note the ongoing different ways of translitation of spelling. eg Tihipko or Tyhypko. Ryabokon or Riabokon. Both bring up different results on google and to top it up you have the Russian versus Ukrainian spelling. This was one of the main problems with the previous Ukrainian electoral roles and many citizens could not find their names on the roll when they went to vote or some where doubled up and or did not match their id card It confusing. In any event Ryabokon or Tihipko will not survive the first round of voting. They are essentially spoiler or technical candidates. At US$300.000 per candidate they have a lot of money to throw away. 121.91.161.62 (talk) 00:18, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Photographs
I suggest that we use and publish the official photographs that are released by the Central Election Commission. They should all be of teh same size format. 250 x 250? Ukr-Trident (talk) 23:44, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid that if those pictures aren't copyright free they will be deleted soon. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  14:19, 3 November 2009

Infobox Elections template
There is a limit of six candidates only that can be displayed in the template "Infobox elections". We need to either have the template modified. Remove it or decide which six should be given precedence I prefer to opt to modifying the template or we should list only the top five according to the latest opinion polls + Yushchenko as incumbent Ukr-Trident (talk) 05:16, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The top 5 + Yushcho is enough in my opinion, will look messy otherwise... —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  14:24, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Our Ukraine
Our Ukraine needs to be listed independent from Our Ukraine - Peoples' Self Defense. Our Ukraine being a sub group of the umbrella organization Our Ukraine - Peoples' Self Defense Ukr-Trident (talk) 05:24, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Does Our Ukraine - Peoples' Self Defense still exist, or only in the Rada? —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  14:26, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * In name alone I think. But not for long. Ukr-Trident (talk) 05:08, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

nominated Candidate list
Kyivpost is reporting 18 candidates registered as of November 13. We have 19 listed. Either someone has not had documents approved or we have one too many. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ukr-Trident (talk • contribs) 19:04, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes according to Interfax-Ukraine a spokesman for the Central Election Commission of Ukraine (CEC) said the same. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  22:10, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

According to the display of candidates on the CEC site Liudmyla Suprun is not a candidate. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  22:14, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
 * No she is! —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  22:24, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

According to her website Nataliya Vitrenko didn't pay the 2,5 million required to enter the race. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  22:33, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks I just read that also on line. She wrote a long winded speech about Constitutional rights, even though the CCU had ruled that the deposit was within the frame work of Ukraine's constitution/.  It is designed to discourage frivilous nominations. Still 18 candidates have come forward and all are required to pay the 2.5 million deposit (USD$300,000).  [from-ua.com].What was strange is that she was not listed in the list of rejections.  She would have lost her deposit anyway.  I guess she has decided to submit a court challenge and they are holding back to decide what next. She will lose any challenge as the CCU of Ukraine has ruled on this question. Ukr-Trident (talk) 05:01, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Support matrix
Can we create "support matrix" for the candidates? Which party supports who? Maybe it can be divided into 2, i.e. 1st round and 2nd round. --195.110.6.24 (talk) 13:01, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Not in the main article as that would be subjective.,  Wikipedia can not make such assumptions. Ukraine had a two round first past the post voting system,, (The two descriptors are needed to verify the type of voting system that is used. If you wish raise it here under discussion only. Ukr-Trident (talk) 10:15, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Method of voting-
The method of voting used is first-past-the-post if no candidate has 50% or more votes then the two highest candidates progress to the second round of voting. A second round only being held if required. Could the persons who continue to remove this this information please cease vandalising the article. Ukr-Trident (talk) 22:00, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 * The system you describe is more generally called Two-round system. First past the post, at least in English refers to the system used in the elections done in US and England. --JorgeGG (talk) 22:44, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Ukr-Trident (talk) 07:07, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * First past the post is a generic term that refers to the method of voting - a single vote per candidate with the highest polling candidate winning. It applies to a number of systems including the two round system which is essentially two first-past-the-post ballots.  There are numerous versions of voting systems that use first-past-the-post voting methods.

Idiots at work or interesting fact?
Is there a place in this articel for this story? Looks rather idiotic to me but could be an example of the immaturity of Ukraine's politics. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  21:27, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Again I do not think this is the place for such subjective commentary. It is not of encyclopedic interest. WIKIPEDIA is not news, a campaign forum or gossip. Ukr-Trident (talk) 07:11, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Top five presidential candidates decline to debate (for future reference)
Top five presidential candidates decline to debate according to Kyiv Post but today Tymoshenko wants to invite Yanukovych to debates. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  19:18, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Its not an issue of encyclopedic interest. Its just campaign noise. All "democraceis from time to time decide not to participate in debates.

Photos
The CEC has released official candidate photos that are not covered by copyright. We should use these.  Ukr-Trident (talk) 07:03, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

For possible future reference if things go wrong
Alexander Torshin Preparation poor for presidential election in Ukraine, IPA CIS mission head says. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  19:55, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Links
Please go sparingly on the links internal and external. There are links to everything. Please read WIKIpedia policy on links. WAY TOO MANY SECONDARY LINKS

Linking and redirection policies Ukr-Trident (talk) 20:44, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Georgian "observers"?
What do you guys make of this story? (I know that's a blog but there are numerous reliable sources within it that you can check out). Seems at least worth mentioning. LokiiT (talk) 00:18, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Do not object agianst it. Although 1 sentence would be enough (only in the International observers) since it did not seem to do anything with the result... —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  07:54, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Then you will have to open up to all other blogs as possible resources. Ukr-Trident (talk) 00:57, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Why? I didn't suggest using the actual blog as a source. LokiiT (talk) 17:57, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Better source would be this article by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. Although I think this "Georgian "observers""-thingy says more about Georgia (or to be more precise Mikhail Saakashvili) then about this Ukrainian election. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  21:20, 24 January 2010


 * Maybe they could supplement their incomes by working as taxi-drivers whilst they are in Ukraine?--Toddy1 (talk) 21:51, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

This election marked the end of the Orange revolution?
If an editor would wrote:”…according to the der Spiegel this election marked the end of the Orange revolution…” that would make sense. See: No original research. 1 editor saying, "Yo, it's over" looks Point of view pushing. Besides I am not sure that it is relevant for this election/article. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  08:28, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Vote total
The numbers in the vote table do not add up to the total given. They add up to 24,180,833. Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 12:51, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 * There has been a slight update in the CEC office results . The table may need revision. Maps are correct.Uk-Trident (talk) 23:47, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I have updated the table to reflect the current publication on the CEC web site.

Note that there is also 1.6% of informal vote (Votes that are left blank or have more then one candidate marked on them. This needs to be calculated and is generally the discrepancy between the sum and the total Ukr-Trident (talk) 01:02, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Yulia Tymoshenko needs votes but not published Original Thoughts on wikipedia
Currently the article claims:

"Viktor Yanukovych (35.45%) has a 10.3% lead in votes over Yulia Tymoshenko (25.05%) who needs to pick up two out of every three alternative votes from voters who supported minor candidates (37%) in the first round in order to win the second final round ballot."

Besides it looks like (or even WP:CRYSTAL), it also doesn't take into account that more or fewer people will vote in this second round. Actually in both Ukrainian presidential election second rounds in 2004 voter turnout was higher then in the first round (+6% and +2.7%). I believe the sentence should be removed. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  23:23, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Removed above claim; elections are not mathematics.... —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  23:34, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Elections are mathematics. Thats what statostics is and elctirons is just a statistiocal poll that has legislative force. It is a verifiable fact Yulia is 10.27% behind Yanukovych. Combined Yanukovych(35.32%) Tymoshenko (25.05%) and "Against All" (2.2%) = 62.39% The other minor candidates collectively represent 37.61%  To make up the short fall of 10.32% Yulia Tymsohenko needs 2 out of 3 of the minor candidates support.  The comment was valid. I suggest that you look at removing a whole lot of other comments that show extreme bias, subjective and have no encyclopedic value.  Such as the ongoing unsubstantiated claims of vote rigging. That you have promoted. Trying to hide obvious verifiable facts does not help. Ukr-Trident (talk) 01:10, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I also agree that some parts of this article have no encyclopedic value, however wikipedia is a community project, so it's the fault of all editors that those parts are still there. I have not "promoted" ongoing unsubstantiated claims of vote rigging, I placed them in, and since nobody objected so I concluded all editors agreed with them to be in there. I hope you do not blame me for not being able to read peoples minds.

And yes I want Yulia to win this elections, and yes that might cloud my judgement. But I'm relying on others to correct my mistakes, just like I corrected other editors mistakes. If other editors don't do that then that is a failure of the wikipedia comunity, more so then my own.

By the way: you are still not taken into account that in 2004 voter turnout was higher in the second round then in the first round, if that happens in this election, or if fewer people vote in the second then in the first round, the calculation will not be able to make (it is also possible that people who voted for Tymoshenko in the first round will vote for Yanukovich in the second round and vice versa). So I was not "trying to hide obvious verifiable facts", I was trying to delete a part of this article that for me had no encyclopedic value, let alone mathematical. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  16:42, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Kyiv Post an unreliable source?
Why would Kyiv Post be an unreliable source? And why only for the sentence "Some Analysts predict a slight advantage for Tymoshenko in the second (and final) round as she was more likely to attract voters from the other 16 candidates"? —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  16:47, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Kyivpost is a reliable source. Those that are claiming otherwise do so because they do not agree with the information that is being reported. It is they who are bias.  Kyivpost is the premier on-line English news site.  They draw on a range of sources in articles published. Ukr-Trident (talk) 23:13, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Can Viktor Baloha statements in the "Fraud suspicions and accusations" please be deleted?
It looks like WP:SOAPBOX to me. And Baloha has at the moment not a great impact on Ukrainian politics. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  16:50, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * If you wish to remove you should also remove the allegation that were unsupported. Viktor Boloha's statement was and is relevant.  Personally I do not agree with the man but he is correct in this issue. He is an authorative source, former secretary to the president of UkraineUkr-Trident (talk) 23:16, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Highest vote map
I have removed the highest vote map as I do not think it contributes anything. It is false and misleading as each regions/district is not representative of the actual vote. It may apply to the final round but certainly has no value to in relation to the first round.(On reflection I do not think it even applies to the final round as the vote is a national poll not regional). The other maps below are much more accurate in that it displays the distribution of a candidates vote in relation to the total vote. An good example of the distortion in the information presented is in Dnipropetrovsk. Here three candidates had a strong showing the highest vote map does not show this. A party/candidate in Donetsk has over 80% of the region/district vote representing 8% of the total vote. Yet in Zakaparttia the region has less then 400,000 votes and is divided three ways. It gives a false impression that one person/candidate has more votes by geographical area then they actually represent. Ukr-Trident (talk) 10:30, 26 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Makes sense so agree. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  10:46, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

It is maybe of some interest in the discussion pages only Ukr-Trident (talk) 10:53, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

By way of example. The maps below are misleading the color scheme shading is based on the percentage of each candidate to the regional vote total. This has the effect of inflating candidates votes as each region is not equal in size. Ukraine's regions are of an administrative nature and have nothing to do with the electoral results. The above maps show the relationship of each region to the national total vote and as such each region is color coded in relation to the overall vote without the statistical distortion. More often then not less is best. Ukr-Trident (talk) 09:31, 29 January 2010 (UTC) Removing these maps hides the unfortunate fact that Ukraine is de facto split in half. That is probably going to have fateful consequences in the future, so there is a proper reason for the article to highlight it. When you look at the article now, this division in two is well hidden from a random visitor. --Drieakko (talk) 07:19, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * "this division in two" is decreasing... —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  10:01, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Example if misleading information published in the maps above.

If you look at Volyn you would think that Yanukovych has more votes there then in Lviv when in fact the complete opposite is the case. The same occurs in Kherson in comparison with Zaporizha in relation to Yulia. You would also think that Yanukovychh has the same support in Luhansk and Crimea as in Donetsk. There is correlation between candidates and regions to the actual percentage of the vote.


 * The above maps provide false and misleading information. The color gradient distribution has no relationship to the overall vote or to each other candidate. Each regional/administrative district is not equal in size or representation. Looking at the above maps you get no indication of the true distribution of the vote. The published maps are based on the percentage of total national vote.  As such they are show a correct relationship to each region and candidate.  Each map has applied the same color gradient scale (% times 20) each candidate is also depicted in relation to each other candidate.  If you think is is important to provided a district level breakdown then you would need to color match and grade each 226 regions based on the total national vote not on the regional vote. It is a detail that I do not think will add to the information presented.Ukr-Trident (talk) 01:07, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * You life in Finland, so you are in no position to predict the future of Ukraine. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  08:06, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

"The division in two" is not hidden from a random visitor, it's obvious to see in the present maps in the article. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  10:32, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Miss Yulia, I come here as a Western European interested in Ukrainian ans Slavic matters asking you cordially if you can please put up again a proper map for this recent election turn out. You see, I came to Wikipedia only to find a map or data that could show me the percentage vote for Yulia Timoshenko and the Party of Regions by Ukrainian first level administrative division. I know Wikipedia is not the best place to look for information, but it usually is a great place to colect data and links to good information sources. I am please asking for you to understand that many like me are interested in the maps I talked about and please, I am asking you as a person who belongs to the European Civilisatio to not let your eventual preferences make the truth slide away. Please, put up such maps or provide me the information I want. Cordially, call me AH if you want. And long live the Eastern Slavs who have faced so many troubles for so long. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.139.166.174 (talk) 12:15, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not my personal blog; if most editors (this is not clear now) want the map in the article I want the map in the article. As to my "eventual preferences", until now I am the only editor who put positive information about him in the Viktor Yanukovych article. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  09:03, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with anon. The map is needed here. All the arguments against one are too complicated for me to understand, or should I say, they are frankly lame. Many other wikis have one , so should we. Garik 11 (talk) 08:33, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Because others do it so should we? That is not your best argument ever Smiley.svg —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  09:20, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Below is a map shoing the distribution of the vote based on the percantate of the national bvote (not regional)

Ukraine's Presidential election, unlike the USA which is based on State representation is a unified national electorate.

Ukr-Trident (talk) 00:53, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, a map in the infobox does make sense, I put one of above (did think about puting them both there, but thought it would be to much info) maps in the infobox. I hope that is a good compromise. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  09:20, 12 February 2010 (UTC)


 * The previous map in the infobox does not make sence. It is false and misleading. It is based on regional percentage and as seriously distorts the ditibution allocatioon of the vote and ignores the fact that other candidates have a significant support in the region. The current maps are best as they are based on the percentage of the National vote not regional vote.  If you want relocate them but do not publish false and misleading information in order to give the impression that Yulia Tymoshenko won more votes then she did. Yulia won 17 out of 25 regions BUT she won only 45% pf the vote  Each regions is not equal is size of number of constituents.  They have no bearing on the overall result of the election are only included for administrative reason only.  Ukraine is not the USA is it n0ot state/regional based. Publishing false data brings wikipedia onto disrepute.

Ukr-Trident (talk) 12:26, 13 February 2010 (UTC)




 * I have reluctantly added a highest vote map. I think this is also misleading as it, like the previous map, hides the underlying vote belong to the other candidate.  It never the less shows the percentage of each region in relation to the total national vote.  Ukr-Trident (talk) 13:20, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

I think that the map showing the raions is better than the map showing the oblasts. If the map showing the oblasts showed who won the oblasts and what their precentage was then we could use it, but since it shows the percentage of national vote, it is more misleading than the raion map. --Tocino 19:17, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Also I think it's important to show to the reader that Yanukovich won some raions in Western Ukraine. --Tocino 19:22, 13 February 2010 (UTC)


 * You do not win regions. That is the whole thing.  It is not a a regional abased election Ukr-Trident (talk) 19:35, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Who said that it was? All the maps show is the breakdown of where each candidate is stronger than the other. The vote tally is bolded for Yanukovich in order to signify importance. --Tocino 19:43, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The map provides information that is false it presents 50% of Zarpattuia as having the same weight/color as Donetsk even though the later has seven times the number of constiuents. The election is NOT WON ON Districts/Regional vote. In the Regional based map there is no relationship between each region.

The map has nothing to do with election rules, it just breakdowns the differences between the regions and the candidates performances in them. There is only one country where regions decide elections and that is the USA. Don't presume that the reader is an idiot who once he sees the map he will think that Ukraine all of the sudden has a USA-style electoral college system. --Tocino, 22:04, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Tossers map The Map as published is false it does not relation to the election resuts. UKRAINE IS NOT A REGIONAL BASED ELECTION. Take a look at Zappartia. It shows it has being a stronger then it is electorate. Because you have based the results on the regional percentage not the national percentage. Why not show it is a percentage of each candidates vote. or is your aim to try and distort the facts? Ukr-Trident (talk) 20:09, 13 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm not deleting anything, you are the one who is deleting maps that are used across all language Wikipedia articles about this election. The maps showing the percentage of national vote are still here. You know we can host both types of maps without breaking Wikipedia's bandwidth. --Tocino 20:20, 13 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Your persisting in publishing false and misleading statistical information. IS this your aim to proved false data. IT IS NOT ABOUT BANDWIDTH IT IS ABOUT TRUTH IN STATISTICS. Yulia received the same number of votes in Donetks as she did in Zarpattia yet the colours are not the same? Why is that? Yanukovych also received much more votes in Donetsk yet he is present as having the same percentage in Kharkiv and  other regions.  It is a NATIONAL VOTE NOT A REGIONAL VOTE.  Each region has vastly different number of constituents why are you presenting then as being equal in weight with not relation to others regions.  You have artficialy increased Yulia representation by distorting the facts. Ukr-Trident (talk) 20:39, 13 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't understand why it is so difficult for you to accept that there are different ways to map the election and some people may want to know how each candidate performed in each district. This is nothing to get angry about. --Tocino 21:03, 13 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I ask the same question of you . THE MAIN DIFFERENCE BEING THAT MAPS SHOWING THE PERCENTAGE OF THE REGIONAL VOTE AS OPPOSED TO THE NATIONAL VOTE IS MISLEADING AND FALSE.  ITS ABOUT HONEST REPORTING.  YOU HAVE TAKEN IT TO UNILATERALLY DECIDE TO PROMOTE FALSE INFORMATION.  51% of 4% is not the same as 51% of 11% is it. So you have inflated the vote that has been allocated to the smaller regions giving a false and misleading i9ndication of the election results.  Unlike the USA election the Ukrainian Presidential election is a NATIONAL VOTE.  It is not determined by Regional/State outcomes.  It has nothing to do about design (Although I think Red is not the appropiate color to use to represent Tymoshenko - Again this is not the USA Election). I have added a disclaimer so that readers are aware of the statistical distortion you are promoting.  And I read it there are two contributed and one anonymous IP address (yours maybe) that is supporting the notion of publishing false data. Ukr-Trident (talk) 00:21, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Is it appropiate to use Russian language on an English site on a Map about Ukraine? Ukr-Trident (talk) 01:26, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Well it hapened before... Ideal would be if somebody made a "Latin letters"-version of the map (and posted that one on Wikipedia Commons). Unfortunatly I have not got the time to do so now... —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  10:47, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Mariah Yulia, for having uploaded more decent maps. You have proven to be a righteous person. I hope you have a good life, you and yours. By the way, if you ever corss the Pyrynees now we can hang out (lol). Only if you're less than 30 years old. eh eh. But really, thank you for the map. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.139.166.174 (talk) 11:30, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for adding the highest vote map in the infobox. I think the disclaimer is just OK, too (maybe just a little bit too wordy). Also, I don't understand why change the pink colour for yellow. The yellow word "yellow" is hardly visible and hurts my eyes a bit. Garik 11 (talk) 15:20, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

'''The Map based on the presentage of the regions should be removed as it is misleading and provides false information. (As outlined above) The higehst vote map as displayed is also misleading as it does not show the scale of support and masks the level of support below the highest vote. Although the yellow and blue model is better then the red and blue. The colors of Ukraine. 124.190.40.8 (talk) 12:11, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

"Tymoshenko withdrew her appeal on February 20 effectively conceding the presidential election"
The current lead reads "Tymoshenko withdrew her appeal on February 20 effectively conceding the presidential election". That last part looks more like a interpretation then a fact, as she still believes the elections where dishonest and that Yanukovych wasn’t elected President of Ukraine... I see that the NY Times source claimed that Yulia effectively conceding the presidential election. But this New Yorker interpretation of Ukrainian politics looks flawed to me. Hence I will remove it in 2 minutes. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  18:03, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Deleted criticism about the international observers
Why deleted criticism about the international observers? The argument that it should be deleted cause it was not given by a International observer looks Stalinist to me... —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  18:09, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

The lead and hello laziness
According to Wikipedia standards "The lead serves both as an introduction to the article and as a summary of the important aspects of the subject of the article". But lately all the last news is only placed by editors in the lead of this article and not in the rest of the article... It is not so hard to copy-and-paste it down below in the article... as I just did... Please do this yourself in future... —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  18:24, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

My latest delete
I moved this info I deleted to Yulia Tymoshenko's article. The article itself does not look reliable as it hardly backs up it's claims and if it does it does with an example (Mr Fischer, retired politician, is suppose to represent "the Western political elite") that is not very strong. Other articles by the author I did not get the point at all... —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  21:17, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Yanukovych refused to participate in Shuster Live on December 18, 2009
I just removed from Savik_Shuster:

Although Yanukovych refused to participate in the Shuster Live'' show arranged specifically for the three main candidates in Ukraine's 5th presidential elections on December 18, 2009, he maintained a clear lead in the opinion polls ahead of Yulia Tymoshenko. ''

because it has nothing to do with Shuster, let alone his political views. But it might be useful in a section in this article called Ukrainian presidential election, 2010 (that most likely never will be written...; but still it seemed a wast to permanently delete from Wikipedia the above Shuster Live information). —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  23:30, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Ukrainian presidential election, 2010. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090218135714/http://www.kyivpost.com:80/blogs/bloggers/tarasgkuzio to http://www.kyivpost.com/blogs/bloggers/tarasgkuzio

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 03:45, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
 * ✔️ Confirmed as correct. Thanks, Cyberbot II. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 04:12, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Ukrainian presidential election, 2010. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110605093504/http://www.kyivpost.com/blogs/bloggers/tarasgkuzio/5121 to http://www.kyivpost.com/blogs/bloggers/tarasgkuzio/5121

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 07:20, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * ✔️ All archived captures are 404s. Changed to active version of article. Thanks, Cyberbot II. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 09:27, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Electoral maps section...
Is there any reason why the maps in the "Electoral maps" don't show the percentage of each region's vote that the candidate got, but instead show the percentage of each candidate's total national vote that he or she got from each region?...

No offense intended to whoever made these maps, but showing the percentage in the way that its shown here frankly strikes me as quite convoluted and confusing.

And it also can be rather misleading, as a region with a larger population will (all else being equal) have more total votes for each candidate, and thus all candidates will have a higher percentage of their votes coming from said region, and vice-versa. And when someone looks at the map and sees a high percentage for a certain region, it's not clear if this is reflecting the candidate being especially popular there, or simply the region's higher population.

So I would suggest that these maps be replaced with more traditional color-shaded electoral maps showing each candidate's vote percentage WITHIN EACH REGION. See for example the maps section of the 2020 US Pres election, where there are shaded with each candidate's percentage by state and by county: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_presidential_election#Maps

-2003:CA:871C:DE7:993F:AD73:CB41:1040 (talk) 15:29, 2 February 2023 (UTC)