Talk:Anti-Corruption Action Center

Latest development for real?
"President Vladimir Zelensky has harmed Ukraine’s hopes of joining the EU by signing an amendment that reduced financial oversight of politicians, anti-corruption activists in Kiev said on Monday. The measure “practically kills” efforts to combat money-laundering, the head of the Anti-Corruption Action Centre (AntAC) claimed. The body is funded by the US government and EU member states and elites in Kiev have long been hostile to its work, despite their dependence on Western funding and support."

If that is for real then 10 years of this NGO were for nothing - expense, expense no recompense. 2001:8003:A070:7F00:6867:E8EA:8B87:2B31 (talk) 01:36, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:NOTFORUM. This is not an article to list all of AntAC's public statements. You could help improve the quality of the article corruption in Ukraine in terms of overall balance, due weight to different sources, historical developments, and so on, and if you have a source for this statement, then it might make sense over there. Boud (talk) 02:55, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

Encyclopedia versus chronicle
People searching for encyclopedic information about this organisation should not be expected to read through its full chronology (it's too early for wikt:history - that will be studied in a decade or so). I tried to explain this in. The questions of knowledge for a topic like this are not just "when?" but all of "which/what/when/where/how/why/who?" A reader wanting to know who is running this (ordinary Ukrainian citizens? CIA? KGB?) should be able to find that info easily. Most countries have corruption, and the stronger the corruption is embedded in the elite structures, the more like that anti-corruption NGOs will be repressed: what repression has occurred (legal cases? imprisonment? assassination?). And how does AntAC claim to act against corruption, or what do independent sources say about how AntAC takes actions against corruption?

The particular divisions I suggested may not be the best, but putting everything into a chronology seems to me to make it hard to find key info.

As for the lead, the advantage of having sections that more or less try to follow which/what/when/where/how/why/who is that a summary can then be made, based on the content and structure - rather than highlighting an individual (somewhat provocative, using a four-letter swearword) protest. Based on the amount of content, my impression is that the sources favour the Lutsenko/AntAC evolving relationship and the Trump-Ukraine scandal are one of the issues for which AntAC is best known. Though I would probably wait for e.g. in-depth analyses of the organisation by an independent reliable source for an overall view of AntAC. Boud (talk) 23:02, 6 March 2023 (UTC)