Talk:Petro Poroshenko/Archives/2014

Oversimplification
I think the article now is an oversimplification. First of all, he is not a relative of the president. They are godfathers of each other's children. Is this called "fellow-sponsors" in English? While this may mean a no less than a direct relation for some people, "relative" is simply incorrect. Regarding the sponsorship of OR, he certainly helped, but "Chief sponsor" is an oversimplification. The matter of sponsors is very much cloudy still but putting it this way looks misleading in any case as it creates an impression of the OR being a paid event which it certainly wasn't. It was a genuine people's resolve to overturn an election fraud and without such a resolve any money would not have mattered much. In my opinion his main role in helping the OR was the creation and support of his own TV channel that provided the revolution with the information support and helped disheartened people to get a non-censored info. This was a brave and nobel goal of his and this needs reflected in the article.

Receiving "the high office in the government in recompense" is a POV. I could see how one may think so, but still it is not neutral. "Chocolate king" and "corruption allegations" are in order and I have no objections to these.

I am not sure when I will have time to write for this article, but I hope these thoughts would be helpful for others who decide to take this upon themselves before I get to it. --Irpen 09:00, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I fully agree with the objections of Irpen. Going to attach the NPOV template if the article will not be rewritten in days. AlexPU 09:13, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
 * General POV tag is excessive. I will be glad to write the article if no one else gets to it once I am done with a mess of two Andriys around here. I just marked a questionable sentence as disputed and watered down the text a little bit. More localized tags are better to use when possible. The in the end of the sentence simply links to talk were all issues are already raised adequately --Irpen 09:38, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Anders Aslund remarks placement
This was in an article about the great influence President Viktor Yanukovych wielded on big business in UA. It does not even mention PP's political office/s. It surely does not belong under his being an MP. And it was long before VY even left, therefore long B4 PP declared candidacy for president. This is the most applicable of current headings. Otherwise it could have its own heading in the general location where the fellow editor placed it, as he noted chronologically. Paavo273 (talk) 20:08, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I separated the praise from the business section, which it has nothing to do with, and revised the section title so it accurately reflects the content.Haberstr (talk) 10:07, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 'Can't see how a discussion of the business environment in UA including as applied to PP's chocolate empire "has nothing to do with" business. A reading of Aslund's published analysis may help clarify.  The so-called "praise" is incidental = part of the highly qualified article author's analaysis. Paavo273 (talk) 08:32, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Official picture
Nice American flag... This is the President of Ukraine--24.203.108.54 (talk) 18:38, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Ukrainian governments refuses to release their images on a free licence, the US government does so the picture was taken at an event organised by the US government and its a much better picture than all his other pictures..--Stemoc (talk) 02:00, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

I think semi-protection should be needed
There was already some pretty amuising trolling ("selling DVDs banned by the KGB"), might be followe by ugly attacks due to the current situation in Ukraine. --Niemti (talk) 13:37, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Klitschko, Poroshenko, Firtash and Defamation?
I am not sure that the information below (currently to be found in Petro_Poroshenko) belongs in this Wikipedia article:

''Klitschko's decision to abandon the presidential ambitions for Poroshenko was welcomed by the former head of the Yanukovych administration Sergei Liovochkin. The internet publication Ukrayinska Pravda, referring to the Austrian press, reported that Poroshenko and Klitschko formed their union on request by Ukrainian billionaire Dmitry Firtash, who is facing bribery charges in the U.S. Firtash publicly confirmed that he supports Poroshenko in the presidential election.''

Although I have great respect for Ukrayinska Pravda in general Ukrayinska Pravda, referring to the Austrian press does seem like poorly sourced to me. Thus the whole above section should be removed by the WP:BLPREMOVE-rule. + the whole above section looks to me to as an attempt to discredit Klitschko and Poroshenko given Firtash rumoured links with former Ukrainian president Yanukovich (not mentioned in that article because the were rumours) and the explicit mentioning that Firtash is facing bribery charges in the U.S.'(by the way, he is thus not even trailed). —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  19:21, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

The text in question
On 29 May the Central Election Commission of Ukraine announced that Poroshenko had won the 25 May presidential election, with 54.7% of the votes.

Klitschko's decision to abandon the presidential ambitions for Poroshenko was welcomed by the former head of the Yanukovych administration Sergei Liovochkin. The internet publication Ukrayinska Pravda, referring to the Austrian press, reported that Poroshenko and Klitschko formed their union on request by Ukrainian billionaire Dmitry Firtash, who is facing bribery charges in the U.S. Firtash publicly confirmed that he supports Poroshenko in the presidential election.

US State Department cables
Ukraine President Once Agent for U.S. State Department

Poroshinko is mentioned in two diplomatic messages, in which he is referred to as "Our Ukraine (OU) insider". The authenticity of the State Department cables at Wikileaks is not disputed, and reliable sources regularly use them. The material from the article I gave a link to definitely needs to go into this Wikipedia article. I think just how to do that should be discussed here first, so we don't get into edit wars. The article gives links to the cables. As mentioned in the first cable, Poroshenko gave the US ambassador insider information about Ukrainian political matters, so there can be no question that he was acting as an agent for the US government. This is noteworthy. – Herzen (talk) 20:16, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Give me a break.... Speaking to a US ambassador insider does not automaticly make you an "an agent for the US government". And the source you have given is clearly not WP:RS (it seems to me it is run by people who used to work for the The Jerry Springer Show who are to dumb to see that RT has become a propaganda website/TV channel). —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  17:22, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

I am not against the use of the Wikileaks cables... This has been done already (in this article). —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  17:32, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I removed the anti-Semitic garbage.
First, your only source is gossip either directly or repeated by rather poor "news sources". Gossip is not a reliable source.

Second, it is clear that his religion is not Jewish.

Third, this is a heavily anti-Semitic. I know it has gone through several iterations, but I am still surprised to see it here. Trying to "out" a Jew who is obviously, vocally and visibly Christian is one of the most bigoted things you could possibly do. What are you trying to do? Prove the world-wide Jewish conspiracy?

This was anti-Semitic garbage. Hilltrot (talk) 11:17, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I forgot to sign. There is one more thing I needed to add. There is an interesting parallel with Obama. There are several enemies of Obama in in the U.S. who claim that Obama is a secret Muslim and that he was also gay married. Their obviously fictional story continues and claims that Obama had his husband murdered by the CIA.

Now I can show you the articles published in the U.S. and I can also list "respected" news in the U.S. repeating the nonsense in order to discredit it. However, that doesn't make it any more true. It's an obvious piece of fiction. Now if you go to the Obama Wikipedia page, you don't see this piece of fiction repeated on the webpage.

Repeating salacious and libelous things about a living person is against Wikipedia policy. It's respect for other living human beings not to do this. This respect should not just be paid to Obama, but also to Poroshenko and everyone else.Hilltrot (talk) 11:28, 18 June 2014 (UTC) Grammar edit.Hilltrot (talk) 11:30, 18 June 2014 (UTC)


 * I agree that it is anti-Semitic garbage but the urban legend that Poroshenko's father was a Jew named Valtzman says something about his image in Ukraine among a group of Ukrainians (and unfortunately also about Ukraine since most mayor political leaders have been accused of being Jewish or benefit from Jewish financial support...). Hence I today moved the the info to the image section. —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  17:29, 26 June 2014 (UTC)


 * I will agree to it being moved to a separate page on anti-Semitism in the Ukraine. It would be inappropriate to use such comments even if you explicitly call them anti-Semitic slander within this article. There are some in the "far-right" of the U.S. who consider Obama to be homosexual gay-married Muslim born in Kenya despite all the facts to the contrary.  This is about 5-10% of the U.S. that believes this or parts of this.  There are deeply held racist viewpoints which drive this primarily in the South, but also the North, Midwest, and West.  It's not in his Wikipedia article for a reason - giving any academic notice to it, brings credence to it.  You already say that these accusations are made against many politicians in the Ukraine.  This is what is called the "Jewish Conspiracy".  The anti-Semites would like nothing more than to reference Wikipedia articles listing the members of the "Jewish conspiracy."


 * Name-calling should not be included in a Wikipedia Biography Article. (Discussions are rarely read in comparison.) Imagine this:  I write an Wikipedia article listing you Yulia, your basic biographical information and under Image is written "A newspaper article in the Sun Times alleges Yulia is a child-molester.  Yulia denies this."   It doesn't matter if it is bullshit I paid to get published in an Indian newspaper.  Everyone will be thinking this Yulia might be a child-molester. Hmm, there must be some reason this was published in the Wikipedia article.  There must be some truth to it.  Those who don't like you or simply like to spread gossip will be latching on and sending this to everyone they know.  Soon, it starts to affect your personal life.


 * So, now it HAS to be in the Yulia Wikipedia article because it is affecting your life and your image . . . We can't take it out now . . . NO!


 * Obvious and absurd slander should never be included in a Biography article. Even if there are people who might believe it and even if it might personally or politically affect the person.


 * There are plenty of bigoted websites where one can read the latest slander. It should not be in a Wikipedia article.Hilltrot (talk) 07:06, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

You have some solid arguments. You would make a fine public speaker. I just moved the "Poro is a jew" stuff to Racism and discrimination in Ukraine. Good idea (of you) to put it there. —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  14:06, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Petro Poroshenko
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Petro Poroshenko's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "PoroWP": From National Alliance of freedom and Ukrainian patriotism "OFFENSIVE": Poroshenko goes to work, Ukrayinska Pravda (6 June 2014) From Petro Poroshenko Bloc: Poroshenko goes to work, Ukrayinska Pravda (6 June 2014) 

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:05, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
 * this problem today! —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  22:43, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

What page on Wikipedia documents the presidential administration of Poroshenko?
What page on Wikipedia documents the presidential administration of Poroshenko? I can't seem to find it, anywhere, neither the Government of Ukraine nor Petro Poroshenko seem to be the place for the more detailed history of Acts, actions and History of the Ukrainian president during this period of time.

In many of the large democracies of the developed world, Wikipedia has articles on the government of the country, the person (BLP, as well as on the particular administration of the current head of the government. E.g., Cameron ministry for the current UK head of government, and Presidency of Barack Obama for the US head of the executive branch of the US Federal government.

Does anything like this exist on Wikipedia for the Poroshenko presidential administration? Should it? N2e (talk) 16:15, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Because WikiProject Ukraine has not many active members; pages like Presidency of Petro Poroshenko do not get written. There are so few of us that even the section Petro_Poroshenko is in danger of getting outdated... Instead on scattering the few manpower WikiProject Ukraine has I think we better focus on keeping Petro_Poroshenko in good shape then on creating Presidency of Petro Poroshenko. Besides there is also no Wikipidia article about the Presidency of George H. W. Bush (specificly)... —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  19:44, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I'd agree with your take, . Current events are dragging everyone in and I'm having trouble keeping POV-ers taking advantage of the neglect of fundamental historical and cultural articles and trying to rewrite history. Considering that Poroshenko has only just assumed office, it's better to focus on keeping on top of one article. At this juncture in time, the more articles started, the more opportunities for propagandists and interest groups to take over the content. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 06:30, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

I have no problem with your take on my question. I'm agnostic to which way it is answered. In fact, to the extent the consensus holds, I think that answers my question: Wikipedia should simply cover the Presidential administration of P. Poroshenko in the mainline BLP article about him, perhaps in a section of the article. Let's see if others have input, but if that outcome holds, it's quite fine by me. N2e (talk) 03:18, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks Iryna Harpy. I am afraid I am SuperWikibonked right now and in danger of becoming a WP:BATTLEGROUNDER so WikiProject Ukraine has to make things happen without me for a while. —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  22:48, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm so sorry to hear that, ... but I can empathise only too well. Have a good break, but please make it short: we need you! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:44, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

The assets of Petro Oleksijowytsch Poroshenko, allegedly in a value of 1.6 billion US dollars, is clearly overestimated. A couple of weeks, he could afford an offered publication in the topic  not.Irpen2 (talk) 15:55, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Removed allegations
Among the extreme right, it is taken for granted that Poroshenko is Jewish and is actually named Walzman (they believe Poroshenko senior adopted his wife's Yevgenya's last name although there is no proof of this name change). In early 2014 Russian television station NTV aired a 30-minute film titled "The Chocolate Bunny" which includes claims that Poroshenko financed the sharpshooters responsible for the deaths of almost 100 people during Euromaidan, that Poroshenko built his chocolate empire through the criminal acquisition of former Soviet companies, and that his pralines contain the carcinogenic organic compound benzopyrene. The programme also alleged that Poroshenko's father is Jewish and had been murdered, and that the candidate had bought out Vitali Klitschko in order to eliminate a potential competitor, was responsible for radicalizing Euromaidan and was tapping the help of right-wing nationalists in order to make the leap to the country's highest elected office. --Niemti (talk) 21:56, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

1 Ukraine Election: The Chocolate King Rises, Spiegel Online (22 May 2014)
 * Why was the above information removed? They are not allegations but facts published by a WP:RS (Der Spiegel, one of the most respected magazines in Germany).

I reintroduced the |Walzman name change myth and |NTV documentary into the article; although in a more NPOV-way then before (that was my intention and is seen as such I hope). —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  15:26, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
 * (Among others) this edit proofs that information about the Walzman name change myth belongs in this Wikipedia article... Before somebody permanently engraves this lie into the article...
 * The NTV documentary tells something about Poroshenko's Cultural and political image in Russia, something that is very relevant right now (given the current tensions between Ukraine and Russia). —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  15:07, 2 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Reported in The Jewish Daily Forward: "According to the popular Russian television channel Russia-1, Poroshenko’s father was a Jew named Alexei Valtsman from the Odessa region who in 1956 took on the last name of his wife, Yevgenya Poroshenko." —Morning star (talk) 16:56, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

These days Russian sources about Ukraine and Ukrainians are not reliable + election campaigns in Ukraine tend to trigger a rise in antisemitic propaganda in which various political leaders are accused of being Jewish or benefit from Jewish financial support; I suspect the The Jewish Daily Forward is not aware of both these phenomenons and just reprinted an urban legend. Besides till Poroshenko says he is Jewish or his father is Jewish he should not be considered a Jew. —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  17:32, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

What about the other allegations that Niemti mentioned (financing the sharpshooters)? If they were reported by a trustworthy news source, perhaps they should be moved out of the footnotes and into the main body of the article with the other controversial issues? -Lciaccio (talk) 22:10, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

I just removed it here. It was only a program on Russian state-controlled TV. --Niemti (talk) 09:11, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

This isn't about whether the original rumors were true, but whether the controvery is notable. I see that it was reported in Spiegel, did it recieve attention elsewhere? I'm going to flesh out the description of the accusations based on the Spiegel article, but if the rumors recieved a lot of media coverage they may warrant more prominent placement. Does anyone have a link to the Wikipedia guidelines for footnotes vs. main text? -Lciaccio (talk) 13:28, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Spiegel does not make allegations that Poroshenko financed the sharpshooters responsible, it only reported that a Russian TV channel broadcasted a documentary that claimed Poroshenko financed the sharpshooters. This was done by the NTV channel that presented the protest of Italian students, dissatisfied with their government, as a pro-Russian manifestation. In other words this NTV channel is not a reliable source... And I believe we should not make Wikipedia a vehicle to spread the lies by some sick people who pretend to be "journalists" (or sick extreme right "Walzman name changers"). It is the responsibility of all contributors to ensure that material posted on Wikipedia is not defamatory. —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  13:50, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I never said it did. Once again, we are discussing whether the rumors were notable, not whether they were true.  Please read my comments more carefully before responding.


 * Additionally, please review the notability guidelines. It is not up to you to decide whether an article is "spreading sick lies."  We are here to make an objective decision whether the rumors are important enough in his public image to warrant inclusion in an encylopedia entry.  You are substituting your personal opinion for what should be included for Wikipedia policy on the matter.  That is not allowed.


 * It may assist you to review how other articles report unfounded rumors that nonetheless were a big part of a person's public image, such as the rumor that Obama was a Muslim -Lciaccio (talk) 17:39, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=937 < seriously? Such 'references' should be removed on sight. --TRIGGERWARNING (talk) 13:29, 15 June 2014 (UTC)