Talk:Putinland

Original research in the article
The article as written by Martintg has a major problem. It is mostly original research on his part, which includes:


 * 1) The documentary article and the Polish article only mention Putinland in their title. According to Martintg, as on eSStonia, this is not valid for inclusion into an article, and hence they have been removed.
 * 2) The lead states that it came into being after the death of Litvinenko. He did die until November 2006. Both of the remaining two sources pre-date his death.
 * 3) I've removed "who exposed the brutality of the Kremlin's war in Chechnya" as it is a word for word copy of the source.
 * 4) The Edward Lucas article mentions the term in the title only. The source provided is a subscription service, so Martintg needs to provide a direct quotation from the text of the article, otherwise the entire Lucas section needs to be removed as per the other two sources.
 * 5) The Edward Lucas reference is not a reliable source for information.
 * 6) The assertion "The term is intended to portray Russia as a corrupt and murderous regime where the line between the security forces and organised crime is blurred, with particular reference to FSB involvement in the Russian apartment bombings and the assassinations of prominent critics." is POV original research on the part of Martintg by the looks of it. Even if it can be sourced, its still POV, due to FSB involvement only being alleged in a number of conspiracy theory by different kooks.
 * 7) Then we have have it appeared after the murder of Politkovskaya. This needs a citation, otherwise that too is original research, because the only source left which actually references Putinland in the article is a direct quotation to Politkovskaya herself, which to point out the bleeding obvious, she isn't able to write from the grave, or is she?

--Russavia Dialogue 20:43, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The issues have been raised on this talk page, but Martin doesn't want to discuss? The mere fact of the documentary being called that, and the name being provided in the article on the documentary, is not evidence of the existence of "Putinland" in the documentary itself. It is WP:OR on Martin's part to suggest as such. Anyone is free to remove that information so long as Martin doesn't discuss on the talk page. --Russavia Dialogue 22:25, 28 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I have limited wiki time, I'll get around to addressing you points here on talk later today. Martintg (talk) 22:38, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Falsification of sources
Why was this reinserted into the article with the comment "A 2 minute Google search will reveal a copy of the article on Lucus' blog". Why is the article sourced to europeanvoice.com? Does Martintg have access to the europeanvoice.com website? Or is it simply being referenced as a result of a google search? And he has now found the article on the blog. There are some problems here. Edward Lucas' blog is not a reliable source for information, and there is no guarantee that the article on europeanvoice.com is the same as on his personal blog. This appears to be a case of using sources which an editor has not even cited, and is a breach of WP:V. --Russavia Dialogue 00:12, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Edward Lucas regularly publishes a duplicate copy of what he writes on his blog. This is identical to this. Martintg (talk) 01:36, 31 January 2009 (UTC)