Talk:Roman Protasevich

Addition

 * With English subtitles: Протасевич на брифинге МИД: о "пытках", Путило, Тихановской. Грязно с той стороны (14 June 2021) Belarus-1.

On what basis it was deleted without explanation? --DarDar (talk) 08:34, 24 June 2021 (UTC)


 * DarDar, I think your contribution is useful, as Protasevich's statements are quite important. The fact that he is cooperating that the Belarusian authorities, even if the Western media see this as a forced action, deserves to be included in the article. For example, in this interview (at 1:22:11) Protasevich states that he is the fighter "Kim", who was drafted into the Azov Battalion. He recognizes himself in the photos, in which he is armed and in the Azov uniform, and says "we were just going to the shooting range" and "I never fought" (if he was forced to confess, why did he not confess to having fought?). As for me, you can restore that source, perhaps by specifying what Protasevich states in the interview.--Mhorg (talk) 13:07, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I haven’t seen the video but if it’s the forced confession of a living person who secondary sources say has likely been tortured and remains under control of his torturers, it should not be presented. It is against our guidelines to conduct speculative WP:original research based on primary sources as Mhorg is doing here, and it is not our job to encourage readers to do so. This doesn’t sound like anything recommended for inclusion by wp:LINK or wp:EXT.
 * And a wp:BLP should not feature abusive or degrading material, or anything else controversial. —Michael Z. 14:01, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
 * It is an original research to report what he said in an interview? I don't think OR works in this way. Also, from Non-English-language sites:"Webpages in English are highly preferred.", preferred, but it is not a must. There are many users who can translate from Russian, that can verify what is said in the interview (otherwise it is not clear why, for example, Kommersant was defined as an RSP and used everywhere). And no, RSs didn't say that he was tortured. BBC said that "Human rights and opposition campaigners say he was tortured." and the BBC specifies this: "A close-up of Mr Protasevich showed marks on his wrists, possibly from handcuffs". And the "fact" that they were "forced" confessions always remains a speculation and not a fact. To be clear, are you going to remove any statements (which you obviously don't like) by Protasevich from here until when he will be released?--Mhorg (talk) 14:28, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) Dear Mhorg, thanks for the answer! You are completely correct in your advice. Could you restore this source, specifying that Protasevich reports this information to correspondents of various media invited to the Foreign Ministry briefing. I'm afraid my English is not good enough for editing here. --DarDar (talk) 14:49, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
 * 2) Dear Michael Z, if you see this video and read the English translation, you may change your mind. --DarDar (talk) 14:49, 24 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Should not be included: coerced confessions are not a good external links material; it's basic human decency to avoid such links. --K.e.coffman (talk) 16:01, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
 * There are also such expert assessments of Protasevich's interview:
 * Kirill Koktysh, Associate Professor, Department of Political Theory, MGIMO University: Коктыш: признания Протасевича ― судьбоносные для Союзного государства. (04.06.2021) Koktysh: Protasevich's confessions are fateful for the Union State.
 * Protasevich impressed the Polish Radio expert Pavel Usov with his sincerity: В Польше шокированы тем, как Протасевич поломал Западу всю игру (15.06.2021) Poland is shocked how Protasevich broke the whole game for the West.
 * Sorry for the machine translation of article titles and expert status. --DarDar (talk) 19:58, 24 June 2021 (UTC)


 * No, linking to a YouTube video with forced confession is an obvious BLP violation. I am surprised that someone even seriously suggested it. Whatever he has to say now is basically something Lukashenko wants him to say. Yes, it might be cited, but only in a context provided by strong secondary RS (e.g. ). And certainly no linking of such videos. My very best wishes (talk) 02:46, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Бездоказательные утверждения о "принудительных признаниях и плохом состоянии его здоровья" Протасевич опроверг. Кто свободно владеет русским языком — может прочитать в русскоязычных источниках, что его искренность отмечают разные эксперты. --DarDar (talk) 07:45, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Unsubstantiated allegations about the alleged "forced confessions and the poor state of his health" Protasevich denied. Those who are fluent in Russian can read in Russian-language sources that his sincerity is noted by various experts. --DarDar (talk) 07:45, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * "My very best wishes", that statement from Amnesty is from 4 June, it is related to the first interview: "He was clearly on the edge of breaking down, in tears and with visible wounds on his wrists, as he was forced to incriminate himself and praise his captors.". The wounds on his wrists has been already "debunked" by BBC. However, in the recent interview, the third, that was reported by user DarDar above, Protasevich is literally laughing. Whether they are forced interviews remains all speculation. History is full of people who, once arrested, collaborate with the authorities, there are thousands of cases even in the Western world. This is not to say that I am 100% sure that they are sincere statements, I am saying that, from the source you are providing, it is not possible to verify that the statements have been forcibly extracted. These are just speculations.
 * DarDar, many users here speak Russian, they just don't believe a word of what Protasevich says.--Mhorg (talk) 07:59, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Вторичный источник: . --DarDar (talk) 08:35, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I realize that you guys are talking about this edit, i.e. one that appears in the beginning of this thread. I think such edits, if repeated, can result in a block or other sanctions. Just saying. Now, if you are suggesting something else, you should say what exactly new text you suggest. My very best wishes (talk) 14:46, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Re to this edit - since you both know Russian, here is an excellent source (especially the video). It describes the wide-spread phenomenon of "Kneeling" when people criticized someone like Kadyrov, Lukashenko, etc., but then publicly apologize to them and denounce themselves after being threatened or captured. It is exactly what had happen here. ( A young anarchist recites a memorized text on camera after being tortured by the FSB. ...Ramzan Akhmatovich's offenders bring him deep and sincere apologies. The iconic YouTuber, face down on the floor, makes a confession. One by one, Russian citizens apologize for promoting rumors. Persons involved in the "palace case" publicly promise never to resist the Russian Guard. The captured participants of the Belarusian protests delight the eyes and ears of their torturers. and so on.) My very best wishes (talk) 00:17, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Of course he is under duress and such statements should not be treated as if he is saying this by his own accord. I think RS already mention this. And I think it is common sense. One does not become an enemy of Lukashenko and then magically decide to become the opposite after being captured by Belarusian authorities by his own choice, who have been widely documented in using torture, threats and other abuses. Mellk (talk) 04:36, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
 * "It describes the wide-spread phenomenon of "Kneeling" [...] It is exactly what had happen here." Just a speculation without any proof in a video of 1000 views. "One does not become an enemy of Lukashenko and then magically decide to become the opposite" It is not as you say, I invite you to take a look to the videos of DarDar, Protasevich specifies that collaborating with the authorities does not make him a political supporter of Lukashenko.--Mhorg (talk) 08:33, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Well in these broadcasted interviews he made positive comments about Lukashenko and other comments the authorities would have liked to hear and put on TV (of course declaring his full support for Lukashenko and pledging allegiance to him would make it a bit more obvious this act), so indeed he went from anti-Lukashenko to praising him after being captured by the government. Of course how he acts here determines his fate. Most importantly, RS treat this as under duress, and this is what matters. Mellk (talk) 09:24, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
 * "he went from anti-Lukashenko to praising him after being captured by the government" No, he only said that he acknowledged that Lukashenko had the strength to resist the riots of 2020. Furthermore, I understand that there is great interest in showing this case as a particular issue of the "regimes" of Eastern Europe, but throughout the Western world, as I have already said, there are "collaborators of justice" (I don't know if is the right translation in English). In Italy these dynamics are evident with those who dissociate themselves from the mafia when they are arrested (or before being arrested). The greater the collaboration, the more the penalty is alleviated. (in any trial, even if not connected with organized crime, greater collaboration with the authorities corresponds to an alleviation of the sentence) However, the context of those statements is specified in the RS, so I don't see why all this need to censor Protasevich's statements.--Mhorg (talk) 09:38, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, it is exactly the opposite. This is more like Mafia bosses are making fun of their victims. Neither Protasevich nor any other people in the ref above were members of Mafia or other criminal organizations, or were guilty of anything at all except expressing their very much reasonable views. On the other hand, Lukashenko and his allies have been described as bosses of their Mafia states. Accordingly, the security forces they are using are not police, but criminals. My very best wishes (talk) 17:05, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Include I agree that the revert wasn't justified by any know provision of any WP:PAG (including WP:EXT). I also strongly disagree with  that WP:BLP would be breached upon inclusion; except of the video's intro there is nothing wrong with it (I don't dispute whether it was done under duress or not however), but I stand by readers side - I would prefer to let them to actually judge how everything did it  happen at the time; would be best to have a direct link to a Russian-spoken side of the state-run channel so it's evident; it would perfectly strike a WP:BALANCE between viewpoints. My best.  AXO NOV  (talk) ⚑ 16:54, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Spelling
- «‎Aftermath: Simplify a bit» - «Undid revision 1054921229 by 82.132.213.133 talk) I think there is no problem; take it to the talk page» - ''«Undid revision 1054699256 by Alexander Davronov talk) way too many basic language errors. Put it on the talk page if you want a competent English speaker to do something with it»''
 * You care to explain what was the problem with English out there?

AXO NOV (talk) ⚑ 13:43, 13 November 2021 (UTC)


 * it’s not the spelling but the words just didn’t make any sense in English. I have attempted to make it more understandable. Andrewgprout (talk) 20:19, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Years active - didn't he renounce his activism?
Shouldn't the infobox say (2011-2021)? Thanks CoryGlee (talk) 12:46, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Sofia Sapega
I think the text about Sofia Sapega can be split to a new article Sofia Sapega (currently a redirect) with additional text from ru:Сапега, Софья Андреевна. It seems there has been sufficient coverage of her to warrant a separate article (biography). If this is a good idea, then I can start working on this. Mellk (talk) 09:10, 8 June 2023 (UTC)


 * I am all for it and I support your idea totally! Count on me for any help if you require any! Thank you much for improving the article. Big hugs. CoryGlee (talk) 09:40, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I think that only Protasevich is relevant, while one section is fine for Sapega. Mhorg (talk) 09:53, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
 * There is enough independent coverage of her to the point it would satisfy WP:GNG. Mellk (talk) 11:47, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I have split it and added some information. I will try to add more information later. Mellk (talk) 11:24, 9 June 2023 (UTC)