Talk:Yulia Tymoshenko/Archive 1

Julia
Her name is a cyrillic variant on Julia. It doesn't matter the 'j' is pronounced as a 'y' in some languages - in even more languages it's still spelled with a 'j' and still pronounced as a 'y'. With the danger that the extremely uncultivated chauvinistic people in the US and the UK might get terminally confused, it still might be advisable to change the spelling back, as leaving it with this ridiculous 'y' ultimately causes even more confusion.


 * What? You're a jerk — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jros83 (talk • contribs) 22:42, 11 October 2011 (UTC)


 * English press calles her "Yulia Tymoshenko", so per WP:COMMONNAME it is her name also here on wikipedia. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  13:57, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * See also WP:RUS. 139.116.254.28 (talk) 03:35, 13 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.116.254.28 (talk) 03:34, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

That should be WP:UKR since she is Ukrainian and Ukrainian is not a Russian dialect.... —  Mariah-Yulia  •  Talk to me!  11:29, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, Julia = Yulia like Yuliy Tsezar = Julius Caesar.UeArtemis (talk) 15:35, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Yulia
Family of Yulia Tymoshenko uses the Y version throughout, she is usually called that nowadays, and this article really does need to be standardised: there are about 9 "Julia"s among many more "Yulia"s. Rothorpe (talk) 00:55, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Comment by 64.231.221.19
Tigry, do you have any credible sources to back up your added info on Tymoshenko? From what I can see it appears that what you added is highly biased and should be conformed to a NPOV or confirmed by outside sources. 64.231.221.19 (talk) 06:46, 27 December 2004 (UTC)

I have several sources from Russian and Ukrainian independent media, I indicate in this article that some of this info is only alleged - but not denied by any official sources, my sources can be provided if necessary -  Tigry 21:15, 27 December 2004 (UTC)

Russia-Ukraine gas dispute
Should the Russia-Ukraine gas dispute be mentioned in this article? Yulia Timoshenko is mentioned in the Russia-Ukraine gas dispute article in wikipedia. Mariah-Yulia 05:18, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Location of page
The English language part of her website calls her Yulia Timoshenko. The BBC News website has been using the spelling Yulia Tymoshenko. Any ideas on where to put the page - this looks likely to be a case of "most common spelling in English media" overriding standard transliteration rules. Timrollpickering 19:47, 25 January 2005 (UTC)


 * On the English news page of her site I see only Tymoshenko, except for one example of boilerplate text reading Timoshenko. Yulia and Yuliya get about equal time.  It looks like they're casually transliterating from Ukrainian, so I wouldn't consider the site's usage authoritative.  Yuliya Tymoshenko is probably the best English transcription of the name.  Timoshenko would reflect Russian spelling.  If you want to explore other possibilities, look at the table in Romanization of Ukrainian.  &mdash;Michael Z. 20:08, 25 January 2005 (UTC)


 * I run a search on Google. In general, three spellings are fairly common: 'Yulia Tymoshenko' gets 22,000 hits, 'Yuliya Tymoshenko' 17,600 and 'Yulia Timoshenko' 12,000. On Google News, however, 'Yulia Tymoshenko' is far more common than the other two, with 1,700 articles on Google News, 'Yulia Timoshenko' gets about 170 and 'Yuliya Tymoshenko' gets 57. This may indicate that English-language media have mostly accepted 'Yulia Tymoshenko' spelling by now. Andris 23:46, 26 January 2005 (UTC)


 * I agree with Michael, especially regarding the first (given) name, which is nothing but Yuliya. Again, Michael is right talking of non-authoritative usage on her site. Remember, people: Ukraine is unfortunately not a fluent-English-speaking country (unlike Poland, India or any EC member). There is no much proper translators and no English conventional names/usages. AlexPU 14:13, 29 January 2005 (UTC)


 * There is no much proper translators and no English conventional names/usages - there are official english name translation for all persons who have their international passport (passport to be used outside of country borders) in addition to internal. There are rules for translation of ukranian names to english to be used in passports at Постанова КМУ вiд 24.03.2004 № 380 but it's still possible that alternative spellings issued as law allow this. TAG 13:00, 10 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Юлия is Slavic form of "Julia".

"Ю" - "Yu", "л" - "l", "і" - "i", "я" - "ya", but also я is "ia". For example, Estonia - Естонія. So You can write "ія" as "ia" or "iya".UeArtemis (talk) 15:49, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Grigyan/Telegina
In an interview, she has said that her father was Latvian, rather than Armenian. The interview is at in Russian, with the relevant excerpt translated in a newsgroup post. This sounds fairly plausible, as Grigyan could be Ukrainization of the Latvian family name Grigjanis/Grigjane. And "foreign interventionism" accusation in the article sounds both xenophobic and silly, so I propose to delete that sentence. Andris 17:37, 27 January 2005 (UTC)
 * Makes sense. That info was added by some very anti-Tymoshenko person. Ambi 00:31, 28 January 2005 (UTC)

your sources www.ПРАВДА.com.ua and www.brama.com are ukrainian nationalist news agencies, and thus they have low credibility because they side with Yushcenko's government and have a tendency to alter the facts; as to "foreign interventionism" - it is made clear that it is an implication by her opponents

- Tigry 03:56, 29 January 2005 (UTC)


 * Guys, just who the F cares of her ethnic descendance? I believe Yul'ka is not so important yet to expand her page in this direction. Instead, you'd better cleanup recent years of biograpy. Set your priorities. And check your sources twice. Best wishes, AlexPU 14:20, 29 January 2005 (UTC)


 * P.S. Not sure about brama, but Ukrayins'ka pravda is the most influential and credible political ezine in Ukraine. Representatives of all political groups consider an honor to publish their opinion there. Half of the articles are in Russian. What is so nationalistic about it? Tigry, may be, you meant not anti-Ukrainian by that? I'll watch you ass after such remark, tezka. AlexPU 14:27, 29 January 2005 (UTC)

In october Dmytro Tchobit, a former member of "Batkivshyna" in his book "Makuha", claimed, Tymoshenko's father was Jewish. According to Tchobit, her grandfather's name was Abram Kapitelman, moreover, he took his wife's surname. She was also of Jewish Descent. But this information is unverified.

Centerfold
I saw her on the front cover of a Ukrainian fashion magazine, like Vogue or something. She must be the most beautiful Prime Misister in the world! Take THAT Margaret Thatcher! 217.137.254.4 (talk) 16:55, 23 May 2005 (UTC)


 * No kidding. Seems like the article should have a line "P.S. She's also totally hot." But I guess the pictures can tell you that. -Bert 171.159.64.10 03:23, 29 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Huh! Sometimes I think she could not fix her eyes. Her inceassantly scampering eyes make her appearance creepy in real life (of course, still images are curing that (Removed per policy on living persons.) very well).

Umm, i hate to be the one who brings this up but, how about a picture of her daughter. please :)

Here's her daughter. She's married. http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread174726/pg1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.40.46.84 (talk) 11:33, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Maiden Name
I am wondering whether her maiden name, Hryhyan, is confirmed by any official source. Sashazlv 18:17, 5 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Google finds only this weblog . Andris 11:32, 8 July 2005 (UTC)

Elle cover picture
This image is taken directly from BBC News. Are we really allowed to do that? -- Woseph 10:10, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I quote from the magazinecover tag, which is used with this image:
 * This image is of a scan of a magazine cover, and the copyright for it is most likely owned by either the publisher of the magazine or the individual contributors who worked on the cover depicted. It is believed that the use of low-resolution images of magazine covers to illustrate the publication of the issue of the magazine in question, with the publication name either visible on the image itself or written in the image description above, on the English-language Wikipedia, hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law. Any other uses of this image, on Wikipedia or elsewhere, may be copyright infringement. See Copyrights for more information.
 * --Rogerd 14:16, 10 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes, I know that we are allowed to display a low-resolution cover picture, but my point was that BBC News scanned the cover, we didn't. For example, if someone photographs an old painting (which isn't copyrighted), we can't use that picture, right? Why is this situation different? -- Woseph 17:18, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

I have changed the text underneath the Elle cover picture. The text on the BBC website says that: "In an earlier interview, given in 2001, she was asked whether she would prefer to make the front cover of Playboy, Time or the Ukrainian women's magazine Natalie. Mrs Tymoshenko said Playboy would be "the best choice for any real woman". She added, however, that she might plump for Time instead."

That doesn't express a personal wish to be in playboy... -- --Bgraabek 21:58, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

The language on the cover is Russian; besides, there is no Ukrainian Elle version, as far as I know.

Zondor's picture
Zondor wants to put this picture on the page and, apparently, refuses to discuss it first (and calling me a vandal in the process), despite my, I think, reasonable request that he/she do so. Therefore, I will show him/her how it's done.

Here is the picture Zondor added without discussion:

Any thoughts on whether it should stay or go? I have none, I just think that Zondor needed to give us an opportunity to come to a consensus about it. I think its obvious that some might think its POV to put it in. Poor form, Zondor. Discussion?Gator1 01:22, 16 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I see nothing POV about the photo (someone please explain what is POV about it), but it is redundant, since there are already two other head shot photos in the article. --Rogerd 01:37, 16 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I asked an admin to temporarily freeze the article until everyone cools down. Please, provide content, don't engage in edit wars. I understand that the current political crisis in Ukraine makes some people view Tymoshenko as a martyr. But let's wait until the dust settles down. Sashazlv 05:13, 16 September 2005 (UTC)


 * It is a free photo, but if it is decided to not include the photo in the article, then I suggest to add so we can have an image gallery of images of the very lovely Tymoshenko. Zach (Sound Off) 05:26, 16 September 2005 (UTC)


 * :) Just wait until the parliamentary elections in Ukraine enter an active phase. The article will be a battlefield. Sashazlv 05:31, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for stepping in Sasha. For the record, again, I don't have an opinion about this picture or about the Ukraine and am not terribly interested in the current political crises (let alone fired up about it). I just felt Zondor was going about it the wrong way. I removed it once with little comment and when he added it back, and tried to argue, I, assuming good faith, beleived that he just didn't understand what I was trying to say, so I explained it more and removed it again. When he added it back with no comment, I went to the talk page and started this discussion, thinking, if he wasn't going to do then I just would. I had no intention on starting an edit war and it was really over and being dicussed by the timeyou reverted it back (thanks by the way, I wasn't about to do that again). Let's just discuss this and make sure everyone remains civil.Gator1 12:42, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Personally, I see nothing wrong with the picture being in an article. I think it properly reflects T. of the time and she doesn't look bad at all here, to my taste. Tastes differ, though. Cheers, --Irpen 06:07, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

I think she looks exhausted on that picture. After looking through a bunch of pictures (start with Google Image Search also have a look at for changes over time) I don't think it's a representative picture of her. To me, it looks like a typical archive picture a newspaper would use in an article about a setback ("Y.T. fired from government" or whatever). Everyone already know good-looking people can look bad/not as good as usual in some pictures, right? -- Woseph 10:29, 17 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I really don't get that impression from the image - it's just a decent, though possibly surplus to our needs, headshot, and doesn't make her look bad in the slightest. Ambi 16:44, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

I agree completely with Woseph, especially about the significance of a Google Image Search. Wikipedia readers should come away with the ability to recognize her for practical purposes. 66.251.24.233 09:23, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Does it matter what she looks like? She has had cosmetic surgery... so she looks like her considerable personal wealth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.43.106.123 (talk) 01:04, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Maybe, this image would be better ? http://img1.liveinternet.ru/images/attach/c/0/37/164/37164275_25796462_timoshenko.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.45.55.154 (talk) 18:22, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

What does she do now?
I'm curious, what does Tymoshenko do now? I assume she's still in politics, since she contested the new PM's appointment, but doing what exactly? I must say, I wonder what Prime Ministers do after they get fired. - 211.28.78.104 11:36, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Just read on-line news and watch TV. Sashazlv 00:05, 27 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Now she is going to win March election and become PM again! And she have good chances. Some of her opponent says that she was bad PM.It is lie! She was super PM. But someone from Yushenko team wasn`t interested in her success. :(. Yulia forever, she is genius. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ukrainemycountry (talk &bull; contribs) 16:35, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Here we go again...
Someone is changing the picture again. I reverrted adn encouraged him/her to come ehre and disucss it. We went throguht this before. Let's talk about it again. Both images are perfectly legal under copyright law so that's not the issue. yes one is more open thant he otehr, but both are legal, so we just need to choose which one we want. If the image is going to be changed it should be discussed first. I prefer the currrent one. It's a much better picture to be used as the first one people see. Thoughts?Gator (talk) 13:25, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I think the previous picture that Zondor put online was much nicer, it shows Yulia as a human being, not as a superstar

Picture
I think the Elle picture looks horrible!


 * Agree, she is painted with make-up there so intensively as if she was a street whoe :((. She never does so in real life, she's a pretty natural-lookig MILF. Shame on Elle!AlexPU 13:11, 8 May 2006 (UTC)


 * She is gorgeous. Not a fan of the Elle picture myself. But yeah, wow. I was impressed when I came across her article. Possibly the hottest politician I've ever seen, and she doesn't look 46. heh. Nevar1982 21:59, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Article's structure
Now back to serious Wikibusiness. The political career section is unreadable: the info is loaded here and there without needed chronology or event-analysis distinction. Needs more reshuffling and liberating of excessive details. So I added a "clean-up" template. Lead and "Origins" seem OK.AlexPU 13:11, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Just cleaned up and updated. Thoughts? Matty J 87 23:41, 4 October 2006 (UTC)


 * AlexPU, the intro is not OK now. I find it overloaded and duplicating the sects. Why don't you take care of it, as a political analyst? Wishes, Ukrained 22:17, 20 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, it's OK again :)). I hope.


 * BTW people, this passage now deleted from the lead is evidently false and POV:


 * "She was dismissed by President Viktor Yushchenko last September, after only eight months on the job since leading the country’s Orange Revolution. Her coalition was unable to overcome opposition from former Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych," Forbes Magazine said.


 * If that's so, than Margaret Thatcher's last cabinet "was unable to overcome opposition from the British Communist Party and the International Peace Council" :). You know, Western journalists usually are dumb in post-Soviet politics, and for a good reason: they live in a purely different political system.AlexPU 22:20, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Help, there trying to delete the picture
Some Swedish person is trying to delete the picture in the "infobox". What can I do (more) to prevent it. Isn't the "According to the Article 10 of the Law of Ukraine on Copyright and Related rights"-tag not enough?

He's also trying to delete the picture from the Wikimedia Commons-site.Mariah-Yulia 22:11, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Language
When we hear her speak publicly in Ukraine, is she speaking Russian or Ukrainian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.239.253.2 (talk) 00:30, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

"gas industry"
Currently, "gas industry" links to the main article about the phase of matter. I believe it is important that "gas" link to natural gas, because in the United States (and perhaps elsewhere), gas usually means gasoline, i.e., petrol. One might get a very different impression of Tymoshenko thinking that the source of her wealth was the oil industry! 66.251.24.233 09:23, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and changed the link so it leads to the page for natural gas. -Tomdobb 16:55, 4 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Well oil and gas are pretty much the same industry... 128.83.167.129 21:20, 4 October 2007 (UTC)


 * We're talking about crude oil and natural gas. As it turns out, Tymoshenko was involved in the oil industry, and this should of course be noted.  But there is still a difference between natural gas, which is a substance composed of several gases, and gasoline, which is a petroleum product whose name is shortened to "gas".  It just so happens that they are both fossil fuels and therefore are linked in the business world, but that doesn't mean that Wikipedia should ambiguously refer to them by the same name.  Tomdobb, thank you for the edit. 66.251.26.115 20:56, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Featured article on tr
Today (December 31 if I have my timezones right -- no, still the 30th (edit)) tr:Yuliya Timoşenko is the featured article (I think; I am probably mistranslating "Demir prenses", since I am going by functional etc. ... Equivalent of "In the news"? Something more recent than the 15th, then?) (viz tr:Ana_Sayfa). Schissel | Sound the Note! 19:00, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Political Views
This article says very little about her political views, and the Fatherland party link says even less. This should to be central to the article, shouldn't it? 172.143.77.32 (talk) 00:05, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The wikipedia article Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc has info about her political views Mariah-Yulia (talk) 00:19, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * A Political positions chapter (as in the Condoleezza Rice article) could be handy. I'm waiting for responce from others.... Mariah-Yulia (talk) 00:28, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I asked User:Philosopher for advice and this was his response:

''Not necessarily - see George H. W. Bush, George W. Bush, Gordon Brown. There will most likely have to be a section(s) that discuss the political positions of the politician, but it doesn't necessarily have to be in a "Political positions" section. Also, some articles that have one, like John Baird (Canadian politician) call it by a different name - though the trend seems to be to discuss political positions in the same section as they discuss the relevant term(s) of office. If you want an example for an article about a lesser-known politician (e.g. not a head of state or head of a legislative chamber) I'd recommend looking at an article like Berkley Bedell - a simpler article about a U.S. Congressman from Iowa, but still a WP:GA. Also, see the Good Article criteria here. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 00:33, 19 September 2008 (UTC)''

Unfortunately right now I haven't really got time to do a lot of work on the article but I will keep his handy tips in mind! Thanks again Philosopher! Mariah-Yulia (talk) 19:57, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

It would be great to see meaningful information on her current political views/priorities and perhaps some summary of previous iterations of the same. Right now this article reads like some lightweight fluff in People magazine obsessed with her braids instead of the thoughts beneath them. -Anon Dec 2008


 * I just ordered this book. I hope it will be useful (for me) to make some edits about her political views (as I would like to see a Political views section too!) — Mariah-Yulia (talk) 22:30, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

I made a start with a Political positions section. — Mariah-Yulia (talk) 08:31, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Plagiarism Foreign Affairs
Accurately sourced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.36.198.51 (talk) 14:29, 2 April 2008 (UTC) Just reinstated it after someone had conveniently removed it a few months back.
 * Fair enough... But why was this text removed --> Although the article was initially considered to be an attack on Russia, Tymoshenko's argument was more nuanced than the title of the article suggests. For example, at no point in the article does Tymoshenko mention or call for Ukraine to become a member of NATO, the most serious point of friction between Russia and Ukraine. Indeed, it voices great sympathy for the leaders of Russia and their "anguished struggle to overcome generations of Soviet misrule." ? I hope nobody wants to make Yulia look anti-Russian. Not sure why this article is looked at as important, it hardly says anything... — Mariah-Yulia (talk) 16:54, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Because, read the text: "I do not believe that a new Cold War is under way or likely. Nevertheless, because Russia has indeed transformed itself since Putin became president in 2000, the problem of fitting Russia into the world's diplomatic and economic structures (particularly when it comes to markets for energy) raises profound questions. Those questions are all the more vexing because Russia is usually judged on the basis of speculation about its intentions rather than on the basis of its actions. In the aftermath of communism's collapse, it was assumed that Russia's imperial ambitions had vanished -- and that foreign policy toward Russia could be conducted as if former diplomatic considerations did not apply. Yet they must apply, for Russia straddles the world's geopolitical heartland and is heir to a remorseless imperial tradition. Encouraging economic and political reform -- the West's preferred means of engaging Russia since communism's end -- is of course an important foreign policy tool. But it cannot substitute for a serious effort to counter Russia's long-standing expansionism and its present desire to recapture its great-power status at the expense of its neighbors."

Thus she is clearly wary of russian expansionism, but beyond that, i find it simplistic to reduce her position to being either pro or anti-Russian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.17.68.202 (talk) 19:14, 7 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Agree! Hmmm, I reread the article and it was a bit different then I remembered.... sorry for my memory failure.... Since wikipedia isn't a forum of blog I think we editors shouldn't declare anybody pro- or anti-anything but let the readers decide that! — Mariah-Yulia (talk) 20:09, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Forbes list
I removed the forbes list bit in the lead for now cause there will be a new list shortly and she might be back on that list (see my reason to suspect that here: (look at the end of the article). To write in the lead: she probably wil be back on the list in 2008 is a bit over it I think... Mariah-Yulia (talk) 17:01, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

2008 Ukrainian political crisis
I moved some info originally here to 2008 Ukrainian political crisis to prevent WP:FORK. Mariah-Yulia (talk) 17:52, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Candidate
I can see quite clearly that the fact that whether it is a PhD or kandidat nauk is not material, and that the emphasis is on her economics training. PhD is indeed what Western people regard as academic training, however to say she took a PhD is like saying "N. purchased a Jeep (equivalent to a Land Rover)" and then neglecting to link to Jeep as well, with the reasoning that its not important that N. knows what a Jeep is (as long as he knows it is like a Land Rover). Hence the link to kandidat nauk. 118.90.101.9 (talk) 22:28, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Well because you use an IP-address (thus your not registered) and most vandals use IP-addresses I thought you vandalised the article by by placing the word "nauk". I'm not familiar with the Ukrainian school systems. Hereby an apology > I'm sorry for thinking you where a vandal. Mariah-Yulia (talk) 18:36, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
 * No need to apologize :D Your reversion was done in good faith (against IP, and not against me personally), so I don't take offense. 118.90.101.9 (talk) 08:23, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

First Tymoshenko Government
I am working on the article First Tymoshenko Government in my Sandbox, that shouldn't take that long. So please do not delete the red links in the article :) — Mariah-Yulia (talk) 23:37, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Done :) — Mariah-Yulia (talk) 23:52, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm done replacing the dead links!
Let the GA-games begin! —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  05:44, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

New Republic reference, re Eva Peron
On Jan. 5, I inserted this section:


 * According to an article published Jan. 5, 2010, in The New Republic, ever since a declaration by a psychic, Tymoshenko has believed she is a reincarnation of Eva Peron, and consciously copies Peron's style and mannerisms[139]

User Maria-Yulia deleted this insertion, stating:


 * 1 opinion by a Russian writer does not look not look noticeable; opinion belongs in "image" section at best.

I dispute this deletion. The New Republic is one of the top political opinion journals in the United States. An article published in it is not "one opinion by a Russian writer," but a sourced allegation by one of the most significant American political magazines that Tymoshenko is possibly delusional. This is a significant statement about this person and demands recognition in this article. Acsenray (talk) 17:04, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Agree with that but added to the article that it was said by a former advisor to Tymoshenko, might have been a bad seperation, he might be working for a party in opposition to her. No disrespect but in Ukraine this sort of stupid uncivel alligation (for instance about she being a Jew, saying that about a person in Ukraine is meant as an atack (I do regret that)) is somewhat the norm, as Tymoshenko herself called Victor Yanukovich a retart who can't see the difference between Austria an Australia. Not sure why The New Republic trust this former advisior.... After following Ukrainian politics since 2004 I don't... —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  15:07, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for this civil discussion; it is clear to see you are not working for a Ukrainian political party ;)! —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  15:18, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Reasons where?????
In this edit a paragraph about a Russian porn movie with clear Tymoshenko and Mikheil Saakashvili lookalikes was deleted along with some mentioning she was born in the Soviet Union. What are the reasons for these deletions? A porn movie with a Angela Merkel lookalike would also be unnoticeable? —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  16:47, 10 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't know anything about or care for the porn issue but if it's a fact she was born in the Soviet Union, it certainly should be reverted. It would appear rather likely she did because she's said to have been born in 1960 while Ukraine first became independent some 40 years later! 88.148.195.228 (talk) 21:38, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Agree, that also seems to be standard here (see:Mila Kunis)! It was 31 years later do ;) —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  09:40, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Placed porn info back into the article; editor did not explain reasons and others seem to have no objections to it's place in this wiki-article. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  10:35, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Please provide good reason to KEEP this information. I can say that you look like some person from some porn movie, or some robber. This is "opinionated" information, and I'm not so sure 100% unbiased. -Andriyko (talk) 18:27, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I think it falls into the Notability, but after finding out that Nailin' Paylin is not in Sarah Palin's article I Guess it's not considered that by others/most editors. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  18:48, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

The rules for Irish are different then for Ukrainians????????
Tymoshenko's mother is a member of the Russian minority in Ukraine???? Why? Cause she speaks more Russian then Ukrainian, so Bono and the rest of U2 are part of the English minority in Ireland cause they hardly ever speak Gaelic but use English instead? Speaking a language does not say anything about somebody's ethnicity, besides Tymoshenko has called her mother of Ukrainian ethnicity. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  08:41, 21 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Your outburst invoking the Irish is counterfactual. There are no special "rules", there are just general rules of logic, e.g., do not apply all the same "rules" to dissimilar things. Prologue statement: you may be correct that evidence is lacking in support of the claim about Yulia Tymoshenko's mother. However, your subsequent reasoning is so silly because it disregards how different the histories and current demographics of the Irish and the Ukrainians are. The Irish have indeed been largely deculturized, deethnicized, in that about 99 percent of the Irish on the island of Ireland do not speak their ancestral language. So they are indeed less ethnically distinct from the English than centuries ago. Obviously, the OPPOSITE is the case with the Ukrainians: there are about 37 million speakers of Ukrainian; 4 out of 5 speakers of Ukrainian inhabit Ukraine; 78% of the population of Ukraine is ethnic Ukrainian. Obviously, the vast majority of ethnic Ukrainians speak Ukrainian, not Russian. Therefore, we should laugh at your ploy to "apply the same rules" to the Irish and the Ukrainians.


 * Now, it IS true that there may be ethnic Ukrainians living in Ukraine who speak Russian instead of Ukrainian. It IS true that there is a "general rule" by which when we wish to analyze ethnicity among Russians and Ukrainians, we must identify the criteria that in practice determine one's ethnicity, whether one is more Russian or more Ukrainian. It is also true that I forgot to do so. Nevertheless, I suggest that Russians and Ukrainians are so similar culturally, historically, and geographically, that it probably IS the case that language is the main determinant. It would be foolish to may the same claim about, say, ARMENIANS. You can easily claim to be ethnic Armenian even if Russian is the only language you know, precisely because there are so many other differences between Russians and Armenians. As regards ascribing Ukrainian ethnicity to some individual, if you take away the Ukrainian language (that is, if the person in question doesn't preferentially speak that language), then please tell me: what remains to make them Ukrainian? After all, Ukrainian, Belarussian, and Russian are linguistically one big language. For goodness' sake, Belarussians, Russians, and Ukrainians are racially the same (except for the large Turkic contribution to the gene pool IN THE BLACK SEA COAST region), all three are historically Orthodox Christians, and in fact the emergence of the separate identities of these three groups out of common East Slavs is relatively recent, about 1,000 years. You don't seem to take any of this into account. Hurmata (talk) 03:02, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

No, I never take into account "ethnic history" when I'm editing cause I am much more interested in politics then in ethnicity. However since wikipedia is a community project I hope and expect my possible faults will be restored. Since the article is in better shape then ever I can say this has worked once again (also thanks to Garik 11 last edit)!

With all due respect, since neither of us live in Ukraine and Russia at the same time (or have lived in both country's for a very long time until recently) we both can not answer questions like: "what remains to make them Ukrainian?". All I can see is that politicly the country's look less the same per year. I am not interested in discussions about someone ethnicity and never was, the fact that have been engaged in 3 this week made me a bit cranky, I do apologise if my behaviour came across as WP:UNCIVIL. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  18:08, 22 January 2010

Majority of Ukrainians still preferably speak Russian at home.It doesn`t make them Russian "minority" in Ukraine.Some people in Ukraine who preferably speak Russian still may have some cultural and mentality differences from ethnic Russians and even politically be pro-Ukrainian as opposed to Russia.People are not defined solely by language but also by their mentality and political preferences.Though it still depends on how we define nationality.Canadians and Australians speak good English it doesn`t make them British.U.S. colonists fought against Britain for independence regardless of speaking the same language. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.58.84.243 (talk) 17:11, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Content which is political advocacy
I deleted a paragraph reporting that the European People's Party — a foreign organization — has urged Ukrainians which presidential candidate to vote for. I made this edit for sake of deleting "political advocacy". An editor complained, "What the hell has the EPP suport got to do with 'Political advocacy', nobody wrote we should agree with them, neither that the analyst where right, but that is 'newsy'." Somebody who doesn't see it isn't advocacy to quote foreigners recommending to Ukrainians who to vote for, I don't believe I can explain it to them. To change the subject, I would like to advise the same editor that Wikipedia prefers to be LESS "newsy". Unfortunately, many Wikipedia contributors yield to the temptation to keep Wikipedia articles "up to the minute" with news that is of only temporary interest and is in rapid flux. Examples: inserting hourly progress reports on the salvage operation at an airplane crash site; reporting speculations as to who will be chosen as the candidate of a given political party for a given office, e.g., who will the nominees for U.S. president choose as their vice presidential "running mates"? (That person X is rumored to be under consideration for vice presidential running mate is actually NOT notable even when it's happening, despite the fact that many Wikipedians think it's notable; and once the running mate is chosen, then certainly the speculations and rumors about all the other politicians who were considered are rendered nonnotable.) There is an explicit guideline in English Wikipedia: "Wikipedia is not a newspaper". For Wikipedia, it should suffice to report whether Tymoshenko wins or loses the 2010 runoff election. Polling data about the race, especially during the campaign, DO NOT belong in Wikipedia. And what the wish of the European People's Party may be is junk news. Hurmata (talk) 07:28, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Whit all due respect the European People's Party is a organisation that has 72 member-parties from 39 countries, 13 EU and 6 non-EU heads of government, 13 European Commissioners (including the President), and the largest group in the European Parliament with 265 members. You do not live in the EU so can not see what how newsworthy the opinions of the EPP are... However I do life in the EU and noticed that the EPP point of view does not seem to have any impact. As I stated above Wikipedia is a community project the "news editors" and "encyclopaedic editors" should balance eachoter out. I can see in this article that worked. By the way I was never enthusiastic about the "opinion poll" part of this article but since most articles about candidates in the 2010 Ukrainian presidential election have one I was hesitated to remove it, however since Ukrainian presidential election, 2010 has plenty of polls I do now see it's removal of it as an improvement of this article. So thanks. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  18:21, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

In case of new Parliamentary elections
This source can be used. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  19:02, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

In case of new Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine
This source can be used. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  19:04, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Tymoshenko demands parliament should consider her government's dismissal on March 2 —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  09:58, 1 March 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. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  16:53, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I see now that the NY Times source claimed that Yulia effectively conceding the presidential election. New Yorkers interpretation of Ukrainian politics looks flawed to me. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  17:06, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

She still thinks Yanukovych wasn’t elected President of Ukraine... —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  17:19, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

fix text in section Orange Revolution
The first sentence of this section includes both Tymoshenko and Viktor Yushchenko broached at creating a broad opposition bloc

"broached at" is incorrect idiom. Someone who knows what the meaning is here should edit it for correct English usage.

Ed8r (talk) 23:16, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Latest edits
This new "Genealogy and family"-section makes the article worse to read... At the article about President Obama only his parents are mentioned early in the article. I don't see why Tymoshenko's grantfather is mentioned in the begining of this article. I am moving it down below, just like the in the featured article Obama (featured articles are considered to be the best articles in Wikipedia). —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  17:18, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree. I think it should be removed, or, if you think it's notable and well-sourced enough, moved to a separate article. Nanobear (talk) 17:26, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Done --> Family of Yulia Tymoshenko. —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  18:12, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Autograph
In case it is needed in the future; a recent autograph of her can be found here. —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  18:06, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Some insights about the trail with a heavy Chrystal Ball part
NRC Handelsblad today noticed that current Energy Minister Yuriy Boiko and possible financier of President Viktor Yanukovych election campaign Dmytro Firtash where both heavenly involved in RosUkrEnergo and that the agreement where Tymoshenko is now convicted for was directly aimed against RosUkrEnergo. Earlier Kyiv Post had stated the current head of the Presidential Administration of Ukraine Serhiy Lyovochkin has ties with RosUkrEnergo. If it would not be against WP:CHRYSTAL it would be worth to put this info in the article... But without direct evidence (it is not even possible to say who finances campaigns in Ukraine) it still is just speculation. But also something to think about if you want to judge the current political situations in Ukraine fairly- —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  20:45, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Wikileaks as source
I'm not sure how noteworthy this is, but Wikileaks provided an example of selective redacting by the Guardian when it came to Tymoshenko;

The cable covers allegations against Tymoshenko made by a character called Firtash, to the US state department, which began with; "Firtash referred to Tymoshenko's title of "gas princess" as a misnomer; he explained that Tymoshenko did make lots of money off of a corrupt, perpetual gas debt scheme during the 1990s, but she knew nothing about the gas business."

Followed by the part redacted by The Guardian; "He added that Tymoshenko hid her wealth in property and investments in the U.K."

And then again by unredacted text; "to give the false impression that she was not actively involved in business."

Naturally, there is unlikely to be much further explanation of the redacted part and why it was not included in The Guardian's release of the cable but the allegation sounds interesting enough. So if it does have any merit I would assume it would be noteworthy.--Senor Freebie (talk) 20:53, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Dmytro Firtash is one of Tymoshenko's biggest enemies and in no way a neutral source (read the section of this talkpage directly above this one). What would you like to write in this wiki-article? "Mr. Firtash, who could be lying his ass of in an attempt to discredit his opponent Tymoshenko, stated that Tymoshenko hid her wealth in property and investments in the U.K."? I assume The Guardian did know you can not trust Firtash. And we can not trust him either; furthermore the whole accusation has a WP:CHRYSTAL flavour. Please do not think Ukrainian politics is as clear cut as in your own country. —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  21:16, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Please do not automatically assume that I am entirely naїeve about Ukrainian politics and the characters involved or that the politics in my country are any less murky. I just saw Tymoshenko on the WP front page and checked to see if a source I knew of was included in the article.--Senor Freebie (talk) 10:25, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

She is also suing him. Again indicating that he has not a neutral point of view against her. —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  21:22, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * In the "Cultural and political image"-section of the article "Discrepancies between her declared income and her (viewed as luxurious) lifestyle have been pointed out"; if Firtash accusation would look believable it would belong next to that sentence. —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  21:31, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * You could point out, using this and perhaps other sources that she's been accused by political opponent(s) of retaining or hiding wealth in the UK and that the Guardian newspaper redacted this. That would be the simple, unbiased truth. The only real question here is if it's noteworthy enough. Firtash is a big figure and the USA at least grants him audience to vent his views, albeit in confidence. The information is now available and the original disclosure included a redaction of the relevant information by The Guardian.--Senor Freebie (talk) 10:25, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

History of?
"His result became the worst result for an acting President in history.[49][50]"

Personal curiosity, is it the history of Ukraine, Europe, or the World? With a number that low (<6%), even the latter sounds plausible.

The sources are not in English so I can't read them. -su88 (talk) 01:47, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
 * You seem to be asking a question about Viktor Yushchenko's Wiki-article on Yulia Tymoshenko's talkpage. —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  02:22, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Wording in article lead about condemnation of sentence
I think the introduction should mention that essentially the entire civilised world and its political representatives have condmened this trial and sentence. If the US, EU and UN all make official statements against such a kangaroo court, it is credible and relevant enough to go in the lead. Obotlig (talk) 04:14, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The lead of this article? Wouldn't it be more suitable in a more detailed article about the court case if that existed since the lead of this article should simply summarise Yulia's life & career?--Senor Freebie (talk) 10:15, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I think that if someone is wrongfully imprisoned or there is even a significat concern of it by human rights groups let alone the political representatives of the entire planet, it would usually be prominently mentioned in the lead. Obotlig (talk) 14:58, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Good point... but the current sentence (in the lead) "The conviction is widely seen as politically motivated persecution" sounds a but WP:WEASEL. The US, EU and UN did not put it did bluntly; the BBC did mention that some see the trail as "politically motivated persecution". So those people who see it has only "politically motivated persecution" seem to be not a very large group in the world... "is widely seen" is even given as a typical example of WP:WEASEL! —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  15:22, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Russian official do not seem to see the case as "politically motivated persecution"; they just seem to disagree with the outcome. —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  16:53, 12 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree with Obotlig, but the last compromise edits by Yulia seem to be fair enough. Biophys (talk) 17:01, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Grigyan/Grigan
Contrary to what the article said, there is no and by linguistics cannot be "Latviam surname Grigan". There does exist the Latvian surname 'Grigjanis', but which looks rather like lettization of 'Grigyan' rather than vice versa. Also, it is known that Yosiph spelled himself Grigyan, and Grigan was occasional spelling in some Soviet documents, see eg quotations and faximile of documents in a book by Dmytro Chobit. Lotygolas Ozols (talk) 20:28, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

For future reference
Tymoshenko claims president ordered prosecutors to put her in jail. Let's wait if she get's prosecuted. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  10:04, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Akhmetov-owned Segodnya paper has already published a video presumably used by the Prosecutor to charge her of bribery. Garik 11 (talk) 10:23, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

That video looks like a Katya-methode. That is used to discredit opposition in Russia. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  11:20, 12 May 2010
 * It is a bribery a accusation. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  11:42, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

The info is now in the article. —  Mariah-Yulia  • Talk to me!  17:18, 12 May 2010 (UTC) - Not sure what to do with these 2: And these 3: Or this one: Tymoshenko feels guilty over unfulfilled dreams after Orange Revolution —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  18:42, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Yulia Tymoshenko: racketeering lawsuit filed against Firtash in U.S. court
 * Yulia Tymoshenko: we must work together to denounce the Kharkiv agreements —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  10:30, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yulia Tymoshenko: events in Lviv were provoked by the government
 * Lviv mayor: Law enforcers responsible for planned clashes on May 9
 * Lviv nationalists clash with police —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  10:44, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Tymoshenko ends appeal in Ukraine today, but let us wait
Tymoshenko ended her appeal in Ukraine today (she will be going to the European Court of human rights); but because it is not clear whether the judge would proceed without Tymoshenko or her lawyers I want to wait a bit how these latest developments unfold before mentioning them in this article. —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  19:05, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅. Proceedings continued and she lost the appeal. —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  16:27, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately she lost. Time will tell if she is released and the political situation in the country improves... Until then, we must hope for the best! Good job on keeping it up-to-date btw! _dsergienko 05:44, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  16:42, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

United Energy Systems of Ukraine Vs. Universal Trading and Investment Company
Need some time to see if this and this is related to this article... And to understand the background behind this case.... —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  19:36, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

This article is "top" importance on WikiProject Ukraine?
On my talkpage it was pointed out by INeverCry this article should be rated "top" importance atleast on WikiProject Ukraine. Since I did spend a lot of time on the article back in the days, I think I should not "rate" the article because It would feel to me I was rating my own work. So I am asking here... should this article be rated "top" importance on WikiProject Ukraine or any of the other WikiProjects this article falls under? —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  19:19, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't know. It doesn't really matter either way, but for top I usually kept articles like Ukraine, Kiev City, Donetsk Oblast, Demographics of Ukraine, Prime Minister of Ukraine, etc.. articles that pertain to the nation itself. But it wouldn't hurt. --ddima (talk) 18:44, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Is this noticable enough for this Wikipedia article (see below)
Court upholds decision to impose fine on Tymoshenko for tax evasion when using Somolli Enterprises cards —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  18:29, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Tymoshenko Suspected in State Treason
Per WP:NOTNEWS I am putting this on the back burner for now since it seems nothing more then the findings of a Ukrainian parliament interim commission and I am not sure if that is significant enough (the head of the interim commission Inna Bohoslovska is notorious anti-Tymoshenko so the outcome of this report is for me far from surprising...) ; let's wait what happens........ —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  16:28, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Parentland
How to translate батьківщина (bat&rsquo;kivshchyna) is an interesting question. Parentland is closest to a literal translation, but of course it's not an English word, and sounds kind of silly (from батьки, bat&rsquo;ky, "parents", but the singular батько, bat&rsquo;ko, means "father"). Motherland and fatherland are both English words, and both serve equally well as translations.

English tends to use the masculine form for neuter concepts. On the other hand, the Ukrainian word is a feminine noun (although it does represent a gender-neutral concept), and there is a common poetic notion of "Ukraine, native mother". The case to prefer motherland is not strong, but I can't think of any argument in preference of fatherland at all. &mdash;Michael Z. 05:19, 17 June 2005 (UTC)
 * I thought Motherland sounded more familiar, but a comparison of Google results is pretty inconclusive, with Motherland having a slight lead. Based on what you've said, Motherland sounds like the way to go, but I'll leave it to those in the know. Ambi 07:39, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * How about "Land of Our Parents" or "(Our) Parents' Land"? If not that, Fatherland seems to have greater credibility. 7SEFIROSU 07:39, 27 2006 (UTC)
 * Gender neutrality is great, but "Land of Our Parents" is not something anyone would naturally say unless it were the title of something. Many other languages have the word fatherland; English has remnants of it such as "patriot" but the original "fatherland" is not common (in the U.S., at least).  Fatherland and motherland work equally well, I'd say.  Motherland might be better.  66.251.24.233 09:23, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually, "batkivschina" has nothing in common with land, nor etymologically, nor semantically. It's an "inheritance from a father, patrimony". The closest translation is Latin "patria", anyway. Noteworthiness (talk) 02:48, 2 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Fatherland sounds Nazi, motherland sounds a bit nicer. But either way, both are rare in English spoken by native speakers. Still, motherland would be my choice. Or Homeland :) Malick78 (talk) 21:32, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Ukrainian intellectuals ask Yanukovych to pardon Tymoshenko
Per NOTEVERYTHING and considering the articles is pretty lengthy already I decided to leave the fact that today some 100 well-known Ukrainian public figures have called on Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych to pardon Tymoshenko out of the article. —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  18:57, 22 March 2012 (UTC)


 * the issue of Tymoshenko's imprisonment is gaining more and more notability, and on a world wide scale. If he article need cutting down I think it should be elsewhere. I think call by Ukrainian public figures should be reinserted. Yours ever, Czar Brodie (talk) 23:16, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

What is the "Abuse of office"?
The article should state clearly which specific acts of Tymoshenko were considered "abuse of office", and if possible cite the Ukrainian law that she was accused of breaking. Currently there is so much hot air about this case in the press, and so little clear information, that it's really hard for a non-Ukrainian person to evaluate which claims are justfied and which are not. For example I would like to find out whether the law she was accused of breaking is an "elastic clause" that can be easily manipulated to get rid of people who are your opponents, or if it is a clear-cut law stating clearly which acts are forbidden and which are allowed. So please if you know put this information in. -- 92.230.209.90 (talk) 23:53, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Partially incomprehensible
Some of the sections on the trial are really incomprehensible, as they are written in a kind of "Russified English" without articles and with very strange word order. Could somebody who knows what is actually meant please clean this up? Thanks! -- 92.230.209.90 (talk) 23:46, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I did my best to do so today.... "Ukrainianfied English" would have been better wording by you....Emblem-cool.svg —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  21:35, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Spat over Tymoshenko between Rome & Kharkiv
Rome mayor's office puts up Tymoshenko portrait on facade late November 2012 and soon after Kharkiv mayor Kernes hangs a poster of former Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi on the city council of Kharkiv (building). Personally I think per WP:NOTDIARY ("using all these sources would lead to overdetailed articles that look like a diary") this row should not be in the article right now. —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  16:21, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Physical mistreatment
As I mentioned [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yulia_Tymoshenko&diff=584046831&oldid=583885958], if you read the report, it's the sort of thing you would expect, very cautious. It definitely does not claim there is "official proof that physical force has been used".

(In any case that sentence is confusing. Using physical force isn't necessarily a problem, even most dedicated human rights groups accept the use of physical force may sometimes be necessary, the issue is of excessive force or unnecessary force i.e. abuse or illtreament.)

What the report does say is that there were injuries (the way it presents these it doesn't sound like there is any dispute) and that a few witnesses heard her scream (again the way it presents these, it sounds like the fact she screamed is not disputed). But neither of these are definite proof of the inappropriate use of force, so it's not surprising that the report is careful to present the claims of inappropriate use of force as allegations. (As the report says elsewhere in a section unrelated to Tymoshenko, injuries may indicative of illtreatment which is a important distinction.)

The source also strongly criticised the investigation, suggesting it was quite inadequete as the investigators may not have been really determined to find out the truth, she was nor provided with timely access to her lawyer and was monitored, that there's some suggestions of witness intimidation (note again it doesn't present this as definite) which doesn't seem to have been properly investigated etc. Given all this, the source unsurprisingly does call for the investigation to be reopened.

The report also strongly criticises her detention conditions is hospital and a few other things.

I have no problem if someone wants to expand the section to cover all that, but they should use care to reflect what the source actually says. (And I'm not sure whether part of the WP:LEDE is the proper place for that level depth.) I appreciate there may be English issues here, the report itself as I've said is the sort of carefully worded and logical thing you would expect for this sort of report, which doesn't throw around words like proof or proven. Notably it's a general report, so doesn't go in to that great depth about the allegations, for example it doesn't discuss whether the injuries were consistent with the allegations (my guess is yes otherwise the Ukrainian authorities would have made a big deal over this).

P.S. The summary our article links to actually covers the gist of what I said too.

Nil Einne (talk) 13:38, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Imprisonment
I propose moving the imprisonment section to a new article. The US Senate has passed a resolution calling for her release and asking for a ban on visas to Ukrainian diplomats. The European Union has delayed indefinitely the signing of a free trade agreement with Ukraine until she is released.  USchick (talk) 05:11, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ at Criminal cases against Yulia Tymoshenko since 2011; things where getting a bit complicated (in my opinion) to shove them all in this article since the last case. —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  19:13, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

With her taking leadership after recent protest developments, her imprisonment needs to be in both articles. Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 21:04, 23 February 2014 (UTC) Preliminary articles said she was taking leadership, but she is declining: "I was surprised to learn that I’m being considered for the position of prime minister of Ukraine. Nobody discussed this issue with me. Thank you for the compliment, but please do not consider my candidacy for the post of head of government," Yulia Tymoshenko said. — Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 22:35, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Article Feedback
I just disabled Article Feedback on this page because 1) it is currently linked to from the Main Page, 2) is the subject of a current event, and 3) has already received some irrelevant reader comments since it was linked to on the Main Page. This was more or less a preemptive measure; if you disagree with this, I won't mind if you re-enable the feature. Regards, Mz7 (talk) 01:50, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Good idea! More formal WP editors can discuss here (TALK) until 'the dust settles' -- Much to discuss. Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 21:08, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

From the lede, you see her official website: http://www.tymoshenko.ua/en/ Watch for current news! Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 21:53, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * "She may want to focus her energies instead on campaigning for president and building up strength after her imprisonment. She spoke to an excited crowd of about 50,000 in Kiev's Independence Square Saturday night from a wheelchair because of a back problem aggravated during imprisonment, her voice cracked and her face careworn." — Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 00:26, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Father ancestry
Why is there so much there about the ancestry of the father who abandoned her either at age 1 or age 3 -- and only one sentence about the background of her mother (who actually raised her)? Is the point simply that grandfather was director of a Jewish school for a few months? If we want to discuss her ancestry, fine, but this is an odd way to do it. --jpgordon:==( o ) 00:48, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Tagged as POV because the article portrays Tymoshenko as a fiery, great hero/leader
The vast majority of the article portrays Tymoshenko as a national hero of the Ukraine. And so the article does not at all resemble an encylopedia entry. For that to be, we need to provide a mixed picture of Tymoshenko, in which good and honest people have varying views of her, from 'hero' to 'corrupt oligarch'. We also need to provide evidence, good RS sourcing, for assertions about her greatness, charisma, and/or corruption.Haberstr (talk) 12:48, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I do not agree that "The vast majority of the article portrays Tymoshenko as a national hero of Ukraine". After a couple of slight rewordings things should be fine and any editor is welcome to do that! On the other hand I did notice that some parts of the article do speak to POV about her.... All was fine with this article till a obviously Tymoshenko-fanclaub-member started to f(*&** things up in 2013... Back then I already spend lots of time making this article NPOV... But since I am a WikiOgre now I did not always keep on eye on things... And I am afraid that articles about people out of the world view can be abused quickly...


 * PS "the Ukraine" is not the (English) common name of Ukraine since December 1991. —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  20:37, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
 * My sympathies, and frankly the massive size of this article makes me pessimistic about fixing things. Anyway, let's just do it real easy and look at the term 'corrupt/corruption' in the article. Assuming that NPOV would recognize that charges of corruption have swirled around Tymoshenko for years (really quick I find these: ). So I search for 'corrupt/corruption'. The first six references are _all_ about her fighting corruption and about how all the corrupt politicians are making life hard on her. Finally, 90,000 words down into the article, the seventh time the word occurs it is about accusations and official charges against her of corruption, but that section is mostly her perspective, about how the corruption charges are trumped up by her corrupt enemies. ... And finally thanks for the naming correction; always wondered about that. Haberstr (talk) 06:38, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Made some repairs and cuts to Intro section. Hope you like them.Haberstr (talk) 07:06, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Opinions section
What's the point? No other world leader (as far as I've seen) has a section similar to this. Is there any reason this shouldn't be removed in this already lengthy article? LokiiT (talk) 06:38, 25 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Agreed. This section should be removed. Kendall-K1 (talk) 13:08, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Agreed/ Itsmejudith (talk) 14:08, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

I agree, it reads like a pamphlet 84.86.56.119 (talk) 18:27, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Move those refs
I shortened the lead, but it's still a bit unreadable because of all the refs. There shouldn't be any refs at all, or very few. The lead should summarize the article, and the article should have the refs. There shouldn't be anything in the lead that isn't backed up by a sourced statement in the article. I would just take them out, but that would leave orphans. Kendall-K1 (talk) 23:28, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Short version of her 2014 Presidential election program...
.... can be found here and in longer interview version here. (I do lack the time/will today to put this stuff in the article now....) —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  17:23, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Way too long
This entire article is too long, and the intro specifically is too long. It needs a massive editing job, dropping superfluous material and if the material is covered in depth in a separate article then it should only be summarized here. Too often on wikipedia we fail to delete anything that has a reference. Something can still be true and yet totally unnecessary to the article. This has become an unreadable mess, and it could be a fantastic article. Ottawakismet (talk) 19:21, 27 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Agreed. I came here to find out who she is and why she's imprisoned. It would take me an hour to read this and figure out what is actually relevant. It's written like a combination of resume and daily diary--unreadable, unusable.Jtcarpet (talk) 23:43, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * So let me get this straight... The arguments for deleting items from this article are "Too often on wikipedia we fail to delete" and "It would take me an hour to read this"?
 * I.e. We need more deleting because there isn't enough deleting and because I don't like to read.


 * Someone should put those words on a shirt. Though they are actually far more worthy of a suicide note. --92.36.133.109 (talk) 22:14, 22 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Someone recently bloated up the lead again. Almost the entire imprisonment paragraph should be cut. And most of the refs should be removed from the lead, which is supposed to summarize the rest of the article. Kendall-K1 (talk) 20:12, 24 February 2014 (UTC)


 * I printed out this article so I could read it at my leisure and mark up places where the are grammatical errors I could fix. The print-out ended up being 53 pages long, with the references alone taking up 21 pages. J I P  &#124; Talk 14:45, 25 February 2014 (UTC)


 * The solution is to make a short summary of her political career and to break out the full career section to a separate article. That is the section that is too long. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 07:31, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Conditions of imprisonment of Yulia Tymoshenko
How were the conditions in the prison? Were any TV, internet, phone calls allowed? Just curious...might be implemented into the article as well (because this is important in any kinds of imprisonment). --178.197.236.243 (talk) 17:14, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Needs GA reassessment
How can an article tagged for its lack of neutrality as well as numerous other issues discussed on these talk pages still have GA status? It may have once been good but there are serious issues with it now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.239.72.120 (talk) 22:37, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * The two things are unrelated, dear unlogged user. Silvio1973 (talk) 10:18, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
 * A good article is—

1.Well-written: a.the prose is clear and concise, it respects copyright laws, and the spelling and grammar are correct; and b.it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.

2.Verifiable with no original research: a.it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline; b.it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines; and c.it contains no original research.

3.Broad in its coverage: a.it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and b.it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

4.Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each.

5.Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

6.Illustrated, if possible, by images: a.images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and b.images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. 99.239.72.120 (talk) 23:09, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Party schism
My edits about the split of Fatherland keep getting removed. I think the split of Tymoshenko's party very much belongs to her article, especially because it explains why Fatherland, previously one of the largest in the parliament just barely made the threshold this time. This obviously has a huge effect on her political career. Aquila89 (talk) 11:57, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Party you can write page All-Ukrainian Union "Fatherland". this information Tymoshenko--Ralbert285 (talk) 14:16, 31 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I disagree. Since she's the party leader, the split of Fatherland is relevant to her article. Especially since Russian media reported that Yatsenyuk and Turchynov left because of disagreements with her. Aquila89 (talk) 14:54, 31 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Russian media can not be trusted, they write bad things about Ukraine and Tymoshenko. yatsenyuk returned to his party Front for Change (Ukraine). Wrong on page Tymoshenko write various rumors are.--Ralbert285 (talk) 15:44, 31 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Whatever. Whether she was the cause or not, I think that the split of her party obviously belongs to Tymoshenko's article. Aquila89 (talk) 00:29, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Allegations of torture
I erased "acknowledged political persecution and torture" attributed to the European Court of Human Rights since these allegations have been specifically rejected by the court. . Againstdisinformation (talk) 03:53, 28 August 2015 (UTC)


 * The fact that ECHR "acknowledged political persecution and torture" in the case of Tymoshenko v. Ukraine, if true, would be a crucial information and, obviously, I wouldn't have erased it without consulting the link provided and all the appropriate relevant sources. The link points to an article of Interfax-Ukraine bearing the title "ЄСПЛ вирішив припинити вивчення другої скарги Тимошенко в результаті "дружнього врегулювання"" which means that the ECHR decided to stop studying Tymoshenko's second complaint as a result of "friendly settlement". I provided a link to the Judgment of the court, that decides there has been no violation of Article 3 of the Convention (on torture) and states that her pre-trial imprisonment, though unnecessary, was not intended to deprive her of her political rights. So that what is written in this article is at best misleading, at worst disinformation. Therefore I have reinstated the correct version of the facts. In case you disagree, please do not simply revert, explain your reasons here first. Thank you. Againstdisinformation (talk) 20:32, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

The whole world and the European court of human rights, the Ukrainian courts have recognized that Tymoshenko is a political prisoner and carried out torture. Add more links. Do not engage in vandalism. And see Ukrainian and Russian, French Wikipedia, there is the same information--Lidaz (talk) 21:19, 28 August 2015 (UTC):

Please, let us avoid inflammatory accusations like "Do not engage in vandalism". The fact that Yulia Tymoshenko was "tortured" or not and that "The whole world" knows about it is utterly irrelevant. The point is that the article (and yourself, I may add) states falsely that this has been recognized by the European court of human rights. I want to improve the accuracy of Wikipedia and I suppose you share this goal. So, read the actual judgment, to which I provided a link, and you will see that the allegations of violation of article 3 of the Convention of Human Rights have been dismissed by the court. If I am wrong, please have the kindness to explain me why. If, on the contrary, you find out I am right, please have the kindness to restore my edit. Againstdisinformation (talk) 23:45, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

As an afterthought, the number of links is irrelevant too. Even if 1000 newspapers claimed the ECHR took such or such decision, the judgment published on the ECHR website takes precedence. So, please have a look at it. Againstdisinformation (talk) 03:47, 29 August 2015 (UTC)


 * The European Court in the case of Tymoshenko violation of Article 18 (scope of application of human limits) in conjunction with Article 5; and decided by majority vote, a violation of Article 3 (prohibition of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment) regarding the alleged beating of Ms. Tymoshenko during her transportation to the hospital April 20, 2012 and on the effectiveness of investigation of complaints on this drive.--Lidaz (talk) 08:30, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

The Court also found Missed - non-exhaustion of domestic remedies - complaint Timoshenko under Article 8 on video surveillance around the clock for her in the hospital.--Lidaz (talk) 08:35, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
 * As for the complaint of Ms. Tymoshenko in her alleged beating during transport to the hospital April 20, 2012, the Court noted that, as was found during her stay in the colony on her body were a few bruises. Only this fact itself was enough that the public authorities the obligation to explain the origin of bruises.

The Court noted that the location of bruises Mrs Tymoshenko - in the abdomen and forearms - consistent with her version of events, according to which it forcibly dragged out of bed and hit in the stomach the day of its transportation to the hospital.--Lidaz (talk) 08:38, 29 August 2015 (UTC)


 * I am sorry, but I have to disagree. Your claim that the court decided by a majority vote that there was a violation of Article 3 is false. I reproduce here the conclusions of the court for your benefit:

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT

1. Declares unanimously the complaint under Article 3 of the Convention concerning the applicant’s alleged ill-treatment during her transfer to the hospital on 20 April 2012 and its investigation, as well as the complaints under Articles 5 and 18 of the Convention, admissible and the remainder of the application inadmissible; 2. Holds by 4 votes to 3 that there has been no violation of Article 3 of the Convention in respect of the applicant’s complaint concerning her alleged ill-treatment during her transfer to the hospital on 20 April 2012 and the effectiveness of the domestic investigation; 3. Holds unanimously that there has been a violation of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention; 4. Holds unanimously that there has been a violation of Article 5 § 4 of the Convention; 5. Holds unanimously that there has been a violation of Article 5 § 5 of the Convention; 6. Holds unanimously that there has been a violation of Article 18 of the Convention taken together with Article 5 of the Convention. Done in English, and delivered at a public hearing on 30 April 2013, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.

Stephen Phillips Deputy Registrar               Dean Spielmann President

Please, understand that I am not here because I have a grudge to Ms Tymoshenko or I want to defend Mr Yanukovitch. As my username suggests, my sole purpose is to maintain accuracy in Wikipedia and to rid it of disinformation. A single false statement could make it lose all credibility. Againstdisinformation (talk) 15:36, 29 August 2015 (UTC)


 * I have reverted the article back to a version from June, because several intervening edits (especially those by and ) had introduced garbled and severely ungrammatical content. I also removed the statement that European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg acknowledged political persecution and torture and put a final end to all criminal case against Yulia Tymoshenko in 2011-2014, which, as Againstdisinformation rightly observes, is patently untrue and also not supported by the reference provided . From what I could quickly gather , there were two cases before the ECHR: in the first, a judgment largely in Tymoshenko's favour was made in 2013, although the specific charge of torture was in fact rejected. The second (the subject of the Interfax article cited) wasn't adjudicated at all, but cancelled without a judgment, because the new post-Majdan government of Ukraine had in the meantime taken Tymoshenko's position and declared she was right. This case didn't concern a charge of "torture", from what I can figure out, and if it did, the court didn't rule on it – the court merely noted the declaration of the new government and decided it had nothing more to do in the case.


 * Further edit-warring or tendentious editing from either side in this dispute will be met with a request for sanctions at WP:AE. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:59, 29 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Two users:Againstdisinformation and Fut.Perf. on the page Tymoshenko do vandalism. They remove important information, patterns, and authoritative sources. I think these users are intentionally work against Tymoshenko to distort information — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lidaz (talk • contribs) 19:29, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Decision of the European Court of Human Rights
The decision of the European court confirmed the link.There are also links about Russian aggression in Ukraine.In the judgment of the European Court says that Tymoshenko was a political prisoner.Regarding the Russian aggression, Tymoshenko's even created his battalion, which was fighting in the East of Ukraine.Please do not remove this important information.--Gal777 (talk) 04:56, 23 September 2015 (UTC)--
 * No, there is a difference between stating that WP:ITSIMPORTANT and WP:WEIGHT. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 05:23, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Former Ukrainian Prime Minister Yuliya Tymoshenko’s second complaint to the European Court of Human Rights has been discontinued, it has been confirmed.The European Court of Human Rights decided unanimously, on 16 December 2014, to strike the application Tymoshenko v. Ukraine – no. 2 (application no. 65656/12) out of its list of cases pursuant to Article 39 (friendly settlements) of the European Convention on Human Rights. The decision is final.The case – the second application brought by the former Ukrainian Prime Minister Yuliya Tymoshenko before the ECHR – mainly concerned the criminal proceedings brought against her in April 2011 relating to contracts for the supply of gas.The court took note of the Ukrainian government’s declaration in which it admitted that the criminal prosecution of Tymoshenko had been politically motivated and in which they acknowledged a violation of her convention rights, and of various measures taken by the government as a consequence of those violations.--Gal777 (talk) 05:37, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Guys, do the talk about this sentence?
 * European Court of Human Rights recognized the "gas case" political persecution of Yulia Tymoshenko.


 * Firstly, both references (the second one I guess suppoesed to be )do not talk about recognizing the gas case as political persecution. They talk that the case is closed as friendly settled - Ukrainian Government has changed and it is now not an enemy of Timoshenko. I do not think that this info is very important but I do not object if somebody want to enter the info.
 * Secondly, we do talk about the European Court of Human Rights in the Yulia Tymoshenko section:
 * On 30 April 2013 the European Court of Human Rights issued a judgment[362] asserting that "Ms. Tymoshenko's pre-trial detention had been arbitrary; that the lawfulness of her detention had not been properly reviewed; and, that she had no possibility to seek compensation for her unlawful deprivation of liberty."
 * Is it not strong enough? Some important information is missing? If yes, then it should be probably added next to this sentence. Alex Bakharev (talk) 05:49, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
 * 22 January 2015 European Court of Human Rights in its decision on the second complaint, acknowledged "gas case" political persecution of Yulia Tymoshenko. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gal777 (talk • contribs) 06:21, 23 September 2015 (UTC)