Talk:Nashi (Russian youth movement)

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 81.68.255.36 (talk) at 14:28, 9 January 2012 (→masha drokova: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 14:28, 9 January 2012 by 81.68.255.36 (talk) (→masha drokova: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Russia: Politics and law Start‑class Mid‑importance

	Russia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Misplaced Pages. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the politics and law of Russia task force.

Various discussion

I think this page compares Nashi to HJ more than needed. Once is enough. It doesn't need to repeated as that makes it sound criticizing and not in line with NPOV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.234.60.130 (talk) 03:50, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

This reads WAY different than the Russian wiki article, which is pretty much all about how Nashi exists to support Putin and prevent a color revolution in Russia. This page needs updating. Dsol 22:49, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

But who is to say that the Russian version is correct? There is large debate about this Nashi group, just as many people think Nashi is Putin's Stormtroopers as there members think they are Russia's only future, and as even a large percentage of the Russian public doesn't support the group, i think it's only fair that a overall view is given on wiki about it instead of just a Nashi press statement. - Barry619

It merits notion that the Russian Misplaced Pages is dominated by Nashi members and supporters, for various reasons -- not least of which is Nashi's rather high approval rate among Russia's young people. It is unlikely that it can stabilise on any version even properly representing criticism of the group in the foreseeable future, lest alone a neutral version. (Indeed, as of now, the Russian version is thorough on various bulletpoints of Nashi marketing, and the section on criticism only has four sentences. Of these four, the first two say, very conditionally, "From all this, one might think that Nashi is similar to Red Guards (China)." No data on who actually makes that criticism, no corroboration, no nothing. (No wonder -- it's not a major point of criticism.) The remaining two describe *one* major point of criticism, that of Nashists' rhetoric all too often being limited to calling their opponents fascists. Again, no context or corroboration is provided.) The sad consequence of this is that the Russian article is not a good source for material regarding Nashi. :-( Digwuren 20:56, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

We do need colourful pictures on their marches and rallies, for instance that of their uniformed santa party in Moscow. It should also be noted that they are supported by the government - their actions are shown in national news and for their marches are allways allowed, unlike those of the opposition. Info about the structure and financial gain for the members wouldn't hurt.IT_ERA_ZI 21:51, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Links to articles don't work www.nashi.su is a forbidden domain. Could someone fix this?

It's not "forbidden" by Misplaced Pages - I can open it here just fine. Looks like the problem is on your side, whatever it might be. -- int19h 19:45, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Interesting thing. The organization uses country code .su (Soviet Union) and not .ru (Russia) on the web. Coincidence? Ostrobothnian 17:06, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

You can't "coincidentially" get a subdomain in .su when you ask for .ru ;) Of course, this is quite intentional. Perhaps it is related to Putin's earlier statement that "the collapse of the USSR is the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century" - with obvious implications. -- int19h 21:07, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Not necessarily. nashi.ru has been taken for many years, per whois data. Russia being one of these countries that routinely uses two TLDs, it's rather common for Russians to go for su domains when the appropriate ru domain is unavailable. Digwuren 16:45, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I quite agree. Nashi is an extremely controversial issue in Russia and its perception very much depends on where you stand and what you are. The Russian version merely presents the official creed of Nashi, whereas the English and the Dutch versions attempt to give a more balanced presentation.

Pierre

I have examined several videos of NASHI advertisments, the view of "stormtroopers" is absurd. I suspect that this is due to misundertandment. NASHI members do various activities in helping Russian communities. One such thing is some members work as "druzhiniki" very similar to UK Neighbourhood Watch. NASHI are also against racial disrimination. Now what really is controversial is - some people say the Russian Government ignores or maybe supports to some extent neo Nazi politicians, why would the Government take an entirely different stance on NASHI? I have also closely watched Russian television when I was staying in Russia, the media did mention suspisions on NASHI...in fact the media has programs for example in which debates between major politicians take place, some may be pro Putin some maybe against etc, ordinary citizens can vote on the outcome of the debate. Also the Government IS ofcourse criticized in the Russian media, I have found Russian media not biast in my view. I wonder if Western media has influenced people to take a negative view of Russia although ofcourse there some positive indications such as Russia's economic development.

Danil Sri Lanka

Oh Danil, so naive. Maybe you have forgotten he fact if you were in Russia, that there is no free media? The english version in Wiki is quite correct. The russian riots in Estonia in April 2007 showed that "Nashi" is Putin's tool even across the borders. In an interview with an Estonian Defence Police detective, was said that Putin is supporting them with billions, all their actions against countries that are not in cremlins favour are very smoothly organized and if usually OMON beats up allkind of protesters within minutes, then if "Nashi" was blocking Estonian embassy, the authorities were just watching, sayng that they do not have any orders to interrupt blockade against embassy. Also about Tallinn riots, main organizers of the russian terror were linked with "Nashi", one of them was even a "Nashi" commisary, it is no coincidence, that at the same time nashist were picketing with this kid pictures, saying that they demand liberation of an innocent schoolboy. Even police authorities and intelligence specialists have said, that "Nashi" is excactly like "Hitlerjugend" (please watch: - Stop Nashism!)

These idiots in Russia are the 21st century Hitlerjugend

Danil is right, the western media is doing everything it can to portray Russians as neonazi fascists, Nashi is probably a completely legitamate organisation. America supports rebel groups and funds color revolutions in countries it doesn't like. Why is it that the many patriotic youth groups in America are praised for loving their country, but if Russia has similar groups, everyone calls them fascists? Also, about the OMON and protests, what about the entirely peaceful Civil rights movement protest tha were brutally put down by American police? Or the murders of innocent black people that police refused to even investigate? I don't get why the west HATES Russia and Russians so much.. (PS Danil obviously personnaly saw the Russian media critisice the Kremlin, so whoever called him "naive" is in no position to tell him that he was wrong) QZXA2 00:19, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps the western patriotic organizations arent fascist, because they do not have policy, that includes hatred against other sovereign and independent countries and slogans that say that actually those countries should belong to them and the people who live there are. ofcourse there are also faschist and/or nazi organizations, but those are not supported by government and also they do not name themselves "democratic" and "anti-fascist", because it is not true. There is a big difference between just showing respect to your country and people or being hostile to other nations and glorify violence. I agree that you can find critizism against Kremlin in Russian media, but it is like a drop in the sea and if the critizism is too objective then similar things happen like the case of Politovskaja and others. If anybody ever wants to compare russian press liability to others, first read thru the world press freedom index...

The recent attacks of Estonia are a joke created by Owrellian reinterpretations of the past. The Soviets never liberated Estonia, in fact they had already subujated it according to the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Too bad I can't set up a common sense criticism section. 70.59.74.162 16:26, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

NASHI is ANTI facist, I will show you why. Nashi does not say that "other countries should belong to Russia" as the above user mentioned. There is absolutely no fact to support any similar statement. Yes NASHI sees the USSR in a less negative way as most Russians who have lived in the USSR and know what it was realistically and not through propaganda sources which poisons minds. The Molotov Ribbentrop pact is not something which Russia today hides, Putin used the very same pact to explain his answer to an Estonian journalist. In fact if the Molotov Ribbentrop pact is read it is DEFINETLY not some alliance, and looks very formal giving no sign of friendship between the Soviet Union and Germany whatsoever. Nashi also promotes cultural events where people of different nationalities can share there culture and also provides events in which Xenophobia or racial hatred is discouraged. I can cite more examples if necessary.

You are right, Nashi does not say that "other countries should belong to Russia", they think that all the independent countries that were held under eastern block, have always been russian areas and at the moment they are "colonies of USA" and should be "liberated" as for example the Baltics at WW2

In this "who's the Nazi now?" hullabaloo, it's important to understand that 'fascist' means different things for Russians than it means to people of Western cultural background. Specifically, for a Westerner, fascism is a matter of ideology: a fascist is one that subscribes to an ideology that is fascist. For a Russian, fascism is a matter of allegiance: a fascist is one that adheres to the Nazis. Thus, for a Russian, pointing out that Nashists oppose Nazis is conclusive proof that they're anti-fascists *and* not fascists. Westerners tend to be puzzled over that proposed "proof", because Western treatment of WWII history does not gloss over the issue of various fascist organisations opposing each other; a Westerner does not consider organisation's X opposition to a known fascist organisation a refutation of organisation's X fascist tendencies.

Similarly, most Russians subscribe to the idea -- or perhaps, stereotype -- that all fascists were utterly loyal to Hitler (or Mussolini), and if a particular fascist behaved in manner incompatible with that, rationalise it through qualities such as cowardice. Incidents such as the July 20 Plot, which are generally taught in high school programmes in West -- especially, countries that actively participated in WWII -- are relatively obscure to Russians. (To an extent, it's a matter of scope; common Russian schools' treatment of WWII tends to concentrate on what Russia considers the Great Patriotic War. On one hand, this means that events not directly related to the Eastern Front (World War II) tend to automatically get much less limelight; on the other hand, it means that many events local to Russia and considered (relatively) minor by Westerners, such as the Siege of Leningrad or the Battle of Sevastopol tend to get the limelight. This aspect may be compared to American schools teaching the history of Battle of Iwo Jima in much greater detail than European schools do.) Digwuren 21:23, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Digwuren Nashi does not have "Eastern Bloc" or the like in it's manisfesto. Nashi are not facist and share no common ideology with facism. Rather, Nashi encourage multi cultural exchanges, they host fairs for example where different nationalities can take part and share their culture, they oppose xenophobia and promote events against racism. Nashi are patriotic, which is the correct word. Digwuren, I believe that it is NOT Russia to blame for her position on history, Western history books seem to give a much minor role to The Great Patriotic War fought by the Soviets. I have studied under the British syllabus and read Russian history books. I am not going to debate on this page, but it is a fact that the Red Army defeated the Germans (Germany's proportion of it's military machine was MOSTLY dedicated to the Eastern front that is USSR) and like Churchill himself said that the Red army tore the heart out of the German army.

Nashi is facist?

Interesting NPR piece here http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=12277079

To weigh in on the 'Nashi are facist or not' issue, I think that any group which has a clear nationalist agenda that focuses on children should be viewed with a good deal of suspision. Preaching to children isn't education, it's indoctrination.

That said, perhaps 'facist' is a little tough? I don't think these guys are quite in the cast of the Nazi Youth.... Perhaps we can just say facist-leaning?

NickCT 20:31, 27 July 2007 (UTC)NickCT

As I said Nashi is not facist, please read my notes above. Please give facts as to why use the word facist to Nashi which is an organisation opposing any ideology of facism.

Actually, they are quite "in the cast". It's just that most of their zany antics don't make to Western media. Interestingly, the reasons for that are not too trivial; for example, a major factor is that they, nor most of the journalists covering them, don't really perceive these as newsworthy. In fact, one version of the story you're referring to explicitly quotes a camp participant declaring that she believes Western youth summer camps are exactly the same way. (Alas, I have forgotten where I saw it. If I should see it again, I'll try to remember and add the link here.)

And, of course, there's the complicating factor that a major facet of what they do is calling everything they disagree with "fascists". It's like the Godwin's law has escaped the Usenet and made its way to real politics of Russia ... Digwuren 20:40, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

More of the camp: Digwuren 11:56, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

And more interesting revelations: , . Digwuren 05:55, 2 August 2007 (UTC) deserves reading, too. Digwuren 14:53, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

THIS ARTICLE IS SO BIASED. I can show countless of arguments against this article, which is Estonian propaganda made in Russian language. (www.epl.ee is an estonain website) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.43.221.20 (talk) 17:45, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, Estonian Ministry of Propaganda does it's work very well! Oh, wait, we don't have one. :( Suva 20:21, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I have no position on this matter in general, but in reply to Suva's comment, a flower by any other name is still the same. Just because there's no American Ministry of Propaganda does not mean that Cuba is a state sponsor of terrorism, as the US says they are. Esn (talk) 02:10, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

POV

I don’t feel like jumping into the middle of an edit war, but the opening statement that Nashi is a “democratic anti-fascist youth movement” is clearly POV in the context of the controversial nature of its, er, nature. It is somewhat amusing that this form was introduced in an edit claiming to clean up POV.

The opening statement should be written without descriptive terms, and followed by a presentation of both perspectives, making it clear who says what. That is the NPOV way. -83.252.213.196 (talk) 13:59, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Done.--Miyokan (talk) 23:43, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Daily Mail

This paragraph misquotes what I wrote. You can find the original article here http://edwardlucas.blogspot.com/2007/07/nashi-sex-camp-shock-horror-latest.html Edwardlucas (talk) 00:58, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Kremlin discards youth movement it fostered

I noticed someone reverted a series of edits last month which included this article, which says some pretty relevant things:

"The youth political movement Nashi (Ours) will be radically reorganized and will no longer function as a centralized federal project. There are no plans to liquidate the pro-Kremlin movement's brand, but Kremlin sources said Nashi will no longer be employed as a political rent-a-crowd. The movement will have only five regional offices left out of 50. "There is no longer an Orange Revolution threat, so we can give more attention to other things now."

" Putin was dissatisfied with how Nashi was faring, they were causing tensions with the West. Medvedev positions himself as a friend of the West, and aggressive national patriotic support does not fit in with that image," political analyst Stanislav Belkovsky explained."

Krawndawg (talk) 07:25, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

"Annual Camp" section

The annual camp section should - in the way it is, be removed, as the statements made there are too grave to let them stand there based just on source, Edward Lucas from the Daily Mail tabloid. As he is also author of The New Cold War And How To Win It he surely would want to talk up his point to increase sales. I personally would call Lucas a biased source that. left standing alone, is of no value. At least one other quality source, not a tabloid or an op-ed, should be found in support of the statements. Oalexander-En (talk) 00:58, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Decline and fall

Today's Nashi picket in Sankt Peterburg consisted of a single person. Reportedly, Nashi didn't manage to get a picket permit on time (!) Previously, Nashi hasn't had any trouble getting picket permits within a hour's notice if politically convenient.

Also, the militia has reportedly arrested a pair of girls for picketing together. Obviously, Nashi is falling out of favour with Russia's authorities. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 15:37, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Yesterday's Postimees quotes Yelizaveta Surnatchova of gazeta.ru as saying that Nashi can't be considered a movement because it doesn't have an ideology. Surnatchova also reports that due to the elections being over, Nashi has trouble with financing, leading towards some activists initiating unsanctioned actions and getting arrested over them. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 15:40, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Another step of decline: . Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 12:13, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Nashis in Finland

Is there any good reason why this article has this lone picture of a Helsinki event? Should this picture perhaps be accompanied with small section explaining that there were 3 activist from Russia, couple of well-known troublemakers from Estonia and whole "demonstration", which by the way was not very welcomed by locals, had overall less then 20 participants? Põhja Konn (talk) 08:17, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I was in the event (and added a couple of picture in Commons). There were 300 listeners for book publishing the "Kaiken takana oli pelko" (The fear was behind everything) by Sofi Oksanen and Imbi Paju. In the beginning of book-publishing came 14-15 people and kept silent demonstration. The were less then ten Nashi and Nochnoy Dozor members, but real (freak show) stars were Finns Leena Hietanen, Abdullah Tammi and Johan Bäckman who, in my opinion, ran the show. There were 3-4 times more reporters than demonstrators. Everything went nice and easy, and book publishing itself didn't interupted – it was like a two different shows in a same room. Overall, at least Finnish demonstrators, made a fool of themselves. Peltimikko (talk) 21:20, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Although the protest was REALLY small scale, the event got extensive media coverage in both local and global news sources and probably should be included somewhere. Not sure how relevant the nashi involvment was, I assume they were rather invited as guests. Suva Чего? 07:40, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

I have seen several newspieces mentioning it consisted of 14 people. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 16:48, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, 14 people together with Nashi, Nochnoy Dozor, Finnish "Anti-Fascists" and ofcourse not to forget Petri Krohn. ;) Suva Чего? 17:10, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

What's your source that Petri Krohn was there?

On the other head, presence of this admitted KGB agent has been reported by Hufvudstadsbladet, for an example: Tyst protest av Putinunga. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 18:20, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Couple of sources:

http://www.hs.fi/english/article/Russian+nationalists+plan+Helsinki+protest+/1135244471088 (As I thought, Nashi was invited over). http://www.hs.fi/english/article/Hundreds+of+listeners+and+a+handful+of+protesters+attend+publication+of+book+on+Estonia/1135244564138

Source for Petri presence:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ostsee/3378664917/in/set-72157615803646316/ Suva Чего? 18:39, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Is it an illusion, or has he taken on the appearance of Dmitri Linter? A few years ago, he seemed more, y'know, geeky. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 19:14, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

I guess all Kremlin funded propaganda organizations have similar dresscode? Suva Чего? 19:18, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Can't be that. He's cut off his beard, but on the very same picture, Abdullah Tammi has a long beard. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 19:26, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Putinjugend is not just Nashi

While Putinjugend most commonly refers to Nashi, it may also refer to Molodaya Gvardiya and Walking Together. How should we explain these additional meanings in the article's lead? Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 13:45, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I have just explained that outside the lead. You are welcome. (Igny (talk) 15:06, 28 March 2009 (UTC))

Removal of links

Please explain your reason for mass removal of links from this article. Please do not simply refer to WP:LINKFARM. Explain why each link you removed was bad.Biophys (talk) 14:56, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

How you about you explaining for every link individually, why it has to be included in the article and what it's role is? Offliner (talk) 00:47, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

It is quite simple. None of the links provide any information which isn't in the article already or which can't be fit into the article. --Russavia 00:57, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

One link is a photo essay, the other a video report, these obviously can't be incorporated into the article, so a link is justified. Martintg (talk) 11:52, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

The video report present's nothing that isn't in the article already. Photos report, perhaps, but we have Commons photos, and I have also written to Nashi asking for permission to use some of their photos. --Russavia 12:32, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

We can't overrely on Nashi publicity photos. WP:SELFPUB applies. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 13:28, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

No it doesn't. Not for photos it doesn't. I don't know where you get that notion from. --Russavia 13:33, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

From common sense rather than wikilawyering. Colchicum (talk) 13:49, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Common sense tells me it doesn't matter where photos come from because they aren't being used for sources. That is what WP:SELFPUB is about, and it isn't wikilawyering to say that it doesn't matter where photos come from, it's common sense. --Russavia 14:33, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Photos from independent reliable sources like Time Magazine are better that WP:SELFPUB sources, since self published images could be self-serving, and this is contrary to Misplaced Pages policy. The photo essay and video linked in the EL section provides WP:NPOV context, while using WP:SELFPUB images could be WP:POV not to mention WP:OR and WP:SYN. Martintg (talk) 20:31, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Anti-fascists?

This is a totalitarian organization known as Putinjugend. They attacked British embassy, assault people, and use dead animals to prove their point. These are facts. Let's not classify them as an "anti-fascist organization" even if they claim themselves such.Biophys (talk) 11:33, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Your question has merit. Similarly, the Antifaschistische Aktion is a self-declared anti-fascist group, acts of which often make one recall SA (Röhm's stormtroopers), however. Thus, we have to ask ourselves, whether an organization's self-declared goal is enough. I think that more often than not, it does not suffice. --Miacek (t) 13:09, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, we should use independent third-party sources.Biophys (talk) 23:48, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Article lede

Offliner has inexplicably reverted my attempts edit the lede to bring it into conformity of Misplaced Pages:LEDE, which states "The lead section should briefly summarize the most important points covered in an article in such a way that it can stand on its own as a concise version of the article". The article contains a section about criticisms, so the lede should mention it. Undoing revert. --Martintg (talk) 11:34, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

You inserted: Critics claim Nashi functions is as a personality cult for Putin whose job was intimidate, bully and harass his opponents. The source you gave does not say this (it is written by one person, not "critics".) Therefore, I have removed it as WP:OR. Offliner (talk) 11:44, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

The thing is that this article has a section on criticisms from a number of critics, so we should summarize it in the lede. Perhaps you can come up with a better summary? --Martintg (talk) 11:59, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

But you can't just take a sentence from the opinion piece of one critic, and then claim that this is what all critics say. Offliner (talk) 12:01, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

It seemed to be the best distillation of the two main criticisms, the cultist aspect of the movement and the tendency of the movement to go after those who are perceived to be opponents of the Kremlin. But as I said, if you can suggest a better summary, well and good. --Martintg (talk) 12:09, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, this "best distillation of two sources" is exactly what is outlined as inadmissible per WP:SYNTH:

Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources. Editors should not make the mistake of thinking that if A is published by a reliable source, and B is published by a reliable source, then A and B can be joined together in an article to reach conclusion C. This would be a synthesis of published material that advances a new position, and that constitutes original research.

PasswordUsername (talk) 17:25, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately you are misapplying WP:SYNTH, the view is that summarizing for an intro is permitted, see Misplaced Pages:Content_noticeboard#Is_summarizing_per_MOS:INTRO_WP:SYNTH.3F. --Martintg (talk) 23:45, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

No, you put the question quite vaguely. Those who read the content gave you the more nuanced view that summarizing and WP:SYNTH do not contradict one another. That is what we'd been telling you all of this time. PasswordUsername (talk) 22:10, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I've added the text as suggested by Abecedare at Misplaced Pages:Content_noticeboard#Is_summarizing_per_MOS:INTRO_WP:SYNTH.3F to the lede. --Martintg (talk) 00:00, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I've added two more reliable, academic, sources to the lede. If there is some kind of problem with their reliability please bring it up at RSN.radek (talk) 15:10, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

The problem isn't with the sources, it's with the content. As I already pointed out, comparing things to Hitler is sensationalism used to generate media hype. People have compared Bush to Hitler, and Obama to Lenin, but we certainly don't see those comparisons in the lead of their articles. We don't see Alex Jones quotes about Obama's police state in his article, do we? It's not appropriate for the lead in an encyclopedia and it's contrary to the notion of a neutral article. That someone compared something to something else is not an excuse to present their claims as fact or to put undue weight on them. LokiiT (talk) 17:33, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree that these claims are not lead material. They are undue because of the reasons above. There is more important stuff in the article that could go into the lead instead. Offliner (talk) 17:54, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Despite PU's claim this isn't "consensus". The comparisons to Hitler Youth and Komsomol are cited to academic reliable sources, not to "sensationalist" journalists as LokiiT claim. This is straight up removal of reliable references. There's no consensus to remove this from the lede and plenty of reasons to keep it - it's notable and reference. This appears to be a case of IDON'TLIKEIT being misrepresented as ... not sure what exactly.radek (talk) 01:08, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Also, most of this discussion took place before additional, reliable sources were added, hence it is irrelevant at this point. Please discuss current sources in the article, not some imagined or old ones.radek (talk) 01:10, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

tag

There's a "neutrality disputed" tag after the Anders Asland source but no explanation given on talk. Is this another spurious tag? Needs to be removed if so.radek (talk) 01:13, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

The tag was put there per a dispute about what the lead should say. Read the discussion above. LokiiT (talk) 03:02, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

That's not an issue of neutrality though, and it was placed there before new sources were added.radek (talk) 12:23, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

The issue is the fact that it's there in the lead at all. It has nothing to do with sources. LokiiT (talk) 22:19, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

But that's not a question of neutrality. (If it is a question at all).radek (talk) 22:30, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

More specifically, if a piece of information/text is well sourced, it's inclusion in the lede depends on its notability - so you'd have to argue that the comparisons between Nashi and Komsomol and Hitler Youth are not notable. This is hard to swallow. Neutrality would be an issue if the actual text was hyperbolic. For example, if it said "Nashi is just as horrible as Hitler Youth" - but it doesn't say that, it just notes that the comparison has been made in reliable sources. This is simply an inappropriate tag (and really no tag belongs there anyway).radek (talk) 22:34, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I could find you about a zillion sources that compare Obama to Lenin. What do you think would happen if I tried to put that into his article's lead? This is stupid, I've already argued this. The comparison being in the lead presents a biased, western-media/anti-Putin positioned view of Nashi with no opinions to present the other side. LokiiT (talk) 22:44, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Whoa. If you can actually find a zillion reliable sources that legitimately compare Obama to Lenin you should probably go to both of those articles and let them people know. But somehow I don't think you can. Look. These are reliable sources. If you think they're not - please go to the RS Noticeboard and raise the issue there. You can't reject sources or article text based solely on IDON'TLIKEIT which is basically what you're trying to do here.radek (talk) 22:48, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Woah. Ad nausium, you're still talking about sources after I already said numerous times that the tag has nothing to do with sources. Fyi, I'm not rejecting that material from the article outright, therefore your citing WP:IDONTLIKE is unfounded; see the criticism section. The tag stays per WP:NPOV and WP:UNDUE. Now I'm done arguing, as you seem unable or unwilling to understand what I'm saying.LokiiT (talk) 23:36, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

To reiterate and for starters, UNDUE is different then neutrality. There's no NPOV violation here. The text simply reports what the sources say. You could argue UNDUE but that's a different tag.radek (talk) 23:50, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

The very first sentences of UNDUE says: Neutrality requires that the article should fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by a reliable source, and should do so in proportion to the prominence of each. That's why there is no tag for UNDUE. Because undue weight is synonymous with POV. LokiiT (talk) 02:04, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

External links

Hi, I recently cleaned up some links from this article's external links section that didn't meet our guidelines but nevertheless constitute reliable sources, so I'll place them here if anyone is interested in using them to cite the article.

Putin's Children- Int. Herald Trib.
Analysis of Nashi by a Russian Jewish group
Report on Nashi by the BBC program Newsnight

Them From Space 18:50, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

I just edited the "New York Times Video: The Putin Generation" video link because it had an error ("," character at the end of the link). This was the reason behind non-working link so i removed the warning about it. Prof. Hubbert Fansworth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.41.121.239 (talk) 06:56, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Mathematical Error

A couple of years ago I studied Biology as part of my school diploma program. It wasn't my favourite subject, but I did manage to learn a few extremely advanced facts:

Some reports mention the use of the camp to improve Russia's demographics, where twenty tents were set up in order to allow twenty newlyweds to sleep together.

Twenty tents for twenty=newlyweds? I'm not quite sure how to put this. Dosen't it, as it were, take 'two to tango'? Isn't there a slight, erm, numerical issue here. Surely it would be ten tents for twenty-newly weds, if you... erm... are catching my drift. I think that casts some doubt on the reliability of the source, or the author's mathematical ability... that is unless the author is a totally pure cherub and is perhaps unaware of some of the more risque facts of human existence. Perhaps they think that an influx of sotrks will improve Russia's demographics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.142.165.62 (talk) 23:34, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

So why don't you change it to say newlywed couples? LokiiT (talk) 23:51, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Ok :). Wouldn't that be original research though?--86.142.165.62 (talk) 18:00, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

No. The article says they are "20 young couples" who "tie the knot in a Big Brother-style ceremony". Whatever that means. LokiiT (talk) 23:08, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

masha drokova

No mention of her whatsoever? 81.68.255.36 (talk) 14:28, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Categories: