This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
People are missing. 116 are dead on the scene, total of 200 are unaccounted. News report [5]. I'm saying there were "aggressive" people on both sides according to eye witnesses. There were also non-aggressive people. Civilians and police. USchick ( talk) 02:55, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
This new angle should be added when unlocked and hopefully by then more details come out from 3rd parties / the authorities: [12] [13]
"People from both sides suffered. But in fact there were terrorists brought from Transnistria and Russia who fired on the Ukrainian march and there were also special toxic substances placed at Trade Union house. It was a scenario developed in advance to make the number of victims higher." - Poroshenko
"Today, in closed session (of Parliament), we obtained additional evidence of what happened: the events that took place in the House of Trade Unions were a terrorist attack. They used toxic substances,"
-- Львівське ( говорити) 15:31, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Meanwhile locals in Odessa blame Kiev for the massacre in Odessa http://www.euronews.com/2014/05/06/odessa-buries-its-dead-as-locals-blame-kyiv-for-the-violence/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.131.231.211 ( talk) 18:44, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
the plot thickens [14]
a chloroform substance used in medicine was discovered, the head of the Investigation Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine, Vitaliy Sakal, stated at a press briefing Monday, May 19, as reported by Interfax Ukraine.
“In the debris and the soot removed during the inspection of the Trade Union Building, a chloroform-like substance was discovered. Chloroform is well known: it is used during surgery, but how it came to be in the Trade Union Building is something we’re trying to establish,” he said.
“The inhalation of chloroform vapor, according to expert opinion, leads to respiratory arrest, which is exactly what happened here. 32 people died not from the heat but as a result of the effects of an unknown substance — cardiac arrest and choking,” Sakal said.
EPR is citing two Interfax reports so it checks out and is coming from authorities. -- Львівське ( говорити) 18:28, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
I'm referring to this edit. Which is it? Did the report say that no arms were found in the building, or that people were shooting on the roof? The sources don't make either clear. However, the sentence is presently contradictory. RGloucester — ☎ 01:53, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
Preliminary findings from an Interior Ministry investigation suggest that pro-Russian separatists in Odesa accidentally set the trade union building on fire with Molotov cocktails. According to an Interior Ministry statement, separatists on April 2 broke into the trade union building and barricaded themselves inside. They then from the roof started throwing Molotov cocktails and shooting with firearms at “peaceful citizens.”
An investigation conducted by the Interior Ministry determined that the majority of the 172 people who had been arrested were identified are Russian nationals, and residents of Transnistria. Police confiscated a large number of firearms during the arrests.
many bodies were moved away http://let-them-know.livejournal.com/2594.html sig-- Crossswords ( talk) 10:11, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
Here's a link with loads of photos (warning: gruesome photos of dead people) which were purportedly taken inside the Trade Union building in Odessa. The ones that I find particularly interesting are the ones appearing to show deceased people (some of whom appear to have been shot) with burnt heads and shoulders, but with no burns on the rest of their body, because I don't see how that is possible unless someone pours a flammable liquid over their heads and ignites it.
If these photos are genuine, there was a murderer (maybe more than one) inside the Trade Union building in Odessa, in my view. Theresonator ( talk) 11:22, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
The government states that at least 42 of the at least 48 dead were in the union building or leaped from it to their deaths. As for the other six dead, only "Odessa lawmaker Dmytro Spivak" [15] claims that all of the six were Kiev supporters. No official has separated the six dead as to whether they were pro or anti-Kiev, though I read early on that at least one of those killed by gunfire was a pro-Kiev protester. I can't find the source for that yet. Haberstr ( talk) 07:57, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
(Please do not remove the tag until after a full discussion and consensus that the POV problem has been solved.) The article uses as a major source the very biased, pro-Kiev 'Kyiv Post'. The article allows in unsupported allegations from non-RS sources if they're biased against the anti-Kiev protesters. (For example: "According to Ukrainian government reports, a bus of pro-Russian separatists was detained while trying to enter the city; the group aboard was immediately released into the city on the order of a high ranking police official.") On the other hand, the entire narrative of what the anti-Kiev sources believe and say actually happened, that there were Right Sector thugs bused in, that the fire was deliberate, that when people jumped and survived they were beaten, and so on is not allowed into the article. Note the exceptional lack of balance and biased sourcing in the following, the entry's key 'assigning blame' paragraph:
Reports about the precise sequence of events that followed vary between different sources. While defending the building, militants on the roof tossed rocks and petrol bombs at the protesters below. A report by the Ukrainian Independent Information Agency (UNIAN) said that the pro-united Ukraine crowd began to throw petrol bombs into the building after having been fired upon by the pro-Russian group. BBC News said that the situation was unclear, with multiple sources indicating that both sides had been throwing petrol bombs at each other. One eyewitness told the BBC that the fire started on the third floor when a petrol bomb was thrown at a closed window from inside the building, and the Kyiv Post reported that several flaming bottles held by Ukrainian unity activists outside were thrown into the front entrance, and through the windows on the second and fourth floors. An official investigation conducted by the Ukrainian Interior Ministry stated that while no firearms were found inside the building, those on the roof were shooting at the crowd below, and accidentally set the building on fire whilst throwing petrol bombs from above. Russian sources dispute this report, saying that the fire was started intentionally by "pro-Kiev radicals," and that those who died were "anti-government activists."
Haberstr ( talk) 18:53, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
ITAR and Voice of Russia are Russian state media, Kyiv Post is privately owned independent news. Entirely different and ridiculous to compare.-- LeVivsky ( ಠ_ಠ) 22:25, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
Some of the editors here do not understand that introductory sections for substantial articles like this one should be much longer than three sentences or 40 words. So, please stop reverting to the paragraph immediately below, which is much too short and doesn't tell us the main events that happened on that day, in particular the events that make the day notable if not for a brief time world famous:
On 2 May 2014, as part of the rising unrest in Ukraine in the aftermath of the 2014 Ukrainian revolution, clashes between pro-Ukrainian and pro-Russian groups broke out in different streets and squares of Odessa. [1] [2] [3] The events were the bloodiest civil conflict in Odessa since 1918. [4]
The following, which has twice been reverted to the above, tells us in brief what happened, and how many people died. As I said in the notes, if you don't like some of the content below, revise, don't revert. We need to include the main facts below and the outline it provides of the basic story of what happened:
On 2 May 2014, in connection with rising unrest in Ukraine in the aftermath of the 2014 Ukrainian revolution, clashes between Ukrainian and pro-Russian groups broke out in the southern Ukraine city of Odessa. The clashes began when militants opposed to the new government attacked a Ukrainian unity march organized around a football match. [1] [2] [3] The larger crowd then attacked the smaller group of anti-government protesters, chasing them to a trade union building. There, the two groups fought and threw Molotov cocktails at each other and into the trade union building. It caught fire and thirty-two anti-Kiev protesters and militants died from fire, asphyxiation, or chloroform poisoning, and another ten leaped to their deaths from the building. [5] A total of six protesters died of gunshot wounds, five pro-government and one anti-government. [6] [7] The events were the bloodiest civil conflict in Odessa since 1918. [4]
Haberstr ( talk) 19:38, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
New lead, sentence one: On 2 May 2014, as part of the rising unrest in Ukraine in the aftermath of the 2014 Ukrainian revolution, clashes between pro-Ukrainian and pro-Russian groups broke out in multiple different streets and squares of Odessa.[2][16][17] These clashes culminated in a large skirmish outside the Trade Unions House, an Odessa landmark located on Kulikovo Field in the city centre.[1] That building then caught fire in unclear circumstances, killing forty-three pro-Russian activists who had holed up in it.[12] Five other people died in running battles on the streets.[11] The events were the bloodiest civil conflict in Odessa since 1918.[18] Old lead, sentence one: On 2 May 2014, in connection with rising unrest in Ukraine in the aftermath of the 2014 Ukrainian revolution, clashes between Ukrainian and pro-Russian groups broke out in the southern Ukraine city of Odessa.
New lead, sentence two: These clashes culminated in a large skirmish outside the Trade Unions House, an Odessa landmark located on Kulikovo Field in the city centre.[1] Old lead, sentences two, three & four: The clashes began when militants opposed to the new government attacked a Ukrainian unity march organized around a football match. [1] [2] [3] The larger crowd then attacked the smaller group of anti-government protesters, chasing them to a trade union building. There, the two groups fought and threw Molotov cocktails at each other and into the trade union building.
New lead, sentence three: That building then caught fire in unclear circumstances, killing forty-three pro-Russian activists who had holed up in it.[12] Old lead, sentences five & six: It caught fire and thirty-two anti-Kiev protesters and militants died from fire, asphyxiation, or chloroform poisoning, and another ten leaped to their deaths from the building. [8]
New lead, sentence four: Five other people died in running battles on the streets.[11] Old lead, sentence seven: A total of six protesters died of gunshot wounds, five pro-government and one anti-government. [9] [10]
An editor apparently believes an RT bottom-of-the-barrel yellow press bit is more reliable than an official UN report. Why? RGloucester — ☎ 05:07, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
I'm sure some biased editors will restore this "politically correct" (for some POV-driven users) title, but I renamed this article, apart from common sense, for this simple reason:
So its illogic to name this article "2 May 2014 Odessa clashes", unless our own political views are more important than being fair & balanced. Ah, and please dont use the argument "but there were deaths in boths sides, so that wasnt a massacre", as for example, incidents in Syria with killed in both sides had been labelled as massacres, so unless we want to made double standards and being unbalanced, this article should be labelled as one. Regards,-- HC PUNXKID 15:49, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
This article reads as if it was written by the current Ukrainian government. Take the cause of the fire, for example. There is loads of video footage of Ukrainian nationalists throwing fire-bombs at the building. I have yet to see any video footage of pro-Russian people throwing fire-bombs at the building.
Absent any unbiased evidence to the contrary, the most likely cause of the fire should be the one stated in the article - fire-bombs thrown by Ukrainian nationalists.
Any alternate theories, like some highly unlikely accident, should be listed afterwards, if there is unbiased evidence to support them. The word of the Ukrainian government (which is hardly an unbiased onlooker, having subsequently employed the Right Sector Ukrainian nationalists in the National Guard) seems to be being given far too much credence.
And it should be called the 2014 Odessa Massacre, in my view, because that's what it was. Theresonator ( talk) 18:00, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
I know what I saw. Pro-Ukraine neo-Nazis fire-bombing the Trade Union building. Theresonator ( talk) 18:49, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
I have loads of links which support my assertion. But from what I've seen, this article is so biased in favour of the Kiev regime that the truth will never be allowed to get out, so I'm loathe to post the links. Theresonator ( talk) 19:33, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
They are links to websites with videos on them. They are someone else's research, not mine. And the unbelievable pro-Kiev bias in this article still exists. It shames Wikipedia that people are covering up for neo-Nazi mass murderers. Theresonator ( talk) 19:41, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
Aren't you ashamed to be defending neo-Nazis? Theresonator ( talk) 20:05, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
WTF? Why some piece of Ukrainian nazi shit named Львівське is in EVERY THREAD ON THIS TALK PAGE, everywhere dismissing each and every source that aren't Ukrainian or don't align to junta's twist, while simulationsly presenting Ukrainian sources as 100% correct? What about NPOV? Youtube with fucking LIVE VIDEO OF INCIDENT is bad, but some Ukrainian newspaper singing juntas tune is doubleplusgood? If first is "original research" then random piece from some random journalist is just as original. This clown should be banned. Entire article should either present all reported points or be reduced to single sentence "We don't know what happened". -- Rowaa[SR13] ( talk) 02:37, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
From the bit about how the fire started: "A report by the Ukrainian Independent Information Agency (UNIAN) said that the pro-united Ukraine crowd began to throw petrol bombs into the building after having been fired upon by the pro-Russian group." It was handy that they happened to have petrol bombs with them, no doubt for entirely peaceful purposes, wasn't it? It couldn't possibly be the case that the neo-Nazis went to Odessa looking to set loads of people on fire, and that's why they had so many petrol bombs with them, could it? Theresonator ( talk) 16:12, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, peaceful people on marches always carry petrol, to allow them to make petrol bombs, just in case they get attacked. Just like peaceful protesters carry metal bars or wooden bats, just in case. Where are the videos of pro-Russians throwing petrol bombs? Theresonator ( talk) 22:13, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
I've stated my problem with the article - it reads as if it was written by Right Sector neo-Nazis, in an attempt to blame their murderous actions on others. Theresonator ( talk) 23:20, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
Let me give you an insight: Lviv|Львів is the home town of ukranian neo-nazis [11]. This explaines a lot about Львівське arrogant persistence. This user should be banned, the whole article rewritten, and title changed to "2014 Odessa Massacre" 130.204.28.68 ( talk) 21:59, 29 May 2014 (UTC)Melanie Helley
GPpru
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).KilledBBC
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).kp4m
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).There are two sides to this story, but the article clearly favors one of them. There are scare quotes around terms like "pro-Kiev radicals" and "anti-government activists", but none around terms like "pro-Ukrainian demonstrators" and "pro-Russian forces" (why is one group, which appears to be the more violent, called "demonstrators" while the other is "forces"?) Presumably you catch my drift. 55 Gators ( talk) 18:15, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
Referring to "pro-Ukrainians" is nonsense. Both sides in the clashes were Ukrainian. It was about being for or against the new regime in Kiev, i.e. pro or anti-Kiev. Perhaps you could write about "pro-West" and "pro-Russian" but to label the dead as "pro-Russian" insinuates they are somehow less Ukrainian than the "pro-Ukrainians".
More importantly, the TITLE is euphemistic to the point of propaganda. It should read "Odessa Massacre". That's what happened if you've actually seen the photographs of the dead in the building. What happened outside is a distraction compared to the carnage in the TU Building. Again, Wikipedia is an awful platform for mainstream propaganda. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.65.156.58 ( talk) 19:25, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
You do not need any source for the following facts: that both sides were Ukrainian; that members of one side in the "incident" were massacred. Therefore "pro-Ukrainian" is a meaningless phrase and "massacre" is, in fact, a mainstream view of what happend in that building. You volunteers proclaim you're defending against "POV" bias but you are gatekeepers defending a very biased article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.65.156.58 ( talk) 19:49, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
I think it is valid to question the use of "Pro-Ukrainian" and "Pro-Russian" as terms to describe the opposing factions. I think it is also disingenuous to ascribe this to "the sources" -- that simply indicates that some editors are finding sources to justify a bias, not the other way around. This article, to be neutral, would need an approximate balance of pro-Russian and pro-NATO sources, and I'm not seeing that. Mr Bee Pod ( talk) 07:52, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
I would suggest two possible alternatives: describe the factions as "Pro-Russian" and "Pro-NATO", or else call them the "pro-government" and "dissident" factions. 55 Gators ( talk) 17:57, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
People are missing. 116 are dead on the scene, total of 200 are unaccounted. News report [5]. I'm saying there were "aggressive" people on both sides according to eye witnesses. There were also non-aggressive people. Civilians and police. USchick ( talk) 02:55, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
This new angle should be added when unlocked and hopefully by then more details come out from 3rd parties / the authorities: [12] [13]
"People from both sides suffered. But in fact there were terrorists brought from Transnistria and Russia who fired on the Ukrainian march and there were also special toxic substances placed at Trade Union house. It was a scenario developed in advance to make the number of victims higher." - Poroshenko
"Today, in closed session (of Parliament), we obtained additional evidence of what happened: the events that took place in the House of Trade Unions were a terrorist attack. They used toxic substances,"
-- Львівське ( говорити) 15:31, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Meanwhile locals in Odessa blame Kiev for the massacre in Odessa http://www.euronews.com/2014/05/06/odessa-buries-its-dead-as-locals-blame-kyiv-for-the-violence/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.131.231.211 ( talk) 18:44, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
the plot thickens [14]
a chloroform substance used in medicine was discovered, the head of the Investigation Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine, Vitaliy Sakal, stated at a press briefing Monday, May 19, as reported by Interfax Ukraine.
“In the debris and the soot removed during the inspection of the Trade Union Building, a chloroform-like substance was discovered. Chloroform is well known: it is used during surgery, but how it came to be in the Trade Union Building is something we’re trying to establish,” he said.
“The inhalation of chloroform vapor, according to expert opinion, leads to respiratory arrest, which is exactly what happened here. 32 people died not from the heat but as a result of the effects of an unknown substance — cardiac arrest and choking,” Sakal said.
EPR is citing two Interfax reports so it checks out and is coming from authorities. -- Львівське ( говорити) 18:28, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
I'm referring to this edit. Which is it? Did the report say that no arms were found in the building, or that people were shooting on the roof? The sources don't make either clear. However, the sentence is presently contradictory. RGloucester — ☎ 01:53, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
Preliminary findings from an Interior Ministry investigation suggest that pro-Russian separatists in Odesa accidentally set the trade union building on fire with Molotov cocktails. According to an Interior Ministry statement, separatists on April 2 broke into the trade union building and barricaded themselves inside. They then from the roof started throwing Molotov cocktails and shooting with firearms at “peaceful citizens.”
An investigation conducted by the Interior Ministry determined that the majority of the 172 people who had been arrested were identified are Russian nationals, and residents of Transnistria. Police confiscated a large number of firearms during the arrests.
many bodies were moved away http://let-them-know.livejournal.com/2594.html sig-- Crossswords ( talk) 10:11, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
Here's a link with loads of photos (warning: gruesome photos of dead people) which were purportedly taken inside the Trade Union building in Odessa. The ones that I find particularly interesting are the ones appearing to show deceased people (some of whom appear to have been shot) with burnt heads and shoulders, but with no burns on the rest of their body, because I don't see how that is possible unless someone pours a flammable liquid over their heads and ignites it.
If these photos are genuine, there was a murderer (maybe more than one) inside the Trade Union building in Odessa, in my view. Theresonator ( talk) 11:22, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
The government states that at least 42 of the at least 48 dead were in the union building or leaped from it to their deaths. As for the other six dead, only "Odessa lawmaker Dmytro Spivak" [15] claims that all of the six were Kiev supporters. No official has separated the six dead as to whether they were pro or anti-Kiev, though I read early on that at least one of those killed by gunfire was a pro-Kiev protester. I can't find the source for that yet. Haberstr ( talk) 07:57, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
(Please do not remove the tag until after a full discussion and consensus that the POV problem has been solved.) The article uses as a major source the very biased, pro-Kiev 'Kyiv Post'. The article allows in unsupported allegations from non-RS sources if they're biased against the anti-Kiev protesters. (For example: "According to Ukrainian government reports, a bus of pro-Russian separatists was detained while trying to enter the city; the group aboard was immediately released into the city on the order of a high ranking police official.") On the other hand, the entire narrative of what the anti-Kiev sources believe and say actually happened, that there were Right Sector thugs bused in, that the fire was deliberate, that when people jumped and survived they were beaten, and so on is not allowed into the article. Note the exceptional lack of balance and biased sourcing in the following, the entry's key 'assigning blame' paragraph:
Reports about the precise sequence of events that followed vary between different sources. While defending the building, militants on the roof tossed rocks and petrol bombs at the protesters below. A report by the Ukrainian Independent Information Agency (UNIAN) said that the pro-united Ukraine crowd began to throw petrol bombs into the building after having been fired upon by the pro-Russian group. BBC News said that the situation was unclear, with multiple sources indicating that both sides had been throwing petrol bombs at each other. One eyewitness told the BBC that the fire started on the third floor when a petrol bomb was thrown at a closed window from inside the building, and the Kyiv Post reported that several flaming bottles held by Ukrainian unity activists outside were thrown into the front entrance, and through the windows on the second and fourth floors. An official investigation conducted by the Ukrainian Interior Ministry stated that while no firearms were found inside the building, those on the roof were shooting at the crowd below, and accidentally set the building on fire whilst throwing petrol bombs from above. Russian sources dispute this report, saying that the fire was started intentionally by "pro-Kiev radicals," and that those who died were "anti-government activists."
Haberstr ( talk) 18:53, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
ITAR and Voice of Russia are Russian state media, Kyiv Post is privately owned independent news. Entirely different and ridiculous to compare.-- LeVivsky ( ಠ_ಠ) 22:25, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
Some of the editors here do not understand that introductory sections for substantial articles like this one should be much longer than three sentences or 40 words. So, please stop reverting to the paragraph immediately below, which is much too short and doesn't tell us the main events that happened on that day, in particular the events that make the day notable if not for a brief time world famous:
On 2 May 2014, as part of the rising unrest in Ukraine in the aftermath of the 2014 Ukrainian revolution, clashes between pro-Ukrainian and pro-Russian groups broke out in different streets and squares of Odessa. [1] [2] [3] The events were the bloodiest civil conflict in Odessa since 1918. [4]
The following, which has twice been reverted to the above, tells us in brief what happened, and how many people died. As I said in the notes, if you don't like some of the content below, revise, don't revert. We need to include the main facts below and the outline it provides of the basic story of what happened:
On 2 May 2014, in connection with rising unrest in Ukraine in the aftermath of the 2014 Ukrainian revolution, clashes between Ukrainian and pro-Russian groups broke out in the southern Ukraine city of Odessa. The clashes began when militants opposed to the new government attacked a Ukrainian unity march organized around a football match. [1] [2] [3] The larger crowd then attacked the smaller group of anti-government protesters, chasing them to a trade union building. There, the two groups fought and threw Molotov cocktails at each other and into the trade union building. It caught fire and thirty-two anti-Kiev protesters and militants died from fire, asphyxiation, or chloroform poisoning, and another ten leaped to their deaths from the building. [5] A total of six protesters died of gunshot wounds, five pro-government and one anti-government. [6] [7] The events were the bloodiest civil conflict in Odessa since 1918. [4]
Haberstr ( talk) 19:38, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
New lead, sentence one: On 2 May 2014, as part of the rising unrest in Ukraine in the aftermath of the 2014 Ukrainian revolution, clashes between pro-Ukrainian and pro-Russian groups broke out in multiple different streets and squares of Odessa.[2][16][17] These clashes culminated in a large skirmish outside the Trade Unions House, an Odessa landmark located on Kulikovo Field in the city centre.[1] That building then caught fire in unclear circumstances, killing forty-three pro-Russian activists who had holed up in it.[12] Five other people died in running battles on the streets.[11] The events were the bloodiest civil conflict in Odessa since 1918.[18] Old lead, sentence one: On 2 May 2014, in connection with rising unrest in Ukraine in the aftermath of the 2014 Ukrainian revolution, clashes between Ukrainian and pro-Russian groups broke out in the southern Ukraine city of Odessa.
New lead, sentence two: These clashes culminated in a large skirmish outside the Trade Unions House, an Odessa landmark located on Kulikovo Field in the city centre.[1] Old lead, sentences two, three & four: The clashes began when militants opposed to the new government attacked a Ukrainian unity march organized around a football match. [1] [2] [3] The larger crowd then attacked the smaller group of anti-government protesters, chasing them to a trade union building. There, the two groups fought and threw Molotov cocktails at each other and into the trade union building.
New lead, sentence three: That building then caught fire in unclear circumstances, killing forty-three pro-Russian activists who had holed up in it.[12] Old lead, sentences five & six: It caught fire and thirty-two anti-Kiev protesters and militants died from fire, asphyxiation, or chloroform poisoning, and another ten leaped to their deaths from the building. [8]
New lead, sentence four: Five other people died in running battles on the streets.[11] Old lead, sentence seven: A total of six protesters died of gunshot wounds, five pro-government and one anti-government. [9] [10]
An editor apparently believes an RT bottom-of-the-barrel yellow press bit is more reliable than an official UN report. Why? RGloucester — ☎ 05:07, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
I'm sure some biased editors will restore this "politically correct" (for some POV-driven users) title, but I renamed this article, apart from common sense, for this simple reason:
So its illogic to name this article "2 May 2014 Odessa clashes", unless our own political views are more important than being fair & balanced. Ah, and please dont use the argument "but there were deaths in boths sides, so that wasnt a massacre", as for example, incidents in Syria with killed in both sides had been labelled as massacres, so unless we want to made double standards and being unbalanced, this article should be labelled as one. Regards,-- HC PUNXKID 15:49, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
This article reads as if it was written by the current Ukrainian government. Take the cause of the fire, for example. There is loads of video footage of Ukrainian nationalists throwing fire-bombs at the building. I have yet to see any video footage of pro-Russian people throwing fire-bombs at the building.
Absent any unbiased evidence to the contrary, the most likely cause of the fire should be the one stated in the article - fire-bombs thrown by Ukrainian nationalists.
Any alternate theories, like some highly unlikely accident, should be listed afterwards, if there is unbiased evidence to support them. The word of the Ukrainian government (which is hardly an unbiased onlooker, having subsequently employed the Right Sector Ukrainian nationalists in the National Guard) seems to be being given far too much credence.
And it should be called the 2014 Odessa Massacre, in my view, because that's what it was. Theresonator ( talk) 18:00, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
I know what I saw. Pro-Ukraine neo-Nazis fire-bombing the Trade Union building. Theresonator ( talk) 18:49, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
I have loads of links which support my assertion. But from what I've seen, this article is so biased in favour of the Kiev regime that the truth will never be allowed to get out, so I'm loathe to post the links. Theresonator ( talk) 19:33, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
They are links to websites with videos on them. They are someone else's research, not mine. And the unbelievable pro-Kiev bias in this article still exists. It shames Wikipedia that people are covering up for neo-Nazi mass murderers. Theresonator ( talk) 19:41, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
Aren't you ashamed to be defending neo-Nazis? Theresonator ( talk) 20:05, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
WTF? Why some piece of Ukrainian nazi shit named Львівське is in EVERY THREAD ON THIS TALK PAGE, everywhere dismissing each and every source that aren't Ukrainian or don't align to junta's twist, while simulationsly presenting Ukrainian sources as 100% correct? What about NPOV? Youtube with fucking LIVE VIDEO OF INCIDENT is bad, but some Ukrainian newspaper singing juntas tune is doubleplusgood? If first is "original research" then random piece from some random journalist is just as original. This clown should be banned. Entire article should either present all reported points or be reduced to single sentence "We don't know what happened". -- Rowaa[SR13] ( talk) 02:37, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
From the bit about how the fire started: "A report by the Ukrainian Independent Information Agency (UNIAN) said that the pro-united Ukraine crowd began to throw petrol bombs into the building after having been fired upon by the pro-Russian group." It was handy that they happened to have petrol bombs with them, no doubt for entirely peaceful purposes, wasn't it? It couldn't possibly be the case that the neo-Nazis went to Odessa looking to set loads of people on fire, and that's why they had so many petrol bombs with them, could it? Theresonator ( talk) 16:12, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, peaceful people on marches always carry petrol, to allow them to make petrol bombs, just in case they get attacked. Just like peaceful protesters carry metal bars or wooden bats, just in case. Where are the videos of pro-Russians throwing petrol bombs? Theresonator ( talk) 22:13, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
I've stated my problem with the article - it reads as if it was written by Right Sector neo-Nazis, in an attempt to blame their murderous actions on others. Theresonator ( talk) 23:20, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
Let me give you an insight: Lviv|Львів is the home town of ukranian neo-nazis [11]. This explaines a lot about Львівське arrogant persistence. This user should be banned, the whole article rewritten, and title changed to "2014 Odessa Massacre" 130.204.28.68 ( talk) 21:59, 29 May 2014 (UTC)Melanie Helley
GPpru
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).KilledBBC
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).kp4m
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).There are two sides to this story, but the article clearly favors one of them. There are scare quotes around terms like "pro-Kiev radicals" and "anti-government activists", but none around terms like "pro-Ukrainian demonstrators" and "pro-Russian forces" (why is one group, which appears to be the more violent, called "demonstrators" while the other is "forces"?) Presumably you catch my drift. 55 Gators ( talk) 18:15, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
Referring to "pro-Ukrainians" is nonsense. Both sides in the clashes were Ukrainian. It was about being for or against the new regime in Kiev, i.e. pro or anti-Kiev. Perhaps you could write about "pro-West" and "pro-Russian" but to label the dead as "pro-Russian" insinuates they are somehow less Ukrainian than the "pro-Ukrainians".
More importantly, the TITLE is euphemistic to the point of propaganda. It should read "Odessa Massacre". That's what happened if you've actually seen the photographs of the dead in the building. What happened outside is a distraction compared to the carnage in the TU Building. Again, Wikipedia is an awful platform for mainstream propaganda. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.65.156.58 ( talk) 19:25, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
You do not need any source for the following facts: that both sides were Ukrainian; that members of one side in the "incident" were massacred. Therefore "pro-Ukrainian" is a meaningless phrase and "massacre" is, in fact, a mainstream view of what happend in that building. You volunteers proclaim you're defending against "POV" bias but you are gatekeepers defending a very biased article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.65.156.58 ( talk) 19:49, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
I think it is valid to question the use of "Pro-Ukrainian" and "Pro-Russian" as terms to describe the opposing factions. I think it is also disingenuous to ascribe this to "the sources" -- that simply indicates that some editors are finding sources to justify a bias, not the other way around. This article, to be neutral, would need an approximate balance of pro-Russian and pro-NATO sources, and I'm not seeing that. Mr Bee Pod ( talk) 07:52, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
I would suggest two possible alternatives: describe the factions as "Pro-Russian" and "Pro-NATO", or else call them the "pro-government" and "dissident" factions. 55 Gators ( talk) 17:57, 27 January 2015 (UTC)