This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
International reactions to the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 4 March 2014 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to Eastern Europe or the Balkans, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
Lets have a discussion here first, I know some out there dislike international reactions articles and before we redo another AfD about it discuss it here. - Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 01:55, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
BEFORE ANYBODY WASTES ANY MORE TIME ON THIS (as I unfortunately have), please note that the Deletion Request has already been discussed and rejected (see here Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/International_reaction_to_the_2014_Crimean_crisis). As is pointed out there, WP:SNOW applies, as it doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hell of being deleted. Tlhslobus ( talk) 08:36, 5 March 2014 (UTC) Just delete it. It is pure propaganda as it is stated. China officialy supports Russia's reaction. I can't find an official statement from Greek or Cypriot government officials that they regard Russia's actions as invasion or whatever you want to call it This page is full of bs — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.75.33.23 ( talk) 02:29, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Hillary Clinton is no longer part of the US Government so I'm wondering if her comments should be listed as part of the government's reaction- possibly in a separate section? 331dot ( talk) 19:44, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Any comment? 331dot ( talk) 20:52, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Suggesting that different colours be used for the map in the lead, as it's near-impossible for me (and presumably others) to read due to colour blindness. -- Connelly90 12:27, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
The Cuban position seems much more supportive of Russia, more like the Syrian position, than like the Indian position (this is with regard to how its coded for the map) Ricardianman ( talk) 14:43, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
After a V4 - NB8 meeting the 12 MFAs of the Nordic, Baltic and Visegrad countries have agreed to support a EU observation mission, to reaffirm the support of Moldovan, Georgian and Ukrainian bids to receive closer ties to Europe.
They also called the Russian actions as an unprovoked violation of Ukrainian society, called Russia to revoke the Federation Council's decision, and decided that the Crimean referendum is unacceptable.
I am citing the Estonian Ministry of Foreign Affairs website: http://www.vm.ee/?q=en/node/19360
I think we should add this position in. Thanks.-- 117.0.167.78 ( talk) 15:53, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
I have included the vote, under the UN reaction. Some of the countries that voted for the motion were ones whose reaction was not previously documented here - notably Chile, Argentina, and Nigeria. Should those now be included? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ricardianman ( talk • contribs) 01:36, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
Although in the wiki article India's national security advisor S. Menon is correctly cited that ".. there are, after all, legitimate Russian and other interests involved.. ", the map seems to stress only the part of this statement that recognises the interests of Russia, but it does not indicate the position that "there are... legitimate... other interests involved...". Per se, it is unclear what 'other interests' means here; it might as well point to the interests of Ukraine. Is it possible to update the legend of the map correspondingly, please. 90.191.175.33 ( talk) 21:14, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Additionally, while the response of security advisor S. Menon is cited in the article, there are no references to the official statement by ministry of foreign affairs from the same day which does not point to the interests of any third bodies besides the Indian citizens in Ukraine and the population of Ukraine as a whole. [1] 90.191.175.33 ( talk) 21:34, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Now that sanctions are being imposed, on certain Russian, Ukrainian, and Crimean individuals, and on the Russian State, by the US, EU and Japan. it might be worth adding those - and perhaps (though I am not volunteering) someone might want to make a map of who is doing sanctions. Ricardianman ( talk) 02:39, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
I added Sri Lanka's reaction to the article which should qualify as "Recognition of Russian and other interests" or "Support for Russian actions and/or condemnation of the Ukrainian interim government" for the map. Could someone please update the map? I don't know how. Stephen J Sharpe ( talk) 03:04, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
There should be a country SVG map of the General Assembly vote today. Plumber ( talk) 17:59, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
[2] Lihaas ( talk) 15:57, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
The position of the group keeps on being added. There is no reason to add their views to this page - they are non-notable in relation to this event. Yes, they are notable enough to have their own page, but they are not notable in relation to the Crimea crisis. If we have to include their views we would have to add the views of every micro-sect that also has a page on Wikipedia.-- Bellerophon5685 ( talk) 04:11, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
I accidentally run into a "Memorandum 14" and added it here. It occurs to me it would be interesting to see the polarization of the Russian diaspora in the post-Soviet state.
Memo14 was signed by ~800 persons, of 300,000+ Russians in Estonia, i.e., about 0.25% Of course, vast majority of population is politically passive. Still, I am wondering how much is on the Russian chauvinist side? How it is in other places? Staszek Lem ( talk) 21:26, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Serbia supports territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine, [1] [2] but is still marked on the map as if it just voiced concern over political developments in Crimea and Ukraine. Could someone please update the map for Serbia and move it to the category "Supports territorial integrity of Ukraine", because I don't know how. Appreciate it. NeroN BG
References
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on International reactions to the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:44, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 13 external links on International reactions to the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.vm.ee/?q=en%2Fnode%2F19307{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.mfa.kg/mews-of-mfa-kr/zayavlenie-ministerstva-inostrannih-del-kirgizskoi-respubliki-ot-20-marta-2014-goda_en.htmlWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:46, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on International reactions to the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.turkishweekly.net/news/163800/turkey-closely-following-developments-in-crimea.htmlWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:12, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
add Cambodia, Tajikistan, Myanmar, Uganda, Burundi, and Eritrea to support [1] and China, Philippines, Uzbekistan, Serbia to the same color as Belarus-09:35, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
I think it would be a good idea to note in the lead that virtually all international reactions here has either happened during the Crimean crisis (as it was initially known) or its immediate aftermath. A time when there was a lot of uncertainty about what goes on, and Russia still maintained its public denial of military use for example. -- Jakey222 ( talk) 13:02, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
Could we add the number of official recognitions in the opening paragraph or info box or somewhere? From the text, I see that it's only two countries recognizing it officially, but to be sure, the actual number should be stated IMHO. Chaptagai ( talk) 09:24, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
International reactions to the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 4 March 2014 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to Eastern Europe or the Balkans, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
Lets have a discussion here first, I know some out there dislike international reactions articles and before we redo another AfD about it discuss it here. - Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 01:55, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
BEFORE ANYBODY WASTES ANY MORE TIME ON THIS (as I unfortunately have), please note that the Deletion Request has already been discussed and rejected (see here Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/International_reaction_to_the_2014_Crimean_crisis). As is pointed out there, WP:SNOW applies, as it doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hell of being deleted. Tlhslobus ( talk) 08:36, 5 March 2014 (UTC) Just delete it. It is pure propaganda as it is stated. China officialy supports Russia's reaction. I can't find an official statement from Greek or Cypriot government officials that they regard Russia's actions as invasion or whatever you want to call it This page is full of bs — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.75.33.23 ( talk) 02:29, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Hillary Clinton is no longer part of the US Government so I'm wondering if her comments should be listed as part of the government's reaction- possibly in a separate section? 331dot ( talk) 19:44, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Any comment? 331dot ( talk) 20:52, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Suggesting that different colours be used for the map in the lead, as it's near-impossible for me (and presumably others) to read due to colour blindness. -- Connelly90 12:27, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
The Cuban position seems much more supportive of Russia, more like the Syrian position, than like the Indian position (this is with regard to how its coded for the map) Ricardianman ( talk) 14:43, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
After a V4 - NB8 meeting the 12 MFAs of the Nordic, Baltic and Visegrad countries have agreed to support a EU observation mission, to reaffirm the support of Moldovan, Georgian and Ukrainian bids to receive closer ties to Europe.
They also called the Russian actions as an unprovoked violation of Ukrainian society, called Russia to revoke the Federation Council's decision, and decided that the Crimean referendum is unacceptable.
I am citing the Estonian Ministry of Foreign Affairs website: http://www.vm.ee/?q=en/node/19360
I think we should add this position in. Thanks.-- 117.0.167.78 ( talk) 15:53, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
I have included the vote, under the UN reaction. Some of the countries that voted for the motion were ones whose reaction was not previously documented here - notably Chile, Argentina, and Nigeria. Should those now be included? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ricardianman ( talk • contribs) 01:36, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
Although in the wiki article India's national security advisor S. Menon is correctly cited that ".. there are, after all, legitimate Russian and other interests involved.. ", the map seems to stress only the part of this statement that recognises the interests of Russia, but it does not indicate the position that "there are... legitimate... other interests involved...". Per se, it is unclear what 'other interests' means here; it might as well point to the interests of Ukraine. Is it possible to update the legend of the map correspondingly, please. 90.191.175.33 ( talk) 21:14, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Additionally, while the response of security advisor S. Menon is cited in the article, there are no references to the official statement by ministry of foreign affairs from the same day which does not point to the interests of any third bodies besides the Indian citizens in Ukraine and the population of Ukraine as a whole. [1] 90.191.175.33 ( talk) 21:34, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Now that sanctions are being imposed, on certain Russian, Ukrainian, and Crimean individuals, and on the Russian State, by the US, EU and Japan. it might be worth adding those - and perhaps (though I am not volunteering) someone might want to make a map of who is doing sanctions. Ricardianman ( talk) 02:39, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
I added Sri Lanka's reaction to the article which should qualify as "Recognition of Russian and other interests" or "Support for Russian actions and/or condemnation of the Ukrainian interim government" for the map. Could someone please update the map? I don't know how. Stephen J Sharpe ( talk) 03:04, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
There should be a country SVG map of the General Assembly vote today. Plumber ( talk) 17:59, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
[2] Lihaas ( talk) 15:57, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
The position of the group keeps on being added. There is no reason to add their views to this page - they are non-notable in relation to this event. Yes, they are notable enough to have their own page, but they are not notable in relation to the Crimea crisis. If we have to include their views we would have to add the views of every micro-sect that also has a page on Wikipedia.-- Bellerophon5685 ( talk) 04:11, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
I accidentally run into a "Memorandum 14" and added it here. It occurs to me it would be interesting to see the polarization of the Russian diaspora in the post-Soviet state.
Memo14 was signed by ~800 persons, of 300,000+ Russians in Estonia, i.e., about 0.25% Of course, vast majority of population is politically passive. Still, I am wondering how much is on the Russian chauvinist side? How it is in other places? Staszek Lem ( talk) 21:26, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Serbia supports territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine, [1] [2] but is still marked on the map as if it just voiced concern over political developments in Crimea and Ukraine. Could someone please update the map for Serbia and move it to the category "Supports territorial integrity of Ukraine", because I don't know how. Appreciate it. NeroN BG
References
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on International reactions to the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:44, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 13 external links on International reactions to the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.vm.ee/?q=en%2Fnode%2F19307{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.mfa.kg/mews-of-mfa-kr/zayavlenie-ministerstva-inostrannih-del-kirgizskoi-respubliki-ot-20-marta-2014-goda_en.htmlWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:46, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on International reactions to the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.turkishweekly.net/news/163800/turkey-closely-following-developments-in-crimea.htmlWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:12, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
add Cambodia, Tajikistan, Myanmar, Uganda, Burundi, and Eritrea to support [1] and China, Philippines, Uzbekistan, Serbia to the same color as Belarus-09:35, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
I think it would be a good idea to note in the lead that virtually all international reactions here has either happened during the Crimean crisis (as it was initially known) or its immediate aftermath. A time when there was a lot of uncertainty about what goes on, and Russia still maintained its public denial of military use for example. -- Jakey222 ( talk) 13:02, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
Could we add the number of official recognitions in the opening paragraph or info box or somewhere? From the text, I see that it's only two countries recognizing it officially, but to be sure, the actual number should be stated IMHO. Chaptagai ( talk) 09:24, 4 June 2023 (UTC)