Currently or all time?
-G
Probably Hitler and Stalin got higher approval ratings because as in Russia now, they had control of the mass media. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.253.29.69 ( talk) 04:38, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Hitler and Stalin had high ratings, but they were also hated. The German Jews, I bet, didn't think too highly of Hitler. Stalin on the other hand, probably was high on the polls until Germany invaded(which that high approval rating disappeared once WW11 was over). I think those two(and everybody else) pale in comparison to the Kims of North Korea.
If we are talking currently, as of 2010, I'd say that honor goes to Kim Jung Il of North Korea. Of all time? A tie. Kim Jr and his pappy, Kim Il Sung 28 December 1972 - 8 July 1994(21 years,192 days). Maybe Emperor Shōwa (Hirohito) of Japan(or at least, up til WWII's ending. I'd say his radio address announcing surrender, upset a lot of the military and some of the public.)
I occasionally read the Putin biography and notice that often the biography does not contain important information about the lack of press freedom in Russia. This is one of the most important developments in the Putin administration. He has gone to great lengths to suppress freedom of the press to an extent that is unheard of in most democracies. Yet when I try to put detailed information about that, including well sourced information, it is usually quickly removed. My understanding is that it is being removed by a Russian. It is also noteworthy that many websites in Russia frequently are defaced if they contain material that is critical of the Russian President. It is a fact that most of the media in Russia is now controlled by the government. Is that going to hold true for Wikipedia also? I will try again to insert information about the problems that journalists face and the problems that anyone faces when they are critical of the Russian President. For example, a few weeks ago, supporters of the opposition were prevented from going to the city where a conference was being held with European countries. The government prevented that by simply declaring void the plane tickets of the opposition and preventing them from boarding the airplane. This forum ought not to echo the methods of the Russian government and therefore I request that true information about the lack of press freedom in Russia not be deleted from this site. Neutrality is one thing but aiding a dictator is quite another.
I note also that there are a substantial number of complaints from other visitors to this site that anything critical of Putin gets promptly removed. You fans of Putin need to realize that he is not viewed as a democratic leader by very large numbers of people. I urge all visitors to help edit this biography so that negative aspects of Putin's leadership are not prevented from being posted. I am sure he has done some things positive for Russia but the negative cannot be ignored or deleted. I am willing to work with the regulars here to produce a quality product but I will not sit idly by while they dictate the contents. A neutral point of view does not mean ignoring the ethical and moral issues surrounding a leader. Suppose Adolf Hitler were alive today and this biography was about him. Would it be correct to ignore his very great crimes in the name of preserving a "neutral point of view"?
In recent months, Putin's government has put enormous pressure on the opposition in a number of ways, using methods that are illegal in the civilized world. The government has interfered with the travel of the opposition, pressured hotels to deny meeting space, arrested opposition leaders, thrown some in prison and in general has behaved in an uncivilized way. Russia is rapidly becoming a dictatorship with all the implications that this has for the world.
Does Putin ever smile a genuine smile? ..or even better, laugh? Any link to a happy picture of him?
I do not think he was preceded by Tony Blair: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Putin#External_links_and_references 13:03, 20 May 2006 (UTC) He was. See G8#Past_G6.2F7.2F8_summits. "31st 2005 July 6–July 8 United Kingdom Gleneagles Hotel, Gleneagles / Muirton, Scotland http://www.g8.gov.uk " ellol
What US-propaganda is this? If you want neutral and objective information about Vladimir Putin you'd better turn to the European Wikipedia pages.
Derek
Putin indeed is youngest of all Russian leaders. Stalin, Kruschev and Brezhnev were heavy drinkers, Lenin, Andropov and Chernenko were terminally ill, but you are right - Boris Yeltsin is also a sport enthusiast - he plays tennis.
Uncle Joe.
Most of the exclusively US perspective has been removed. A few people seem to think that it is relevant to include in this article the allegation that US President George W. Bush refers to Putin as "Pootie-Poot". It's a cute nickname, and it probably tells us something about Bush, but this artcle isn't the place for American political trivia.
I think this bloke you guys are on about is gay. this comment was from Jáck Hóllóbréád
Thanks for sharing, Jäck.
I made some minor edits relating to the appointed governors and the proportional voting system. The view that these changes somehow subvert democracy is US centric. The majority of democracies use a proportional voting system, and I happen to be from an established democracy (the Kingdom_of_the_Netherlands) where governors are appointed by the Crown (and accepted or rejected by the local legislature). I am willing to accept that Putin championed these changes to tighten his grip on power, and (combined with his control over the national, but maybe not regional, media) they might well have that effect, but one of the US contributors will have to make an explicit case for that to make that argument stick. Maybe he just prefers a more European, and less American, type of democracy? (aboer)
Why and how is Putin so popular (and his opponents so unpopular)? Isn't Russia in a bit of a state? I've heard it suggested that the Russians have remained in a Soviet-era mindset, favouring a strong, stable, central leader over uncertainty and debate. What do people think? Any Russians or other ex-Soviets about? Is it about nostalgia for the USSR, the invasion of Chechnya or more than just those two?
Mr. Jones 10:23, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)
You really have to ask that Question? try here Russia pays off its Soviet era debts to the west and probably a million other positive reforms come on people we need to get educated. - Theblackbay 09:08, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
The Problem with the critising Putin is that he is really popular. If you saying something against his politics, you sonn will be terribly unpopular. There are a lot of independent medias in Russia, but all they are super- liberal, pro-oligarch (corrupter enterpreneurs) and anti- Russian (especiaaly the Berezovsky's media-holding). His Excellence
CPC
Putin owns the Russian media. Thats all it comes down to.
There should really be at least *something* in the article about the sharply divergent views of him in Western media: dictator or democrat, strong leader or weak puppet. If you're a native English speaker (or just better than me) and can come up with something that doesn't violate NPOV, please add it. 82.83.132.165 23:05, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Well, it's not what tabloids write about him. It's what mainstream journalism writes about him. Certainly the article ought to mention Putin's alleged attacks on a free press in Russia. I think that in general the article ought to be considerably more detailed, to be honest. john 04:13, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)
People, people, just because you Americans think your the "most democratic country in the world" doesn't mean you really are!!! Honestly, you are not the capital of the world!! What happens and what works for your country my not work for other nations. What is happening in Russia, really does not concern and should not concern you or your leaders foreign policy in any way what so ever, Russia is Russia, America is America, and Putin is doing the best bloody job, he can FOR RUSSIA'S INTERESTS, just because it doesn't coincide with the beliefs of your polical heads doesn't give you the right to critisize what you dont know. LONG LIVE PUTIN, LONG LIVE RUSSIA, LONG LIVE THE UN.
It might be harder to put 'facts' about Putin in at this point in history without slanting them. Back in the day with kruschev, it'd be easy to say "Installed minimum wage," but now things are a bit more complicated, and saying "Kills Chechens" and "Stops terrorism" are the same 'fact' but you see where perspective determines which 'fact' is being written. Unless you want to post his entire budget proposal every year?
Once again what I already mentioned at GW Bush discussion page. Here (and then US-Russian summit) are some photos from Bush-Putin summit in Slovenia in 2001. The photos are not really public domain but may be published freely if the source and photographer are mentioned. So if you like them and would like to include them into an article, go ahead...
In the table: I put 'None' as the political party, just so people know there's no association (he's just a one-man propoganda machine, but let's not get into that)
In the bottom: I left the link, but I made the text say "prime minister of modern russia" to differentiate between the office held now and the office held before the communist revolution.
— Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 17:50, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I removed the NPOV placed by 80.139.9.254 ( or Voevoda ?). There are no arguments except the sentence "Putin is a rather atypical Russian leader: He is comparatively young, never touches alcohol, and is a sports enthusiast" which is definitely not something major in this article. Lvr 11:16, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
What's Putin's ideology? I know he's a former Communist but I've never heard him called a socialist or social democrat. Pimpalicious 2:46, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
"I looked the man in the eye. I was able to get a sense of his soul." by US President George W. Bush, June 16, 2001, evidently finding Putin to be trustworthy and straight forward. ??? What a naive *******t! Evidently? Can we really find out what politicians think of each other? Can we really trust their diplomatic speeches? You know, when some come country posesses a nuclear arsenal, and becoming more and more hostile to the West, and you're U.S. president, you just can't say "that ex-spy looks like a stupid duck". AlexPU
Isn't it kinda naive to take what a President says about his meeting with another President at face value? As you said - people are complicated. Bush might not mean what he said - but merely to impress the idea that Putin and he are close.
Also, George W. Bush probably said that to foster good relations... Relations that are now gone as Putin refuses to allow a resolution against
Iran to be passed in the
UN Security Council. Russia, as a permanent member, has veto power.
Dzerzhinsky
22:14, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I have edited the sentence pertaining to Gazprom. The sentence implied Gazprom is completely state owned when in actuality, the Russian government has a 38% stake in it. It may push that above 50% by merging Gazprom with Rosneft. Source - The Economist p74 Dec11th-17th 2004 User:miltonjackson
I don't have time to edit this now, but the state now controls 51% of Gazprom and is working on merging it with Rosnef, which took over Yukos's assets last year.
I've removed my previous essay on quotations. I cut my proposal to remove: "This is a man who reads." "Russia doesn't negotiate with terrorists. It destroys them" I agree that all of them make good points, but move the Wallace interview higher, so the one about slithouse would be read the last. Gnomz007 9 July 2005 00:02 (UTC)
I think, that most of these quotations are
1) Interesting to many people, because they explain position of the president of large country on the questions of inner policy(and not only it) which really alarm the world community.
2) Important, because they make the article more of NPOV. You can return that a man can't say things of NPOV about himself and his own doing (and that's right). But what he says is a POV as well. And now readers can compare what they read about Putin before with Putin's replies on much of it, -- and have better possibilities of making their own unbiased viewpoints. So such a rare situation can hardly be called bad.
3) telling much about character and personality of the man who the article is about.
I think that replacing Quotations with retelling of them and a short note that Putin likes using rude words would be an error, since it would lose half of the interest, most of the importance(so called effect of broken telephone: the information being retelled partially loses it's original sense) and all about Putin's personality.
And my last but not least. Gnom007, I respect you, but can't leave the sensation that you want to decide for all what is lousy, am I wrong? The words shithouse and circumcision even do not belong to Seven dirty words (yet the second one is a correct medical term); in my POV it's enough for they being acceptable in the article. Other opinions?
ellol 9 July 2005 00:54 (UTC)
The Quotations section takes up half the page. Could everyone consider trimming it down a bit? You can get more quotes in WikiQuotes so I don't see the point in flooding the page with it. Cyborg Ninja 29 Nov 2006 14:39 (UTC)
--I Do think that his response to Bush's comment on Russian democracy should be included in the "Quotations" category as opposed to the "Putin-related Humor".
" - Нам бы не хотелось, чтобы у нас была такая же демократия, как в Ираке, скажу честно" Translated: " - To be honest, we hardly want to have democracy such as in Iraq"
Dear All,
A photo of President Putin in the KGB can be located at http://images.evrazia.org/images/putin-kgb3.jpg. Enjoy. Zscout370 01:50, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
What do yall think of it? Zscout370 14:36, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I think it's more promising than a leader who's lit on stolichnaya all day.
FYI: I uploaded a new photo of Putin, who is talking in this one. I personally think this is a better one, and it still comes from the website of the Russian Presidency. The earlier photo had Putin "looking stoned (in my POV)." Zscout370 (talk) 03:04, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
South and East Asian governments have a tradition of thinking about 'batches' of leaders based on their cohort. I usually think of Vladimir Putin as part of the larger group of positive centrist politicians who have emerged: George W. Bush, Tony Blair, Spain's Zapatero, Hu Jin Tao and Junichiro Koizumi. This perspective might be useful in contextualizing Russia under Putin in terms of its foreign relations against the backdrop of a world recently united by airplane and computer technology. McDogm-- 64.12.116.13 15:01, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
There is a delicious portrait of the very inner workings of power:
It is of Russian President Vladimir Putin and champion Olympic Greco-Roman wrestler Alexander Karelin.
Karelin towers over Putin in a protective posture while Putin shows a hovering glee.
The "pinnicle" of society "needs" the more "base" elements for its existence.
Find it at: [2]
-- Scroll1 22:43, 14 May 2005 (UTC)
Yes, those "pinnicles" of society. Is that a cross between a "pinnacle" and a "pickle"? -- Uthar Wynn 01 03:19, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
A common nickname for Putin in Russia is Iron fist Putin, which is an attempt to liken him to Stalin, I think it should be added to this article that many Russians liken him to the murderous despot.
So, you're saying that his nickname in Russian would be "Путин-железный кулак" ("Putin-zheleznyj kulak")? Are you aware that such a noun-as-adjective form of nicknaming does not exist in the Russian language? Kazak 23:42, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
Just for fun: I heard that somebody named him "Наш железный Буратино" - "Our iron Buratino (Pinocchio)". Lucius
Right, I changed it. Sorry, I was thinking two different things at the same time, apparently. Kazak 02:55, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
"Путин-железный кулак" ГЫ ГЫ ГЫ, вот гон то :-) Хоть на voffka.com не ходи, в смысле тут смешенее...
Dzerzhinsky 20:29, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Cool, now Russian headlines read "American businessman presented Vladimir Putin with a diamond ring". [3] "American Oligarch presented a ring to Putin. Why?" [4] Well Kraft decided it was a gift then :) [5] here is in English [6] Opps, forgot to sign Gnomz007
This paragraph was deleted - please see rationale in the discussion of the Second Term section. If others want to reintroduce it, perhaps you could offer a comment about how this story tells us something important about Putin - as it was, it read more like an "In Brief..." article from the sports section of a local US newspaper.
I've cleaned up the article some to conform more to Wikipedia's NPOV policy, a much more balanced perspective has been created IMHO. Tell me what you think. -- Uthar Wynn 01 03:14, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
Uthar, I can agree with a few of your lesser revisions, but most suggest that you are simply adding pro-Putin POV. The fact is that the ODIHR election report does not "refute" the criticisms of massive and one-sided campaigning by state-owned and state-allied news services, notably television. There is nothing NPOV about stripping the observation - evident to absolutely anyone familiar with Russian news - that Putin's actions and statements are carefully stage managed by PR experts - it is a hallmark of his presidency, and removing this non-judgemental observation looks like you're applying shampoo to this Kremlin's style. The Chechen conflict is not simply a sideshow in America's War against Terrorism - it has very deep historical roots and long predates 9/11, and not everything done by the Chechens is terrorism. The "friend and ally" caption you added to the photo is both silly and untrue - they are not "friends" in any meaningful sense, and the US and Russia are not allies (if they were, they would not be targetting one another with thousands of nuclear weapons. Pretending Russia is simply "improving" relations with Belarus is ridiculous and insults anyone who has followed the story for years (for those who haven't, Russian political commentators regularly raise the possibility of a wholescale absorption of Belarus by Russia).
All this to me suggests that the NPOV claim is a fig-leaf. I would argue for complete reversion to the text that existed at the beginning of 12 July. You could then go back over your proposed revisions much more carefully and see if there are any that really merit inclusion.
(As an aside, I find it strange that Uthar Wynn's piecemeal but wholescale revision of the text, over the course of two hours, doesn't attract any criticism from 216.183.184.253, who is nonetheless quick to slap down a subsequent reversion as "such a drastic rv" that must be discussed. Doesn't make any sense.)
I think this article needs more NPOV and more facts, to allow an understanding of Putin's ideology, what he has done in Russia (right and wrong), and who is benefiting from it.
There is a feeling of international anti-putin press in the article that doesn't leave the reader very convinced. I wished I knew more about the subject to add something of value. Thanks. Oscar. 14:13, 5 Dec 2005 (UTC)
He is a confirmed vandal. Some of his edits of this article was deliberate vandalism as well. His massive rewording is nothing but to hide his vandalisms. there is no reason to waste time and sift for pearls in his contrib. mikka (t) 20:56, 13 July 2005 (UTC) And by the way, it is interestiong to notice that most of contribs from 216.183.184.25 account, who struggles to defend Utthar here, are reverted vandalisms. mikka (t) 21:02, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
Thank you, Mikkalai. I was being too generous...
And YOU are the most abusive excuse for an admin I have ever seen. You bandy about accusations indescriminately and are constantly drawing criticism for your unscrupulous deletion of anything which violates your biased POV. I caught you vandalising this very talk page earlier, deleting my comments, which is NOT acceptable behavior except in very limited circumstances.
A "confirmed vandal"?! What, is there some kind of "master list" now? And as far as the accusation that my "rewording" is just to hide vandalisms, I'll have you know that I reworded things because the article as it stood was little more than anti-putin propaganda. Everyone knows your radical anti-putin views, so don't try to hide behind your revert as "undoing vandalism" when all you're really doing is shifting the article back to your POV.
I admit that some of my rewordings went to far towards a positive POV of Putin, but many of them were to conform ths article to the NPOV policy. You should remember that you don't own this page, you aren't the only editor around here, and you aren't going to intimidate me with your admin status. You've made a lot of enemies on Wikipedia, and if you keep it up one of this days people are going to get you discharged as an admin. -- Uthar Wynn 01 02:55, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
I edited the paragraph concerning Kursk tragedy.
1) 118 people died on Kursk. See Russian_submarine_Kursk_explosion_(2000)
2)As for me, that passage seems a bit of strange.. IMHO, the proper president's action was sitting in his Kremlin and allowing professionals to do their job...
3) After several days of mounting public confusion and anger Was it really mounting? If it was, was it concerned with Putin's absense in Moscow?
Thanks for clarifying about the cause of the explosion. My understanding was that it was an experimental hydrogen peroxide torpedo - the basic design was old, but I thought this was a new model.
I suspect we could talk about Chechnya here for a very long time, but if the article is missing important points about Putin's handling of the crisis then let's discuss these. I certainly agree (and wrote earlier in the article) that Chechen separatism posed a threat to Russia's territorial integrity. I hope you also agree that the "Chechen separatism --> Russian disintegration" argument doesn't come close to explaining everything.
– Gnomz 007( ?) 02:46, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
4) New version: The first acute crisis which Putin faced after the invasion of Chechen extremists in Dagestan... Although Putin was yet a Prime Minister when the invasion occured, he took direct respect to resolving the crisis, and it is(was) a significant constituent of his public image.
ellol
16:14, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
[8]- this one is a collection of news in Russian... definitely not for the faint of heart. All I've got : On 1 January 2005 when the law(bill) of replacement of social benefits (free rides, free medication, discounted utility/apartment rent bills) for elderly, disabled and servicemen, with cash payments(of less value) took force, after that on January ?9? there were protests, mostly of pensioners, involving blocking of highways, which lasted for almost a week and made the government ?increase the pension payments to compensate for that?. It is also noted by the Russian and other press, that Putins approval rating reached it's historical minimum of 38% in January 2005.– Gnomz 007( ?) 04:54, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
Please add how to say the name: Pútin or Putín?
Bush's alcoholic nickname for Putin, Pootie Poot links to this article, it should link to either alcoholic dementia, or to a list of Bushisms.
in the 2004 presidential election putin got 92 percent of the vote in chechnya... which is impossible unless on the ballot it said "kill" instead of "vote for".
putin ripped off the election and is going to stay in power for a long time.
you have to feel so sorry for the U.S. people, when are they going to be free from crime and corruption in the government?
You have to feel sorry for the U.S. people, when are they going to be free from propaganda, ignorance, government control, feelings of agression against the entire world, imperialism, and militarism? - Russian mafia
I added the category "sex symbol" for Putin but my edit was mercilessly removed by doc glasgow. I maintain that Putin has some sex symbol status, at least in Russia. He is popular among some young women who regard him as a "dependable" and "manly" figure.
Yes yes yes yes!!!! Putin is SEXY SEXY!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.82.88.179 ( talk) 14:42, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
After the first Harry Potter film came out, a Russian newspaper mischievously reported that the character of Dobby was in fact a stylised version of Putin. Shared details such as the sallow complexion and small stature were cited as evidence of this. However, the article was clearly tongue in cheek and the story has never been substantiated. It's a funny comparison, and one that appeals to me personally, but it's not worth including in this article (any more than, say, the fact that I think Dubya looks like a chimp or that Russian political provocateurs have commissioned porn films starring a supposed look-alike of Ukrainian politician Yulia Tymoshenko).
"After saying the US shouldn't have gone into Iraq in the first place: "But if the U.S. were to leave and abandon Iraq without establishing the grounds for a united and sovereign country, that would definitely be a second mistake."
And your point? This is a completely valid point, hopefuly not an effort to highlight the stupidity of Putin, as it has surely backfired. Indeed the USA shouldn't have gone into Iraq and they ended up needlessly openin a can of worms (division/civil conflict) they can not shut through diplomacy nor aggression
I have just watched a weekly TV-program "Realnaya politika" on NTV channel. Major presenter is Gleb_Pavlovsky, 2 other people (Mr. Parker, and man with a nick "Mr. Montblanc") make shorter reports. Motto of the program is 'a program about real power'. It's a sort of analysises of major events concerning Russia (politics, economics, social life). The program considers troubles of Russia, ways out. It considers dynamics of world. What are we moving to, and what we have now.
Considering serious problems includes grains of humour. What is interesting, the program included 3 short (3-5 mins) plays (of Mr. Parker) in a style, seemingly derived from style of "Kukly". That is, puppets (computer animation, not real ones) represented major politics. Putin is the main protagonist; (an interesting detail is that head of "puppet" Putin is never shown). Plays are direct "inheritors" of Parker's "Vladimir Vladimirovich" series.
ellol 21:31, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Isn't the party rep in the submarine of the movie The Hunt for Red October named Vladimir Putin? -- HJV 23:08, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
The last name of the political officer (zampolit) is Putin, but nowhere either in the movie or the book is he referred to as Vladmir Putin. Agent Smith in The Matrix is not Joseph Smith. Same thing. Just because the last name matches doesn't mean it references the same person.
-- 209.182.101.246 20:19, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
The Washington Post has an article that goes into some detail about Putin's educational background and the new charges of plagiarism. Regular editors here might want to discuss working it into the article. Jkelly 02:33, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
(Google is your friend!)
Just a minor thing about the article: The text, "Vladimir Putin has been accused by fellows Clifford Gaddy and Igor Danchenko at the Brookings Institution of plagiarism" reads like Cliff and Igor are from the "Brookings institution of Plagiarism". There either needs to be commas after "accused" and "institution", or the sentence needs to be restructured, as in, "Vladimir Putin has been accused of plagiarism by fellows Clifford Gaddy and Igor Danchenko at the Brookings Institution." I'm not sure how strict the Wikistapo are monitoring the changes here, some pages are pretty lax, some are run by tyrants. -- Mcvoid 19:46, 10 December 2006 (UTC)19:46, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Are there any quotations any of you know of that were made by Putin, that don't have to do with terrorism and/or America? I think the diversification of that section would be helpful. Picaroon9288 01:09, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
Putin gives plenty of speeches, and you can get hundreds of quotations. Kremlin's press service translates some of his speeches/press interviews and makes them publicly available on the Internet. The problem is, most Americans think of Putin as this ominous creepy Cold War-type stock "bad guy" character, who spends days and nights conspiring against American "freedom" and "democracy". So, whoever wrote this article probably thought that all of Putin's remarks are about America (meaning USA). The constant rehash of "war in Chechnya" news in certain media explains the abundance of terrorism quotations. Starz
Quotations of which kind should be added? Perhaps the section is too big now, which quotations should be removed? ellol 23:59, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Any of you knows whether Vera Putina, in the Ineke Smits documentary movie is or is not the true Putin mama? Think you that this curious story should appear somewhere on the main page? Peppe (not logged)
what is different Vladimir Putin then every other leader did?
I think we may add info about referendum held on March 23, 2003 in Chechnya. Main question was approval or disapproval of constitution of Chechen Republic. According to chairman of election committee of Chechen Republic A.K. Arsakhanov, 89,48% of people in lists took part in vote, and 95,97% of them voted FOR constitution. (Russian) [10] + photo [11] . It's still inaccurate, of course, if I'll add this info I'll find english sources. ellol 16:52, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
Sorry. I wished for a short statement on the current situation. But not all like it, MarcMontoni changed it to In recent years, due mainly to the Putin government's campaign of stepped-up economic and political harassment, coupled with violent oppression [1] [2] [3] of the Chechen populace, the conflict in the Chechen Republic has largely subsided, at least as a two-sided conflict. I don't know may be mine was incorrect, but this is at least that much wrong. I reverted it to before my changes. Perhaps we have to wait for a real person from Chechnya, who would know real things. Links remained, why, good ones. ellol 20:43, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
Please, note the Chechnya was (and continues to be) the part of Russian Federation, and not the recognised souvereign state. So defining the conflict as war between RF and *part of RF* is somewhat incorrect.
Put a picture of him kissing that poor little boy.
sheez people just get up themselves at the slighest thing. People obviously have nothing to do these days. 218.101.74.127 13:27, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
I tried to work there more than on year. But unfortunately, i had to come back because of my father illness. Soon i'll try to come back to Moscow, but suddenly i've noticed that my heart beats very fast and do not want to come back. I tried to analise, what's happening with me. I do not afraid of unemploiment, i don't afraid of the law, I am afraid of militia man. They can find any fact to get some money(mobile phone, golden rings and smth) that you've earned. (to be continued)
shirin sozokbaeva
I have added this article to Category:Russian terrorists because Mr. Putin meets the criteria listed at Category:Terrorists. To wit,
Vladimir Putin is the president of the Russian Federation and has been active in managing the campaign against separatist insurgents in Chechnya. As the article on Second Chechen War notes, "Violations of human rights conducted by the Russian forces drew international condemnation."
Second Chechen War states that, "the death toll from the conflict is unknown, with estimates ranging from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands dead or missing, mostly Chechnya's civilians."
The conflict in Chechnya has been primarily an insurgency and counter-insurgency, rather than a conventional war, since 2000.
The Russian occupation of Chechnya coerces the populace of that area to remain part of the Russian Federation and sends the message that attempts to gain independence from the Russian Federation will be met with violence.— Nat Krause( Talk!) 21:11, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
The same (lack of) logic would classify George W. Bush as a terrorist, Ehud Olmert as a terrorist, etc. Lots of people would like to censor all mention of terrorism from Wikipedia (terrorism articles and categories are frequently nominated for censorship, and sometimes censored). If you don't share that goal, I suggest you refrain from debasing the language. Mirror Vax 16:46, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Some say Putin, while mayor of Lenningrad, played an important role in saving the LOMO camera. If true it should be posted to the main article, perhaps in a trivia section.
Is Vladimir Putin Orthodox? see by yourself [14], [15], [16], and especially this one [17]. -- Hectorian 04:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Praying in church at every Christmas and Easter reveals he is religious. We don't need his personal statement. Have you a statement from George W. Bush that he's United Methodist? Religion must be added. Garret Beaumain 18:33, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
on Kosovo's independence true? -- HolyRomanEmperor 20:30, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
This page has been vandalized, as I am not sure how to fix all of the problems I am hoping that someone reads this soon and fixes it. Some of the examples are most of the mentions of Putins name have been changed to Hoskins, and other random word changes.-- Wlf211 04:59, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
See under: Prime Minister and first term as President "Putin was caught..." 69.6.162.160 02:51, 9 October 2006 (UTC)Brian Pearson
"In May 1990 Putin was appointed Mayor Sobchak's prostitute on international affairs." wtf —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.226.239.87 ( talk) 23:31, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Today (October 10), 2000 demonstrators shouted angrily "Murder, murder!" at Putin when he arrived in Dresden: http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/0,1518,441835,00.html
Some were holding a sign: "Murder, you are no longer welcome." Millions of Germans are outraged because of the murder of this brave woman. - Free Europe.
Perhaps I should clarify the chronology.
89.55.95.221 's contribution about Putin-murder-of-Politkovskaya comprised with blanking of half page was removed by admin Ezhiki.
Same message by user 89.55.55.45 was soon
removed by
me. I considered it as vandalism, but yes, I disliked it as well.
Days later, user 89.55.10.62 posted the same message (removed by admin Alphachimp); twice vandalized my userpage and removed notifications by users MER-C and Gwernol at his talkpage, for which action he was temporarily blocked.
Again, days later user 89.55.39.175 posted the message on this talk page you've just read. It's curious, that the same user within 10 minutes tried to remove block notification on 89.55.10.62 's talk page.
Now, I consider it proved, that all four IP's belong to the same vandal.
But it still is curious, may be 'Putin' page is cornered by brain-washed pro-Putin Russians? No: of all mentioned users only Ezhiki and I are Russophone, and only I live in Russia; it's up to Ezhiki whether he considers himself Russian. Those mysterious "some Russians" were in fact only me; it causes to suggest a personal attack.
ellol 18:03, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
update: what can be seen on user's 89.55.39.175 talk page, as well as his vandalisms on pages of MER-C and Gwernol seem to be acts of an ill person. I shouldn't in fact write that all. I'm sorry. ellol 20:40, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Okey, we've heard adversary of "bloody gebnya" (GB), now I offer to have a look at Putin's interview with German newspaper:
QUESTION: The fact that the famous journalist Anna Politkovskaia has been shot is in the headlines of all the newspapers. Can you please tell us how you are affected by the death of this journalist who criticized you very harshly?
"VLADIMIR PUTIN: First of all I would like to say that a murder is a very serious crime both with respect to society and with respect to God. The criminals must be found out and correspondingly punished.
Unfortunately, this is not the only such crime in Russia. And we will do everything we can to bring the criminals to justice.
And now, with respect to the political aspect of this affair. The investigation is looking at all possible variants. And of course, one of them, one of the most probable, is related to her work as a journalist. She really was a critic of the present authorities — something that is common to all media representatives — but she often adopted radical positions. And recently she mainly concentrated her attention on criticizing the authorities in the Chechen Republic.
I must say — and I think that experts would agree with me — that her political influence inside of Russia was negligible and that she was probably better known among human rights organisations and in the western media. In connection with this I think that one of our newspapers was correct when it stated today that Anna Politkovskaia’s murder has caused much more damage to the current authorities in general, and to the Chechen authorities in particular, than her reporting did.
In any case, I repeat that what has happened is absolutely inadmissible. This horrendous crime is damaging for Russia and must be solved. It causes both moral and political damage and is damaging for the political system that we are building, a system which must have places for all people, independently of their points of view. On the contrary, we must ensure that people receive the possibility to expose their points of view, including in the media. "
ellol
16:21, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
User ellol and Ezhiki may work for the FSB. At least they use the same methods: They have forged the history of this article (so that it appeared that a person critical of Putin blanketed half of the page) for creating a reason to silence him.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.55.56.255 ( talk • contribs).
This section should be turned into standalone leaf article, placed into Category:In popular culture. It would make this page less awful. Pavel Vozenilek 15:57, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Why is Putin's name so gigantic on the top? BirdValiant 08:26, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
At which age did Putin start judo trainings? 12 or 13? ellol 19:41, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
It is invalid translation of Russian phrase. Putin told "The comrade wolf" and used verb кушает which is used for children. Only the little child can кушает. The whole phrase is like he spoke about a spoilt capricious child, not about an dangerous enemy. The phrase also in rhythm like a simple poetry for children. I think we must explain that in article because it shows Russian-American relations much better when both Wall Street Journal and Rossijskaya Gaseta.
HE IS AN EVIL MAN !!!!! 21:11 November 26,2006 HE ORDEDERED THE KILLINGS OF THE RUSSIAN JOURNALIST AND THE FORMER SPY.
he is evil
Maybe i´m wrong! (UTC)Dave
MAYBE THE ANTICHRIST?
that´s too silly!
The section on "Family and personal life" was stuck between two political controversies, so I moved that up for organizational flow. And, there were two "Trivia" sections, so I merged them together. Carmela Soprano 23:43, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
I still think my reference to Patriarch Alexius II as a former KGB agent DROZDOV was appropriate, because that would explain to a reader what is going on the picture. Without my remark, this portion of the text is misleading. It basically says that Putin is a religious man, or at least he respects religion. But nothing can be further from the truth. Putin is not speaking with a spiritual leader. He is speaking with his subordinate. What do you think? Biophys 05:56, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Also read this: [18], [19], [20], [21] (should be an original paper in The Washington Times) Biophys 06:32, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Okay, so I know that the spy has proportedly been posioned by Vlad, but this as of current, has not been proven. This is an encyclopedia, not a place for conspiracy theories. The article should be very careful to ensure that blame is not placed on any one until the investigation has been finished.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.157.42.230 ( talk • contribs) 15:51, 28 November 2006
In this edit, the following passage was recently removed from the article on the allegation that it added nothing to the article and that it was unsourced:
Litvinenko publicly accused Putin in a statement, which was released shortly after his death by his friend Alex Goldfarb [22]. Critics doubt that Litvinenko is a true author of the statement released. They refer to the fact that the idiom "angel of death" encountered in the statement is not common for a native Russian speaker and it could rather be used by a person who natively speaks English. They also doubt that by the time of writing he was mentally capable of performing such complex activity as writing a public statement. They point out that it took 16 hours for him to recall the details of his meeting in the restraunt "Itsu" at about the time of alleged writing. Critics also refer to the fact that no video or audio recording of his words exists. [23] When asked about Litvinenko statement at a press conference after joint Russia-EU summit, Putin doubted its credibility by raising a question as to why it was not published before his death and saying that there could be no comments on a statement released after death of its author. [24]
I don't know, but I clicked on those links and those look like sources to me - the only unfortunate detail being that they're in Russian. Non-English sources are not forbidden on wikipedia, especially in cases where the argument in a certain language can be one-sided. Perhaps the section could be shortened and the user directed to the Litvinenko article instead, but I'm not sure that it was a good idea to just delete it outright. Esn 21:15, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
I am open to addressing the reaction to the Litvienko death in this article, but, without offering any context, devoting an entire section to a narrative of conspiracy theories is about as unencyclopedic as anything that can be done to this article.
Earlier today, I converted a new section of the article that consisted of a narrative of conspiracy theories into a section on Putin's crime policies-- important material that makes the article more encyclopedic previously not addressed. [25] But then I was reverted by editor accusing me of "suppressing documented information." [26] Frankly, this is a dishonest misrepresentation of my edits. My rewrite mentioned, "the poisoning of Litvinenko raised suspicions that his death might be the work of Putin's security service colleagues." I contextualized the discussion on the basis of two relevant topics to an encyclopedic biography on a Russian president: (1) a discussion of the politics of crime and (2) the notability of the allegation in Western circles. The previous version, however, discussed Litvineko under the heading "Unnatural deaths of political critics"-- an obvious attempt to spoil the well against the subject of the article (and, I think, afoul of the Wikipedia living persons guidelines). 172 | Talk 03:05, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
The large number of unnatural death of Putin critics is, like it or not, causing political repercussions in Europe [29]. Don't these deaths and political repercussions merit even mention in the article? If so, why is this information being repeatedly deleted? I note that article manages to find room to mention that Putin "works out regularly" and once kissed a little boy on the stomach. This People Magazine style trivia is evidently considered "encyclopedic", but the fact that 14 journalists critical of Putin have been murdered in recent years evidently is not. I would like to have the rationale for that explained to me. -- BrianH123 03:13, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
under the section on putin's second term:
"One of the most controversial aspects of Putin's second term was the prosecution of Russia's richest man, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, President of Yukos oil company, who knowingly and purposefully robbed the Russian State and Russian people of hundreds of millions of dollars. While much of the international press saw this as a reaction against a man who was funding political opponents of the Kremlin, both liberal and Communist, the Russian government has argued that Khodorkovsky was in fact engaged in corrupting a large segment of the Duma to prevent changes in the tax code aimed at taxing windfall profits and closing offshore tax evasion vehicles. Certainly, many of the initial privatizations, including that of Yukos, are widely believed to have been fraudulent (Yukos, valued at some $30bn in 2004, had been privatized for $110 million), and like the other oligarchic groups, the Yukos-Menatep name has been frequently tarred with accusations of links to criminal organizations."
smacks of pro-putin propaganda
This piece does not belong to a biographical article, hence removed. You may want to create Crime in Russia.
`' mikkanarxi 20:10, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
subjective removal. I don't approve of what you did. 216.37.86.10 17:59, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
What has happened to the quotations section and why has it been deleted without discussion? User 81.106.199.17 ( talk).
Two fifths (almost a half) of this wiki article on Putin is devoted to "humor" about Putin, comparisons to unlikable characters from films, and various negative perceptions coming from dubious sources (is "citation needed" a source?).
Compare that to the George W. Bush article which has less then 1/10 of it devoted to his "criticisms and public perception", not to mention that there are absolutely no citations or images of him as the "Mad" character or him holding the children's book upside down, or his antics with things like "nucular weapons" (giving a middle finger to cameras?)? Or perhaps an explanation how he ever graduated from Yale, since wikipedia seems to investigate one's academic work quite deeply (as in the allegation of Putin's plagiarism)...
I know that this is an article about Putin and not G.W.B., but wikipedia needs to apply the same standard to all world leaders, whoever they are, limiting it's articles to balanced reporting of facts. I actually have no objections to G.W. article (above questions are meant to show how ridiculous this POV approach is); rather, all world leaders' articles should follow the same standards and not sound like someone's personal soap box. In this case Putin's article leaves a lot to be desired, like more serious approach to descibing his actions and/or achievements and failures rather then concetrating on negative suggestions and painting his image in certain colors.
Compare beginings of paragraphs about Bush and Putin:
Bush article:
"Time magazine named George W. Bush as its Person of the Year for 2000". (That's the first sentence of Bush "criticism" paragraph)
"Bush enjoyed strong support among Americans..."
"Bush began his second term with an emphasis on improving strained relations..."
"As one of the most popular governors in the nation..."
"Days into his first term, Bush announced his commitment to channeling more federal aid to faith-based service organizations..."
Compare that to beginings of paragraphs in the Putin article:
"Putin was appointed Prime Minister ... making him Russia's fifth prime minister in less than eighteen months."
"... Putin, a virtual unknown, to last any longer than his predecessors..."
"...This put all of his opponents at a disadvantage, giving him the element of surprise and an eventual victory..." as if he stole his victory (which could be said of Bush)
"One of the most controversial aspects of Putin's second term was the prosecution of Russia's richest man...". (note: Putin was not the judge nor in the jury and was certainly less connected to the affair then Bush was to Enron).
"...Kremlin-controlled or allied media accused Putin's chief rivals..." (I haven't seen a single reference as to president Bush's media connections in Bush article. Does that mean that they don't exist?)
"In international affairs, Putin has been trying..." - yet another negative conotation...
"While President Putin is criticized as an autocrat..."
"Putin surprised many... "
"During his time in office, Putin has attempted to..."
Putin has been trying, has been criticized, and has been attempting things. He has also "surprised" (a quality no one would want from a leader who has his finger on world's second largest nuclear arsenal).
Putin article needs to be neutral.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.148.97.140 ( talk • contribs)
What's your point? Many of the sentences you refer to are just stating facts, and the "negative connotations" are in the eyes of the beholder. For instance, Putin was completely (not "virtually" as the article says) unknown before becoming the PM -- which is not surprising for an FSB agent. Or you don't like that the article mentions criticism of Putin -- but article on Bush does so too. Lebatsnok 14:09, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
To which particular period does this refer? When did it originate? Do we think the phrase warrants a mention in the article? -- 80.1.72.245 00:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps it is not appropriate to look into future for wikipedia but I find it appropriate when talking about this individual. It is now a very popular joke in Russian Federation that Putin will change law just before the third term and will be once more the president. What do You think.
Today there were news that Russian Federation democratic parties link here [33] (Sorry i'm bad at using wiki and giving links) - Jabloko, SPS, DPR didn't join. But I hope (though it is not a wikipedia style) that in two years they might bring out a new contendant. But the question is will he/she succeed.
What is the relation between Vladimir Putin and Boris Jelcin? It is largely argued now in Russia and outside that Russia is at a deadlock (Ofcourse taking into consideration that the only thing that brings money is recources and not business). So what sources can be placed to clear up the relation between the two and say why 'Jelcin (democrat) gave power' (i'm not saying he gave it himself) to Putin who 'definetly smells of nothing near to democracy'.
I guess the answers can be found at Alexandr Letvinenko. But I still believe that this topic should be here in for discussion and perhaps listed in a bio of Putin Vladimir.
Dzerzhinsky 23:41, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
I temporarily removed the new contribution for further discussion:
I don't doubt in your literature talents, but can't not to raise a question: are we a wikipedia article or yellowish papers?!! As it is now, it doesn't pass. The Russian government comprises executive, legislative and judiciary branches. Be more strict: who were 'government agents', MVD, FSB or OMON? What was the official reason for intrusion and arrest (for several hours or for 2 days????) 'It is said' doesn't fit. The last sentence of first passage is propaganda. Above all, the whole message is not sourced.
About Litvinenko murder, let's wait for the end of the official investigation, and then put it into the article or not. ellol 23:00, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, she was the thirteenth journalist to be killed in Russia in 2006. We had this nonsense in the article for almost two months, and people read this as credible source. In fact, Politkovskaya was thirteenth journalist killed after Putin's inauguration in 2000. What irresponsibility! It should be a lesson for us all. ellol 17:09, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
First it occurred in Nov 25, it was vague, but not a mistake yet. In Dec. 2 it already took the form mentioned above. ellol 17:47, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Why adding opinionated stuff is considered OK, while removing seeming bias is seen as pro-Russia propaganda ?! ellol 17:47, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
On the election article, it says the European group has criticised the elections and that the CIS have called them free and fair.
However on this article it says the European group has called them free and fair and fails to mention the CIS at all. -- TheSeer ( Talkˑ Contribs) 15:28, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Товарищ Волк знает кого кушать. Кушает и никого не слушает. - the proper translation is "Comrade Wolf knows who to eat. (He) eats and doesn't listen to anyone." The explanations that follow are fine as they supplement nuances lost in the translation, but the translation itself given in the article is innacurate. With respect, Ko Soi IX 09:55, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
I compiled an annotated list of important laws proposed by Putin, but User:Colin Keigher deleted it. However, the article about George W. Bush does contain a link to such a list, and I think it is an important mean to characterize Putin's policy. Is it worth including or not? Here is the section:
Vladimir Putin legislation and programs
Legislation proposed by Putin, approved by the Federal Assembly of Russia, and signed by Putin [35]
Federal Law On Modifications and Additions to the Federal Law On General Principles of the Organization of Legislative (Representative) and Executive Bodies of State Power of the Subjects of the Russian Federation
О внесении изменений и дополнений в Федеральный закон "Об общих принципах организации законодательных (представительных) и исполнительных органов государственной власти субъектов Российской Федерации"
It authorizes the president to dismiss the heads of Federal subjects of Russia.
Federal Law On the Formation of the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation
О порядке формирования Совета Федерации Федерального Собрания Российской Федерации
It replaces the heads of the legislative and executive Bodies of the Federal subjects of Russia with representatives of these bodies as Members of the Federation Council of Russia.
Federal Constitutional Law On the State Anthem of the Russian Federation
Федеральный конституционный закон "О Государственном гимне Российской Федерации"
It changes the Russian anthem to a version based on the musical score of the pre-1991 Soviet anthem.
Federal Law On Guarantees for Former Presidents and Their Families
О гарантиях Президенту Российской Федерации, прекратившему исполнение своих полномочий, и членам его семьи
Federal Constitutional Law On Modifications and an Addition to the Federal Law On the State Anthem of the Russian Federation
О внесении изменений и дополнения в Федеральный конституционный закон "О Государственном гимне Российской Федерации"
It approves the new text of the anthem written by Sergey Mikhalkov.
Federal Law On Modifications and Additions to the Federal Law On the Status of Judges in the Russian Federation
О внесении изменений и дополнений в Закон Российской Федерации "О статусе судей в Российской Федерации"
It introduces disciplinary and administrative responsibility of judges.
Federal Law On Basic Guarantees of Suffrage and Right of Referendum of the Citizens of the Russian Federation
Об основных гарантиях избирательных прав и права на участие в референдуме граждан Российской Федерации
It prohibits to conduct a referendum within the last year of a term of the president or State Duma and disallows mass media to comment on election campaign.
Federal Law On Modifications and Additions to the Russian Federation’s Legislation in Connection with the Passing of the Federal Law On Countering Extremist Activities
О внесении изменений и дополнений в законодательные акты Российской Федерации в связи с принятием Федерального закона "О противодействии экстремистской деятельности"
Federal Law On Countering Extremist Activities О противодействии экстремистской деятельности
These regulations define the notion of extremism and establish measures to counter it, including procedures of suspension of political parties, public and religious associations.
Federal Law On the Election of the President of the Russian Federation
О выборах Президента Российской Федерации
It considerably changes regulations concerning the nomination procedure and doesn’t require the nominees of political parties that are represented in the State Duma to collect one million signatures in support of their registration anymore. Each of the other nominees has to collect two million signatures rather than one million required before.
Federal Law On General Principles of Organization of the Local Self-Government in the Russian Federation
Об общих принципах организации местного самоуправления в Российской Федерации
It establishes a limited list of powers of the local self-government and defines the circumstances under which they have to be delegated to executive power bodies of the Federal subject.
Federal Law On Modifications and Additions to Some Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation in Connection with the Passing of the Federal Law On Basic Guarantees of Suffrage and Right of Referendum of the Citizens of the Russian Federation
О внесении изменений и дополнений в некоторые законодательные акты Российской Федерации в связи с принятием Федерального закона "Об основных гарантиях избирательных прав и права на участие в референдуме граждан Российской Федерации"
It establishes that a mass media can be suspended if it violates election legislation twice during an election campaign.
Federal Constitutional Law On Formation of a New Subject of the Russian Federation within the Russian Federation as a Result of Unification of Perm Region and Komi-Permyak Autonomous Area.
Об образовании в составе Российской Федерации нового субъекта Российской Федерации в результате объединения Пермской области и Коми-Пермяцкого автономного округа
It merges the Perm Oblast and Komi-Permyak Autonomous District into the Perm Krai.
Federal Law On Modifications to the Federal Law On General Principles of the Organization of Legislative (Representative) and Executive Bodies of State Power of the Subjects of the Russian Federation and the Federal Law On Basic Guarantees of Suffrage and Right of Referendum of the Citizens of the Russian Federation
О внесении изменений в Федеральный закон "Об общих принципах организации законодательных (представительных) и исполнительных органов государственной власти субъектов Российской Федерации" и в Федеральный закон "Об основных гарантиях избирательных прав и права на участие в референдуме граждан Российской Федерации"
It replaces the direct election of the heads of the Federal subjects of Russia with a system whereby they are proposed by the President and approved or disapproved by the legislative power bodies of the federal subjects.
Federal Law On the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation
Об Общественной палате Российской Федерации
It institutes the Public Chamber of Russia.
Federal Law On the Election of Deputies of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation
О выборах депутатов Государственной Думы Федерального Собрания Российской Федерации
It establishes that the State Duma will be elected by closed party-list proportional voting only, entirely eliminating the single-member district plurality voting system that accounted for half of the 450 seats before, and raises electoral threshold from 5 to 7%.
Federal Law On Modifications to the Russian Federation’s Legislation on Elections and Referenda as well as other Legislative Acts.
О внесении изменений в законодательные акты Российской Федерации о выборах и референдумах и иные законодательные акты Российской Федерации
It considerably toughens formal requirements for nomination, allows electronic voting, makes funding the parties participating in the State Duma receive from the government ten times higher and establishes that a member of the State Duma loses his/her seat as (s)he leaves his/her faction.
Federal Constitutional Law On Formation of a New Subject of the Russian Federation within the Russian Federation as a Result of Unification of Krasnoyarsk Krai and Taimyr (Dolgan-Nenets) Autonomous District and Evenki Autonomous District.
Название: Об образовании в составе Российской Федерации нового субъекта Российской Федерации в результате объединения Красноярского края, Таймырского (Долгано-Ненецкого) автономного округа и Эвенкийского автономного округа
It makes the Taimyr Autonomous District and Evenki Autonomous District parts of the Krasnoyarsk Krai.
Federal Law On Parliamentary Investigation by the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation
О парламентском расследовании Федерального Собрания Российской Федерации
It regulates the parliamentary investigation and prohibits parliamentary investigation of the activities of the President, court and investigative authorities if they comply to the processual law. Also it establishes that no parliamentary investigation should last longer than a year and that the cases processed by a court should not be subject to it.
Federal Constitutional Law On Formation of a New Subject of the Russian Federation within the Russian Federation as a Result of Unification of Kamchatka Oblast and Koryak Autonomous District
Об образовании в составе Российской Федерации нового субъекта Российской Федерации в результате объединения Камчатской области и Корякского автономного округа
It merges the Kamchatka Oblast and Koryak Autonomous District into the Kamchatka Krai.
Federal Constitutional Law On Formation of a New Subject of the Russian Federation within the Russian Federation as a Result of Unification of Irkutsk Oblast and Ust-Orda Buryat Autonomous District
Об образовании в составе Российской Федерации нового субъекта Российской Федерации в результате объединения Иркутской области и Усть-Ордынского Бурятского автономного округа
It makes the Ust-Orda Buryat Autonomous District part of the Irkutsk Oblast.
Colchicum 18:41, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
I don't know if it would be good to add in this article (or his list of quotes article) this quote about his recent criticism of the U.S foreign policy that he made yesterday
“ | Unilateral, illegitimate actions have not solved a single problem: they have become a hotbed of further conflicts. | ” |
[36]-- JForget 21:42, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
I think it's normal to put this quote in list of quotes article. As for Putin page, this speech is viewed in the beginning of Foreign policy (btw I was an anon user who took part in its editing). The general problem here is we shouldn't make it too long. Any way, the current version is not ideal, so be bold and if you see how you may make it better go ahead. Just one proposal, imho it's better to work with the speech itself. Thank you for the interest. ellol 22:04, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Hey guys, Is there really a need for so many references to the one statement (e.g. In the Chechen war section, there are seven references to the one statement)? You may improve the article by picking the best sources out of the lot. 59.101.176.223 09:27, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
This was the original text:
“ | On March 3, 2007, a demonstration of several thousand opposition protesters (see Saint Petersburg March of the Discontented) was suppressed by city authorities in St. Petersburg. Several thousand members of liberal and leftist groups (the number differs from 1,500 to 15,000 according to different estimates) chanted "Down with Matviyenko", "Shame to Putin", "Revolution", "No to police state" as they marched down Nevsky Prospekt. OMON beat dozens of protestors with truncheons but several thousand broke through police cordons. Officials stated that 100 people were detained, including heads of National Bolshevik Party and Vanguard of Red Youth and a member of United Civil Front. Organizers of demonstration state the number of detainees is several hundreds. The action was not sanctioned by сity authorities. Governor of Saint Petersburg Valentina Matviyenko called the action "provocation". Analogous demonstration took place in December in Moscow, though was of less scale. Russia's television stations covered these protests only briefly. | ” |
Ok one sentence at a time.
On March 3, 2007, a demonstration of several thousand opposition protesters (see Saint Petersburg March of the Discontented) was suppressed by city authorities in St. Petersburg.
Several thousand members of liberal and leftist groups (the number differs from 1,500 to 15,000 according to different estimates) chanted "Down with Matviyenko", "Shame to Putin", "Revolution", "No to police state" as they marched down Nevsky Prospekt.
OMON beat dozens of protestors with truncheons but several thousand broke through police cordons.
Officials stated that 100 people were detained, including heads of National Bolshevik Party and Vanguard of Red Youth and a member of United Civil Front. Organizers of demonstration state the number of detainees is several hundreds.
Governor of Saint Petersburg Valentina Matviyenko called the action "provocation". Analogous demonstration took place in December in Moscow, though was of less scale. Russia's television stations covered these protests only briefly.
Lastly I would question the actual inclusion of this information in the article - it is of trivial importance considering the fact that we are dealing with a presidential term - this information may be better left on Matviyenko's page on events in St Petersburg. Please discuss this otherwise I will consider deleting this addition. 59.101.157.29 14:10, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
SPAG
I have removed a political edit from the article. Below is the sections removed with the reasons for removal.
“ | While heading the Committee for External Relations, from 1992 to March 2000 Putin was also on the advisory board of the German real estate holding St. Petersburg Immobilien und Beteiligungs AG (SPAG) which has been investigated by German prosecutors for money laundering.[10][11][12][13][14][15][16] | ” |
See http://www.buzzflash.com/mediawatch/03/10/03.html
My question is why are you guys adding this? The whole thing is questionable, as Ritter has not been convicted of anything. How about innocent until proven guilty? Try to assume good faith, besides why is there guilt by association of Putin on a possible fictitious charge that isn’t even addressed to him?
I see this as politically motivated information as at the moment it is only based on speculation and not proved fact. Therefore I have removed it. 59.101.157.29 05:55, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
I think it is important not to remove sourced stories of controversies surrounding any politician. I think the the fact that Putin was on the board of a firm investigated for the money loundry is relevant and important and seems to be very good sourced. I do not see much of the misrepresentation of the sources there. If you have source of the other side of the story you are welcome to put them to the article (if the addition will grow above a couple of sentenses we would have to put it into a separate article. I am restoring deletions Alex Bakharev 07:49, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Considering that Senator Allen's wikipedia page had an entire section dedicated to his use of the term "macacca" and wiki's were very very quick to add an entire section for Ann Coulter's use of the word "Faggot"....when wikipedians go into a frenzy when it comes to controversey over politicians, I think it is absolutely relavant to add to this page Putin's controversial and accusatorial involvement in recent deaths of his critics. If this is not relevant, then NOTHING is on any other politicians page. Wiki's love to add "controversey" sections to political pages...especially conservative ones. Now this communist needs his fair share. Putin is looking very suspicious and it IS relevant.
Please, better formulate your thoughts. I removed the following passage:
Russians have good reasons not to trust or respect the press, but they are nonetheless affected by what they read in the newspapers and watch on television. As a result, the outcome of elections is greatly influenced by press coverage. Vladimir Putin has shown himself adept at manipulating public opinion. He has also demonstrated a desire to exert more control over the lives of the country's citizens. That makes sense for a man who spent most of his career in the KGB, but it augurs badly for the future of independent journalism in Russia.
What exactly did you want to express? "Russians have good reasons not to trust or respect the press, but they are nonetheless affected by what they read in the newspapers and watch on television. As a result, the outcome of elections is greatly influenced by press coverage." Sky is blue. What you said here might as easily refer to any country, including U.S. "Vladimir Putin has shown himself adept at manipulating public opinion." You convicted Putin of manipulating public opinion and suppressing independent journalism without providing any proofs. It's good that you did it politically correct, but still you need solid proofs. ellol 02:22, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
The article indicates that on the day on which Putin was nominated as prime minister, he volunteered to run for the presidency. ("Yeltsin also announced that he wanted to see Putin as his successor. Later, that same day, Putin agreed to run for the presidency.") The source for this is a BBC article that appears to based on an incorrect translation. (Mr Yeltsin said he wanted Mr Putin to succeed him as president in next year's elections. Mr Putin immediately responded by saying: I shall definitely stand for the post of Russian president.") It seems that Putin actually said that he would support the office of the presidency, and not that he was planning to run for president. I certainly do not recall Putin saying this in August of 1999. Would it be possible to find the Russian text for this? - JackRus
JackRus, that moment is viewed in memoirs of Boris Yeltsin [38], if you can read this extract it would be great, if not I'll translate most important parts. The passage refers to August 5, 1999, when Yeltsin offered Putin to become a Prime Minister. Before this, Yeltsin thought of his candidature as a future president, but never shared his thoughts with anyone. The extract proves that Putin wasn't eager to become a president. So, at least from POV of Yeltsin, "I shall definitely stand for the post of Russian president" is nonsense.
ellol 21:39, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
User 212.125.64.141 made the following contribution into the article. Perhaps it could be added if properly formatted:
Same user voiced the opinion concerning "Popular Support" section:
"His biography, От Первого Лица" -- We should add the English translation of this to the article. -- 201.50.254.243 14:21, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Guys what do you think if we combine all the controversies in the article into one section at the bottom of the article above the Criticism section? It would be a better read then and from what I've seen is the more common format in Wikipedia. If I wouldn't have naysayers I will proceed to create the section through cutting and pasting of existing information. 59.101.205.24 08:29, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
I believe this article is extremely biased in favor of putin. What the hell? seems like it's been edited constantly by kgb sons of bitches. Wikipedia belongs to KGB!
There is LOTS of mistakes in the article. -- HanzoHattori 11:27, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks 59.101.161.148 13:19, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Who is editing this article? Putin himself?
Here is a list of journalists killed under Putin's reign, each one listed in the SOURCE cited within the article:
Vladimir Yatsina (shot by Chechen militants 2000) [2] Aleksandr Yefremov (remote-controlled mine on Russian controlled Chechen road 2000) [2] Igor Domnikov (beaten to death in entry of his Moscow apartment building 2000) [2] Eduard Markevich (shot in the back, Sverdlovsk, Russia, 2001) [2] Natalya Skryl (beaten to death near her home in Rostov-on-Don, Russia 2002) [2] Valery Ivanov (shot 8 times, while entering his car in Togliatti, Russia 2002) [2] Roddy Scott (body found shot to death, in Galashki Region, Russia 2002) [2] Sergei Kalinovsky (murdered beside a lake outside the city of Smolensk, Russia 2002) [2] Aleksei Sidorov (murdered in Togliatti, east of Moscow 2003) [2] Adlan Khasanov (by bomb in Grozny, Chechnia, claimed by rebel leader Basayev 2004) [2] * Paul Klebnikov (drive-by shooting, described by police as contract murder 2004) [2] Pavel Makeev (hit and run, body found hidden in ditch 50 meters from impact area 2005) [2] Magomedzagid Varisov (machine-gunned outside Makhachkala, Russia 2005) [2] Vagif Kochetkov (beaten/assaulted near his home in Tula Russia 2006) [2] Anna Politkovskaya (shot in a Moscow elevator, 2006, exclusive critic of Putin) [2] Ivan Safronov (thrown out a window for reporting a 3rd Bulava launch failure, 2-3-2007) [3]
He was also working on a story about Putin personally selling arms to Iran freak, Ahmadinejad [4]
additionally, three Russian journalists are listed as killed in Chenchnia in October 1999. Since Putin officially controlled the reigns in August, 1999, those fall under his watch as well.
This makes a total of NINETEEN journalist killed in Russia, under Putin.
I will change the article again, and contact the administrators of WikiPedia to settle this dispute. My version is fair, because I do not list 19 victims, I list 15, since the 3 killed in 1999 are not presently suspected of Kremlin fault, and Basayev has claimed Khasanov. The other 15 are brutal mob-like barbaric acts, unworthy of any democratic leadership and cannot be whitewashed. I refuse to allow that.
FOOTNOTES: [2] Archive list of victims, all years, http://www.cpj.org/CPJ_killed_data_12.06.xls [3] Current 2007 list from above source, http://cpj.org/killed/killed07.html [4] http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6426043.stm DanaSaurSchloss 05:51, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
No more questions. I stand corrected. Thanks for educating me about WikiPedia.
I remember when I first heard about this, I thought it was absolutely great. An unbiased, factual encyclopedia on line. For 3 years I have let my subscriptions run out, and left a few trees in the forest by not buying hard copies.
Now, it appears, I was entirely wrong. Any topic can have a bunch of hooligans hanging out all night, playing Goebbels with their favorite subject, and there is no accountability? No oversight? No final authority? No final review? That is not an encyclopedia. That is propaganda anarchy.
The most attentive (or those with the most spare time on their hands) can rewrite history any way they see fit, and keep writing retrograde versions over the truth?
So Putin's KGB, which certainly has the most resources to dedicate to the task, can man this web page "behind the curtains" and make sure he looks good 99.9% of the time that anyone seeks data.
And, although I do not care to see what lies they have about Dubbya (almost as sick and vile a cretin), I am sure Libby and Rove are keeping their guys up at night, to whitewash his lies. But as much of a fascist as he and all his lying pals are, they do not dare condone -or ignore journalists murdered during his administration, no less 19, or being the prime suspect in two of the assassinations. That is the DEFINITION of Putin. Besides the deranged company he keeps -and defends (Kim-ill and Ahmadinejad). This article reads like a tour guide. Girls want to kiss Putin.
Right. Kiss Polonium Putin. OK, take it away. You can have it. You can erase this farewell. I will go shell out the bucks for a new encyclopedia and whack a few trees. At least there, somebody with a real name and address has to accept responsibility for any lies, slant or spin they print. This is no encyclopedia. It is a bloated blogsite -with a veil of academic legitimacy.
you are 100% correct. Wikipedia is nothing more than force-fed propoganda. Wiki-hawks impose their view using "NPOV" as their disguise. in reality, they are forcibly imposing a single viewpoint and they absolutely will not tolerate any dissent. This site is a farce.
i understand that this is an article on a russian topic, but is it ok to have russian lang. sources for an english encylopedia?
The section on Media Freedom seems somewhat journalistic (e.g. "The toll of the past week in the city of Samara alone is very worrying"). Furthermore, the content of that section seems a bit detached from the subject of Putin himself, perhaps warranting inclusion in another article or at least a bit of NPOV summary.
As an inexperienced and junior "wikipedian", I'm hesitant about making such major changes myself (plus time pressures currently deny me the means), but I thought it best to make a note of my concerns.
Edit; just saw some of the comments above about this article's impartiality etc. Well, I can assure all the critics I'm a fresh-faced, totally neutral student of politics, and have no bias one way or another! My concerns are with style, and placement of content - the content itself seems acceptable to me.
Why is this section under Putin's biographical entry? It has nothing about Putin in it, it should either be an article in its own right . I dont understand why its there at all Pubuman 07:09, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Again somebody claims "The high approval ratings must be seen in a context of a country where the government controls most of the mass media."!! Read at least Media freedom in Russia, it's incomplete yet, but there's no total control of the government over informational flows. ellol 16:18, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Is it possible for someone to arrange his foreign policy in chronological order.
Putin recently said if US puts missiles in Europe, Putin promises to target Europe. [39] - Yancyfry 02:44, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Half of this supposedly biographical page is occupied by the very partial examination of media freedoms in Russia. As most people living in Russia are not concerned about this (see the polls) and the section explicitly contradicts WP:UNDUE, I suggest we move it elsewhere. Instead, it would have been helpful to mention some of the topics that Putin himself considers important (see his assessment of his term here). -- Ghirla -трёп- 13:42, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
"I think there are things of which I and the people who have worked with me can feel deservedly proud. They include restoring Russia’s territorial integrity, strengthening the state, progress towards establishing a multiparty system, strengthening the parliamentary system, restoring the Armed Forces’ potential and, of course, developing the economy. As you know, our economy has been growing by 6.9 percent a year on average over this time, and our GDP increased by 7.7 percent over the first four months of this year alone.
When I began my work in 2000, 30 percent of our population was living below the poverty line. There has been a two-fold drop in the number of people living below the poverty line since then and the figure today is around 15 percent. By 2009-2010, we will bring this figure down to 10 percent, and this will bring us in line with the European average.
We had enormous debts, simply catastrophic for our economy, but we have paid them off in full now. Not only have we paid our debts, but we now have the best foreign debt to GDP ratio in Europe. Our gold and currency reserve figures are well known: in 2000, they stood at just $12 billion and we had a debt of more than 100 percent of GDP, but now we have the third-biggest gold and currency reserves in the world and they increased by $90 billion over the first four months of this year alone.
During the 1990s and even in 2000-2001, we had massive capital flight from Russia with $15 billion, $20 billion or $25 billion leaving the country every year. Last year we reversed this situation for the first time and had capital inflow of $41 billion. We have already had capital inflow of $40 billion over the first four months of this year. Russia’s stock market capitalisation showed immense growth last year and increased by more than 50 percent. This is one of the best results in the world, perhaps even the best. Our economy was near the bottom of the list of world economies in terms of size but today it has climbed to ninth place and in some areas has even overtaken some of the other G8 countries’ economies. This means that today we are able to tackle social problems. Real incomes are growing by around 12 percent a year. Real income growth over the first four months of this year came to just over 18 percent, while wages rose by 11-12 percent.
Looking at the problems we have yet to resolve, one of the biggest is the huge income gap between the people at the top and the bottom of the scale. Combating poverty is obviously one of our top priorities in the immediate term and we still have to do a lot to improve our pension system too because the correlation between pensions and the average wage is still lower here than in Europe. The gap between incomes at the top and bottom end of the scale is still high here – a 15.6-15.7-fold difference. This is less than in the United States today (they have a figure of 15.9) but more than in the UK or Italy (where they have 13.6-13.7). But this remains a big gap for us and fighting poverty is one of our biggest priorities." [42]
A lot of Putin's alleged successes have more to do with looting the private sector. For instance, his government may have paid off its foreign debts, but the way it did it was by theft of resources previously held in the private sector. The re-nationalization of the oil and gas industries, or their illegal transfer to the corrupt friends of Putin, are perfect examples. MarcMontoni 16:10, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
Why does anything added to this page about the unnatural deaths of people who are critical of Putin always removed? wrc_wolfbrother 17:26, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
It's worse than that, because it's not just information about his dead opponents. It's **anything** critical of Putin. For instance, he had his military conduct a bloody massacre of Chechens. When I tried to provide that for balance in the section on Chechnya, it was promptly removed. Soviets used to have a joke about their televisions: "Q: Why do Russian televisions have windshield wipers on them? A: To wipe the spit off." It's unfortunate that WikiPedia has become a tool of Putin's propaganda machine. MarcMontoni 16:15, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
I've been trying to add the comment that Putin strangely uses interpreters when conversing with english-speaking people, but someone keeps removing it.
Has it ever been explained why he feigns a lack of understanding of english, to the point of using interpreters when talking to english-speaking people?
According to Putin's own words, he started learning English during his first term but does not have enough time for extensive practice. He understands English but would not speak in public. Besides, the United Kingdom and United States are perceived as alien countries here, and their language as a tool of modern cultural imperialism. It would have been preposterous to broadcast interviews of a Russian president speaking some foreign tongue, with a Russian translation. I don't think many Russians would appreciate that. -- Ghirla -трёп- 09:01, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Seems to me that Putin's language skills are somewhat exaggerated. It is probably true that his passive knowledge of English and German is quite good, but that is where it ends. The few times I heard him speak Englsh he was merely reading out a pre-written speech, stuttering and mispronouncing many words. The claim that he 'speaks German with near-native fluency' is way over the top. Listen to him speaking some German here. At best, I'd assess it as 'intelligible'. His Russian is probably better than mine though... Vlaflipje1982 18:23, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
I think I've seen an old TV interview when he was in the KGB where he was speaking english.
Shouldn't it be noted that Putin laughed after he said that? QZXA2 19:18, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Historian Anne Applebaum believes that "Whether by waging cyberwarfare on Estonia, threatening the gas supplies of Lithuania, or boycotting Georgian wine and Polish meat, he [Putin] has, over the past few years, made it clear that he intends to reassert Russian influence in the former communist states of Europe, whether those states want Russian influence or not. At the same time, he has also made it clear that he no longer sees Western nations as mere benign trading partners, but rather as Cold War-style threats." Putin is playing a dangerous game By Anne Applebaum, 05/06/2007 British historian Max Hastings also now described Putin as a " Stalin's spiritual heir" in his article "Will we have to fight Russia in this Century?", and tells that although "a return to the direct military confrontation of the Cold War is unlikely", "the notion of Western friendship with Russia is a dead letter" A blundering Bush, Tsar Putin, and the question: will we, in this century, have to fight Russia? by Max Hastings
I removed these quotes for now. The problem is that they seem to illustrate Western comments to Putin's proposal on Gabala Station. But, both these articles are dated June 5, while Putin's proposal was made on June 7 [43]. So this is more of desinformation, rather than actual comments of Western analytics on Putin's proposal. ellol 07:17, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
I want only to say, that as these quotes were added again to the article, I left them in the text but marked as an example of surge of rhetorics following Putin's Munich speech. ellol 14:20, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
I had a look at the text, and noticed some problems. I changed "study judo" into "practise judo" - since I suppose that was a mistranslation from Russian. I still have no clue what is meant by "disappointed Major". The major problem concerning the language of the artticle is the mixture of British and American English.
Some of the things in the humour are trivial and could easily be deleted. However, if we do keep something about "uncanny resemblances", should not we better refer to Arnolfini Portrait. I have seen the portrait in London, and the Arnolfini-Putin likeness is indeed striking. The pregnant Flemish lady bears an uncanny resemblance to Inge Vervotte, a young Belgian politician. Considering that a number of esoteric websites quote the Arnolfini-Putin resemblance as evidence of Putin being the Anti-Christ (yes, really - eg [44] ) I think that would be more noteworthy than some silly jokes about flying a whale to the moon (not presently relevant with all the oil money) or resembling a Harry Potter character. -- Pan Gerwazy 09:25, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
I think it would be great to have a section placing Putin's views in context of the political spectrum. They may look trivial to some Russians, but in fact they aren't. Colchicum 14:23, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Marktwain403's edits to the Media freedom seem completely inappropriate. It makes the section way, way too long. It's also a very poor cut-and-paste job from the already-existing article on the very same topic. It's also, as others have argued, inappropriate for this biography. I'd like others to weigh in before I revert Marktwain403's latest edit. -- ElKevbo 02:35, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
You are going to have to work with me too, Elkevbo, if you want to avoid a continuous revert war on this. It may well be that Putin's suppression of the media may turn out to be the most important aspect of his administration and I will continue to try to post this information. I am willing to shorten it and provide better references if you will allow a good portion of it in the biography. Even though I may not have provided the best references, they do exist and the information I posted is valid. You can find that out for your self with a short search on the Internet. Also, Putin's primary opposition right now is Kasparov and a biography of Putin would not be complete without that information.
I removed the "Selected quotes" section yesterday but that change was reverted without discussion. I assert that the inclusion of such a section is inherently POV as it is the work of Wikipedia editors cherry-picking quotes they (the Wikipedia editors) believe represent Putin or his views. Further, all such quotes belong in Wikiquote or, at best, integrated into the body of the article in the appropriate place(s). -- ElKevbo 15:55, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
"Selected quotes" section is very informative and absolutely necessary; your subjective judgment is no reason for removing it. If you want to remove it, you must provide a better reason than your likes or dislikes (which include applying labels such as POV without giving a reason for it other than saying "inherently"). If you think it's biased, you're free to provide other quotes. Note that most of these quotes were first "cherry-picked" by journalists -- I don't think many Wikipedians are listening to the Putin's speeches and doing the "cherry-picking". -- However, "anecdotes" section is not really necessary: most of it could be included in "selected quotes". Lebatsnok 15:05, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Ellol, Why are you such a fan of Putin that you don't want any negative information in the biography? All of your edits serve to show him in the best possible light when in fact he is rapidly becoming a dictator in Russia. Your edits are not from a neutral point of view.
I occasionally read the Putin biography and notice that often the biography does not contain important information about the lack of press freedom in Russia. This is one of the most important developments in the Putin administration. He has gone to great lengths to suppress freedom of the press to an extent that is unheard of in most democracies. Yet when I try to put detailed information about that, including well sourced information, it is usually quickly removed. My understanding is that it is being removed by a Russian. It is also noteworthy that many websites in Russia frequently are defaced if they contain material that is critical of the Russian President. It is a fact that most of the media in Russia is now controlled by the government. Is that going to hold true for Wikipedia also? I will try again to insert information about the problems that journalists face and the problems that anyone faces when they are critical of the Russian President. For example, a few weeks ago, supporters of the opposition were prevented from going to the city where a conference was being held with European countries. The government prevented that by simply declaring void the plane tickets of the opposition and preventing them from boarding the airplane. This forum ought not to echo the methods of the Russian government and therefore I request that true information about the lack of press freedom in Russia not be deleted from this site. Neutrality is one thing but aiding a dictator is quite another.
Marktwain403 00:38, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
I would say that if we are going to have a section about Media freedom in Russia it must be argumented talk. There are positive and negative sides and trends in situation about independence of media from the state. Simply blaming the situation in general would not help neither Russian journalists nor people of Russia, but hazard reputation of Wikipedia as a truthworthy source. Again, there's no point in removing info that Putin is supported by 80% of population or writing it's about lack of media freedom. Better high approval rating is about economic recovery after Russian financial crisis of 1998. Nobody is going to claim that Vladimir Putin is an ideal person or president. But his high approval rating obviously certifies that his policy is supported by majority of population. Usually to the end of second term people start to get annoyed by their president. But as it still holds at 80%, it means that either people notice certain positive changes in their lives which happened during Putin's terms, or he managed to give them the hope for decent future. 99% of info about Putin at Russian three major TV channels are mere information blocks without positive or negative emotional background.
If Vladimir Putin was a dictator he wouldn't be named in ironical context "Uncle Vova", "Mister Pu" or other ways that I heard myself. If Vladimir Putin is a dictator and Russian a dictatorship, shouldn't we just nuke each other to end this all stuff? Look around, more than half of the world are ruled by regimes sufficiently more undemocratic than Vladimir Putin's government, shouldn't we nuke them as well? ellol 20:42, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Elkevbo and Ellol, you are living in a fantasy world. Anytime a ruler has control of the press or most of it, it is not surprising that they will get high marks in the polls. What ridiculous reasoning you are using. The brutal dictator Stalin had the affection of a very substantial segment of the Russian people. He killed millions! The reason is that most of the time his terrible crimes went unreported.
I note also that there are a substantial number of complaints from other visitors to this site that anything critical of Putin gets promptly removed. You fans of Putin need to realize that he is not viewed as a democratic leader by very large numbers of people.
MarkTwain, I'm not fan of Putin. There are no complains, there were few complex issues but we got through them. Leave bones of Stalin rest in the place. It was long ago. There was cult of personality. There was a threat of physical destruction of dissidents. There was total censorship, i.e. all newspapers were to reconsile their issues with bosses from Communist Party. Nothing of that can be seen now. Compared to Stalin times media freedom in Russia is absolute: you took a wrong example. I live in a real country among real people. Russian private company Medialogy investigated Russian television in 2006: of all 13890 messages about Putin, 118 contained positive background and 38 contained negative. Positive and negative are about 1% of total messages. [46] This rejects any your suggestion about cult of personality of Putin. ellol 21:15, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Ellol, organizations of professional journalists disagree with you on whether or not there is a free press in Russia. There are many people who say there is very substantial suppression of dissent that happens in many ways. Do you deny that Kasparov's people were prevented from flying to Samara by the government? They certainly were prevented. Why do you deny what is a proven fact about the lack of media freedom in Russia? I don't contend that it is total, but it is very much present. Did you read the reports of "Reporters without Borders" and "Freedom House"? They have no motivation to lie about Russia.
Yes, detaining some Other Russia people for several hours so they were late to get in Samara by airplane and missed Russia-EU summit was a dubious covert action of Russian authorities which perhaps directly contradicts Russian constitution which guarantees freedom of transition. How does this concern media freedom? Stop spitting around, lay your arguments on table. ellol 21:33, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Ellol,
Surely you can see that one type of suppression is not really any different from another type. Those people wanted to travel to Samara wanted to do so to express their opposition to the government. That is just another aspect of free speech. And with respect to travel to Samara, they were not just delayed but prevented entirely from going. How do you answer the statements of professional organizations of journalists who are highly critical of the lack of press freedom in Russia? Are they just lying?
Marktwain, the source sais there were 38 negative, not positive, statements on Russian TV about Putin. Stop reverting negative to positive. Or, are you just playing? It's unimportant what the source sais? Also, "The above should be understood in a context where the Russian government has almost complete control of the means of mass communications. It should not be very hard to be popular in a country where dissent is largely prohibited." statement is original research, which contradicts policy Wikipedia: No Original Research. ellol 21:52, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Ellol,
I don't understand your statement about 38 negative statements on Russian TV. I never mentioned that, you brought it up. As for references, it is a standard scholarly practice not to have to reference things that are generally known. I would say that it is generally known and generally accepted that there is very little media freedom in Russia. You didn't answer my question about what you think of the formal statements on press freedom put out by the two professional organizations, Reporters without Borders and Freedom House. Do you disagree with the consensus of reporters and others that media freedom has declined under Putin? Just to refresh your memory Eloll, here is what was said by Freedom House. Do you dispute this assessment? Do you prefer a regime that goes to great lengths to suppress criticism? Tell us, Ellol. Is that why you go to such great lengths to suppress any unfavorable comment about Putin in Wikipedia?
[2] A report from the Organization "Freedom House" contained the following comments about Russia: "Media freedom was further curtailed in 2006 as President Vladimir Putin’s government passed legislation restricting news reporting and journalists were subjected to physical violence and intimidation. Although the Russian constitution provides for freedom of speech and of the press, authorities are able to use the legislative and judicial systems to harass and prosecute independent journalists ...Despite public objections, Russia’s parliament also passed amendments to the Law on Fighting Extremist Activity, which Putin then signed in July. The measure expanded the definition of extremism to include media criticism of public officials, and authorized up to three years’ imprisonment for journalists as well as the suspension or closure of their publications if they were convicted ...Authorities continued to exert influence on media outlets and determine news content in 2006."
Marktwain403
Forger about negative statements. You just weren't enough accurate and reverted my change "positive" to "negative". All is long ago written down: see this article [47]. I am too tired today and not going to repeat all its statements. Read it yourself. What Freedom House speaks are just words, not fully supported with facts. Then read at Media freedom in Russia certain claims from this article which exactly answer your question. There's no consensus, other than that in your mind. ellol 01:31, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
"It's generally accepted there's very little media freedom in Russia." Hm. I always thought there are certain problems with it, and the problem is the improve the situation. Hey, move in Russia, and watch Ren-TV. Or ask Marianna Maksimovskaya, whether she has only little freedom of speech when she discusses Other Russia organization or makes report about some new tensions between Russian journalists and authorities, or makes a sharp analysis of top political figures in Russia at her "Operation Successor" series. I'm wondered what would she answer you. ellol 01:53, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Why isn't the Russian public disturbed by the fact that their country is being led by a former USSR official who's "Friends" that had some of the highest ranking positions in the the Soviet Union.-- [[User:Franky210|Turtopotamus]] 16:16, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
-G —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.230.161 ( talk) 23:13, August 28, 2007 (UTC)
Vladimir Putin served in Finland as young KGB officer at Soviet Embassy in Helsinki and later in Consulate of USSR in Turku. I think this Finland period should be also be mentioned in main article, before he was being transfered to DDR.
According to one French TV document Vladimir Putin´s mother is claimed to be a daughter of ethnic Russian father and Georgian mother. She claimed that her son was taken away from her from Georgia to Leningrad by her boy´s grandfather. Any prove of this story?
According the just published claim in Helsingin Sanomat 31.07.2007 Vladimir Putin has from his father´s side Tver Karelian roots as claimed among the Karelians in Daughter Karelia (Tver), Spiridon Putin is said to be a Karelian, not Russian.
JN
Section about anekdotes was removed by an user as trivia section. Perhaps it yet worth looking on it [48] to rewrite it in a proper manner or so. ellol 21:10, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Vladimir Putin/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
needs better referencing plange 05:47, 30 July 2006 (UTC) |
Last edited at 05:47, 30 July 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 20:58, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Currently or all time?
-G
Probably Hitler and Stalin got higher approval ratings because as in Russia now, they had control of the mass media. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.253.29.69 ( talk) 04:38, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Hitler and Stalin had high ratings, but they were also hated. The German Jews, I bet, didn't think too highly of Hitler. Stalin on the other hand, probably was high on the polls until Germany invaded(which that high approval rating disappeared once WW11 was over). I think those two(and everybody else) pale in comparison to the Kims of North Korea.
If we are talking currently, as of 2010, I'd say that honor goes to Kim Jung Il of North Korea. Of all time? A tie. Kim Jr and his pappy, Kim Il Sung 28 December 1972 - 8 July 1994(21 years,192 days). Maybe Emperor Shōwa (Hirohito) of Japan(or at least, up til WWII's ending. I'd say his radio address announcing surrender, upset a lot of the military and some of the public.)
I occasionally read the Putin biography and notice that often the biography does not contain important information about the lack of press freedom in Russia. This is one of the most important developments in the Putin administration. He has gone to great lengths to suppress freedom of the press to an extent that is unheard of in most democracies. Yet when I try to put detailed information about that, including well sourced information, it is usually quickly removed. My understanding is that it is being removed by a Russian. It is also noteworthy that many websites in Russia frequently are defaced if they contain material that is critical of the Russian President. It is a fact that most of the media in Russia is now controlled by the government. Is that going to hold true for Wikipedia also? I will try again to insert information about the problems that journalists face and the problems that anyone faces when they are critical of the Russian President. For example, a few weeks ago, supporters of the opposition were prevented from going to the city where a conference was being held with European countries. The government prevented that by simply declaring void the plane tickets of the opposition and preventing them from boarding the airplane. This forum ought not to echo the methods of the Russian government and therefore I request that true information about the lack of press freedom in Russia not be deleted from this site. Neutrality is one thing but aiding a dictator is quite another.
I note also that there are a substantial number of complaints from other visitors to this site that anything critical of Putin gets promptly removed. You fans of Putin need to realize that he is not viewed as a democratic leader by very large numbers of people. I urge all visitors to help edit this biography so that negative aspects of Putin's leadership are not prevented from being posted. I am sure he has done some things positive for Russia but the negative cannot be ignored or deleted. I am willing to work with the regulars here to produce a quality product but I will not sit idly by while they dictate the contents. A neutral point of view does not mean ignoring the ethical and moral issues surrounding a leader. Suppose Adolf Hitler were alive today and this biography was about him. Would it be correct to ignore his very great crimes in the name of preserving a "neutral point of view"?
In recent months, Putin's government has put enormous pressure on the opposition in a number of ways, using methods that are illegal in the civilized world. The government has interfered with the travel of the opposition, pressured hotels to deny meeting space, arrested opposition leaders, thrown some in prison and in general has behaved in an uncivilized way. Russia is rapidly becoming a dictatorship with all the implications that this has for the world.
Does Putin ever smile a genuine smile? ..or even better, laugh? Any link to a happy picture of him?
I do not think he was preceded by Tony Blair: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Putin#External_links_and_references 13:03, 20 May 2006 (UTC) He was. See G8#Past_G6.2F7.2F8_summits. "31st 2005 July 6–July 8 United Kingdom Gleneagles Hotel, Gleneagles / Muirton, Scotland http://www.g8.gov.uk " ellol
What US-propaganda is this? If you want neutral and objective information about Vladimir Putin you'd better turn to the European Wikipedia pages.
Derek
Putin indeed is youngest of all Russian leaders. Stalin, Kruschev and Brezhnev were heavy drinkers, Lenin, Andropov and Chernenko were terminally ill, but you are right - Boris Yeltsin is also a sport enthusiast - he plays tennis.
Uncle Joe.
Most of the exclusively US perspective has been removed. A few people seem to think that it is relevant to include in this article the allegation that US President George W. Bush refers to Putin as "Pootie-Poot". It's a cute nickname, and it probably tells us something about Bush, but this artcle isn't the place for American political trivia.
I think this bloke you guys are on about is gay. this comment was from Jáck Hóllóbréád
Thanks for sharing, Jäck.
I made some minor edits relating to the appointed governors and the proportional voting system. The view that these changes somehow subvert democracy is US centric. The majority of democracies use a proportional voting system, and I happen to be from an established democracy (the Kingdom_of_the_Netherlands) where governors are appointed by the Crown (and accepted or rejected by the local legislature). I am willing to accept that Putin championed these changes to tighten his grip on power, and (combined with his control over the national, but maybe not regional, media) they might well have that effect, but one of the US contributors will have to make an explicit case for that to make that argument stick. Maybe he just prefers a more European, and less American, type of democracy? (aboer)
Why and how is Putin so popular (and his opponents so unpopular)? Isn't Russia in a bit of a state? I've heard it suggested that the Russians have remained in a Soviet-era mindset, favouring a strong, stable, central leader over uncertainty and debate. What do people think? Any Russians or other ex-Soviets about? Is it about nostalgia for the USSR, the invasion of Chechnya or more than just those two?
Mr. Jones 10:23, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)
You really have to ask that Question? try here Russia pays off its Soviet era debts to the west and probably a million other positive reforms come on people we need to get educated. - Theblackbay 09:08, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
The Problem with the critising Putin is that he is really popular. If you saying something against his politics, you sonn will be terribly unpopular. There are a lot of independent medias in Russia, but all they are super- liberal, pro-oligarch (corrupter enterpreneurs) and anti- Russian (especiaaly the Berezovsky's media-holding). His Excellence
CPC
Putin owns the Russian media. Thats all it comes down to.
There should really be at least *something* in the article about the sharply divergent views of him in Western media: dictator or democrat, strong leader or weak puppet. If you're a native English speaker (or just better than me) and can come up with something that doesn't violate NPOV, please add it. 82.83.132.165 23:05, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Well, it's not what tabloids write about him. It's what mainstream journalism writes about him. Certainly the article ought to mention Putin's alleged attacks on a free press in Russia. I think that in general the article ought to be considerably more detailed, to be honest. john 04:13, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)
People, people, just because you Americans think your the "most democratic country in the world" doesn't mean you really are!!! Honestly, you are not the capital of the world!! What happens and what works for your country my not work for other nations. What is happening in Russia, really does not concern and should not concern you or your leaders foreign policy in any way what so ever, Russia is Russia, America is America, and Putin is doing the best bloody job, he can FOR RUSSIA'S INTERESTS, just because it doesn't coincide with the beliefs of your polical heads doesn't give you the right to critisize what you dont know. LONG LIVE PUTIN, LONG LIVE RUSSIA, LONG LIVE THE UN.
It might be harder to put 'facts' about Putin in at this point in history without slanting them. Back in the day with kruschev, it'd be easy to say "Installed minimum wage," but now things are a bit more complicated, and saying "Kills Chechens" and "Stops terrorism" are the same 'fact' but you see where perspective determines which 'fact' is being written. Unless you want to post his entire budget proposal every year?
Once again what I already mentioned at GW Bush discussion page. Here (and then US-Russian summit) are some photos from Bush-Putin summit in Slovenia in 2001. The photos are not really public domain but may be published freely if the source and photographer are mentioned. So if you like them and would like to include them into an article, go ahead...
In the table: I put 'None' as the political party, just so people know there's no association (he's just a one-man propoganda machine, but let's not get into that)
In the bottom: I left the link, but I made the text say "prime minister of modern russia" to differentiate between the office held now and the office held before the communist revolution.
— Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 17:50, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I removed the NPOV placed by 80.139.9.254 ( or Voevoda ?). There are no arguments except the sentence "Putin is a rather atypical Russian leader: He is comparatively young, never touches alcohol, and is a sports enthusiast" which is definitely not something major in this article. Lvr 11:16, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
What's Putin's ideology? I know he's a former Communist but I've never heard him called a socialist or social democrat. Pimpalicious 2:46, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
"I looked the man in the eye. I was able to get a sense of his soul." by US President George W. Bush, June 16, 2001, evidently finding Putin to be trustworthy and straight forward. ??? What a naive *******t! Evidently? Can we really find out what politicians think of each other? Can we really trust their diplomatic speeches? You know, when some come country posesses a nuclear arsenal, and becoming more and more hostile to the West, and you're U.S. president, you just can't say "that ex-spy looks like a stupid duck". AlexPU
Isn't it kinda naive to take what a President says about his meeting with another President at face value? As you said - people are complicated. Bush might not mean what he said - but merely to impress the idea that Putin and he are close.
Also, George W. Bush probably said that to foster good relations... Relations that are now gone as Putin refuses to allow a resolution against
Iran to be passed in the
UN Security Council. Russia, as a permanent member, has veto power.
Dzerzhinsky
22:14, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I have edited the sentence pertaining to Gazprom. The sentence implied Gazprom is completely state owned when in actuality, the Russian government has a 38% stake in it. It may push that above 50% by merging Gazprom with Rosneft. Source - The Economist p74 Dec11th-17th 2004 User:miltonjackson
I don't have time to edit this now, but the state now controls 51% of Gazprom and is working on merging it with Rosnef, which took over Yukos's assets last year.
I've removed my previous essay on quotations. I cut my proposal to remove: "This is a man who reads." "Russia doesn't negotiate with terrorists. It destroys them" I agree that all of them make good points, but move the Wallace interview higher, so the one about slithouse would be read the last. Gnomz007 9 July 2005 00:02 (UTC)
I think, that most of these quotations are
1) Interesting to many people, because they explain position of the president of large country on the questions of inner policy(and not only it) which really alarm the world community.
2) Important, because they make the article more of NPOV. You can return that a man can't say things of NPOV about himself and his own doing (and that's right). But what he says is a POV as well. And now readers can compare what they read about Putin before with Putin's replies on much of it, -- and have better possibilities of making their own unbiased viewpoints. So such a rare situation can hardly be called bad.
3) telling much about character and personality of the man who the article is about.
I think that replacing Quotations with retelling of them and a short note that Putin likes using rude words would be an error, since it would lose half of the interest, most of the importance(so called effect of broken telephone: the information being retelled partially loses it's original sense) and all about Putin's personality.
And my last but not least. Gnom007, I respect you, but can't leave the sensation that you want to decide for all what is lousy, am I wrong? The words shithouse and circumcision even do not belong to Seven dirty words (yet the second one is a correct medical term); in my POV it's enough for they being acceptable in the article. Other opinions?
ellol 9 July 2005 00:54 (UTC)
The Quotations section takes up half the page. Could everyone consider trimming it down a bit? You can get more quotes in WikiQuotes so I don't see the point in flooding the page with it. Cyborg Ninja 29 Nov 2006 14:39 (UTC)
--I Do think that his response to Bush's comment on Russian democracy should be included in the "Quotations" category as opposed to the "Putin-related Humor".
" - Нам бы не хотелось, чтобы у нас была такая же демократия, как в Ираке, скажу честно" Translated: " - To be honest, we hardly want to have democracy such as in Iraq"
Dear All,
A photo of President Putin in the KGB can be located at http://images.evrazia.org/images/putin-kgb3.jpg. Enjoy. Zscout370 01:50, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
What do yall think of it? Zscout370 14:36, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I think it's more promising than a leader who's lit on stolichnaya all day.
FYI: I uploaded a new photo of Putin, who is talking in this one. I personally think this is a better one, and it still comes from the website of the Russian Presidency. The earlier photo had Putin "looking stoned (in my POV)." Zscout370 (talk) 03:04, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
South and East Asian governments have a tradition of thinking about 'batches' of leaders based on their cohort. I usually think of Vladimir Putin as part of the larger group of positive centrist politicians who have emerged: George W. Bush, Tony Blair, Spain's Zapatero, Hu Jin Tao and Junichiro Koizumi. This perspective might be useful in contextualizing Russia under Putin in terms of its foreign relations against the backdrop of a world recently united by airplane and computer technology. McDogm-- 64.12.116.13 15:01, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
There is a delicious portrait of the very inner workings of power:
It is of Russian President Vladimir Putin and champion Olympic Greco-Roman wrestler Alexander Karelin.
Karelin towers over Putin in a protective posture while Putin shows a hovering glee.
The "pinnicle" of society "needs" the more "base" elements for its existence.
Find it at: [2]
-- Scroll1 22:43, 14 May 2005 (UTC)
Yes, those "pinnicles" of society. Is that a cross between a "pinnacle" and a "pickle"? -- Uthar Wynn 01 03:19, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
A common nickname for Putin in Russia is Iron fist Putin, which is an attempt to liken him to Stalin, I think it should be added to this article that many Russians liken him to the murderous despot.
So, you're saying that his nickname in Russian would be "Путин-железный кулак" ("Putin-zheleznyj kulak")? Are you aware that such a noun-as-adjective form of nicknaming does not exist in the Russian language? Kazak 23:42, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
Just for fun: I heard that somebody named him "Наш железный Буратино" - "Our iron Buratino (Pinocchio)". Lucius
Right, I changed it. Sorry, I was thinking two different things at the same time, apparently. Kazak 02:55, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
"Путин-железный кулак" ГЫ ГЫ ГЫ, вот гон то :-) Хоть на voffka.com не ходи, в смысле тут смешенее...
Dzerzhinsky 20:29, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Cool, now Russian headlines read "American businessman presented Vladimir Putin with a diamond ring". [3] "American Oligarch presented a ring to Putin. Why?" [4] Well Kraft decided it was a gift then :) [5] here is in English [6] Opps, forgot to sign Gnomz007
This paragraph was deleted - please see rationale in the discussion of the Second Term section. If others want to reintroduce it, perhaps you could offer a comment about how this story tells us something important about Putin - as it was, it read more like an "In Brief..." article from the sports section of a local US newspaper.
I've cleaned up the article some to conform more to Wikipedia's NPOV policy, a much more balanced perspective has been created IMHO. Tell me what you think. -- Uthar Wynn 01 03:14, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
Uthar, I can agree with a few of your lesser revisions, but most suggest that you are simply adding pro-Putin POV. The fact is that the ODIHR election report does not "refute" the criticisms of massive and one-sided campaigning by state-owned and state-allied news services, notably television. There is nothing NPOV about stripping the observation - evident to absolutely anyone familiar with Russian news - that Putin's actions and statements are carefully stage managed by PR experts - it is a hallmark of his presidency, and removing this non-judgemental observation looks like you're applying shampoo to this Kremlin's style. The Chechen conflict is not simply a sideshow in America's War against Terrorism - it has very deep historical roots and long predates 9/11, and not everything done by the Chechens is terrorism. The "friend and ally" caption you added to the photo is both silly and untrue - they are not "friends" in any meaningful sense, and the US and Russia are not allies (if they were, they would not be targetting one another with thousands of nuclear weapons. Pretending Russia is simply "improving" relations with Belarus is ridiculous and insults anyone who has followed the story for years (for those who haven't, Russian political commentators regularly raise the possibility of a wholescale absorption of Belarus by Russia).
All this to me suggests that the NPOV claim is a fig-leaf. I would argue for complete reversion to the text that existed at the beginning of 12 July. You could then go back over your proposed revisions much more carefully and see if there are any that really merit inclusion.
(As an aside, I find it strange that Uthar Wynn's piecemeal but wholescale revision of the text, over the course of two hours, doesn't attract any criticism from 216.183.184.253, who is nonetheless quick to slap down a subsequent reversion as "such a drastic rv" that must be discussed. Doesn't make any sense.)
I think this article needs more NPOV and more facts, to allow an understanding of Putin's ideology, what he has done in Russia (right and wrong), and who is benefiting from it.
There is a feeling of international anti-putin press in the article that doesn't leave the reader very convinced. I wished I knew more about the subject to add something of value. Thanks. Oscar. 14:13, 5 Dec 2005 (UTC)
He is a confirmed vandal. Some of his edits of this article was deliberate vandalism as well. His massive rewording is nothing but to hide his vandalisms. there is no reason to waste time and sift for pearls in his contrib. mikka (t) 20:56, 13 July 2005 (UTC) And by the way, it is interestiong to notice that most of contribs from 216.183.184.25 account, who struggles to defend Utthar here, are reverted vandalisms. mikka (t) 21:02, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
Thank you, Mikkalai. I was being too generous...
And YOU are the most abusive excuse for an admin I have ever seen. You bandy about accusations indescriminately and are constantly drawing criticism for your unscrupulous deletion of anything which violates your biased POV. I caught you vandalising this very talk page earlier, deleting my comments, which is NOT acceptable behavior except in very limited circumstances.
A "confirmed vandal"?! What, is there some kind of "master list" now? And as far as the accusation that my "rewording" is just to hide vandalisms, I'll have you know that I reworded things because the article as it stood was little more than anti-putin propaganda. Everyone knows your radical anti-putin views, so don't try to hide behind your revert as "undoing vandalism" when all you're really doing is shifting the article back to your POV.
I admit that some of my rewordings went to far towards a positive POV of Putin, but many of them were to conform ths article to the NPOV policy. You should remember that you don't own this page, you aren't the only editor around here, and you aren't going to intimidate me with your admin status. You've made a lot of enemies on Wikipedia, and if you keep it up one of this days people are going to get you discharged as an admin. -- Uthar Wynn 01 02:55, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
I edited the paragraph concerning Kursk tragedy.
1) 118 people died on Kursk. See Russian_submarine_Kursk_explosion_(2000)
2)As for me, that passage seems a bit of strange.. IMHO, the proper president's action was sitting in his Kremlin and allowing professionals to do their job...
3) After several days of mounting public confusion and anger Was it really mounting? If it was, was it concerned with Putin's absense in Moscow?
Thanks for clarifying about the cause of the explosion. My understanding was that it was an experimental hydrogen peroxide torpedo - the basic design was old, but I thought this was a new model.
I suspect we could talk about Chechnya here for a very long time, but if the article is missing important points about Putin's handling of the crisis then let's discuss these. I certainly agree (and wrote earlier in the article) that Chechen separatism posed a threat to Russia's territorial integrity. I hope you also agree that the "Chechen separatism --> Russian disintegration" argument doesn't come close to explaining everything.
– Gnomz 007( ?) 02:46, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
4) New version: The first acute crisis which Putin faced after the invasion of Chechen extremists in Dagestan... Although Putin was yet a Prime Minister when the invasion occured, he took direct respect to resolving the crisis, and it is(was) a significant constituent of his public image.
ellol
16:14, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
[8]- this one is a collection of news in Russian... definitely not for the faint of heart. All I've got : On 1 January 2005 when the law(bill) of replacement of social benefits (free rides, free medication, discounted utility/apartment rent bills) for elderly, disabled and servicemen, with cash payments(of less value) took force, after that on January ?9? there were protests, mostly of pensioners, involving blocking of highways, which lasted for almost a week and made the government ?increase the pension payments to compensate for that?. It is also noted by the Russian and other press, that Putins approval rating reached it's historical minimum of 38% in January 2005.– Gnomz 007( ?) 04:54, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
Please add how to say the name: Pútin or Putín?
Bush's alcoholic nickname for Putin, Pootie Poot links to this article, it should link to either alcoholic dementia, or to a list of Bushisms.
in the 2004 presidential election putin got 92 percent of the vote in chechnya... which is impossible unless on the ballot it said "kill" instead of "vote for".
putin ripped off the election and is going to stay in power for a long time.
you have to feel so sorry for the U.S. people, when are they going to be free from crime and corruption in the government?
You have to feel sorry for the U.S. people, when are they going to be free from propaganda, ignorance, government control, feelings of agression against the entire world, imperialism, and militarism? - Russian mafia
I added the category "sex symbol" for Putin but my edit was mercilessly removed by doc glasgow. I maintain that Putin has some sex symbol status, at least in Russia. He is popular among some young women who regard him as a "dependable" and "manly" figure.
Yes yes yes yes!!!! Putin is SEXY SEXY!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.82.88.179 ( talk) 14:42, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
After the first Harry Potter film came out, a Russian newspaper mischievously reported that the character of Dobby was in fact a stylised version of Putin. Shared details such as the sallow complexion and small stature were cited as evidence of this. However, the article was clearly tongue in cheek and the story has never been substantiated. It's a funny comparison, and one that appeals to me personally, but it's not worth including in this article (any more than, say, the fact that I think Dubya looks like a chimp or that Russian political provocateurs have commissioned porn films starring a supposed look-alike of Ukrainian politician Yulia Tymoshenko).
"After saying the US shouldn't have gone into Iraq in the first place: "But if the U.S. were to leave and abandon Iraq without establishing the grounds for a united and sovereign country, that would definitely be a second mistake."
And your point? This is a completely valid point, hopefuly not an effort to highlight the stupidity of Putin, as it has surely backfired. Indeed the USA shouldn't have gone into Iraq and they ended up needlessly openin a can of worms (division/civil conflict) they can not shut through diplomacy nor aggression
I have just watched a weekly TV-program "Realnaya politika" on NTV channel. Major presenter is Gleb_Pavlovsky, 2 other people (Mr. Parker, and man with a nick "Mr. Montblanc") make shorter reports. Motto of the program is 'a program about real power'. It's a sort of analysises of major events concerning Russia (politics, economics, social life). The program considers troubles of Russia, ways out. It considers dynamics of world. What are we moving to, and what we have now.
Considering serious problems includes grains of humour. What is interesting, the program included 3 short (3-5 mins) plays (of Mr. Parker) in a style, seemingly derived from style of "Kukly". That is, puppets (computer animation, not real ones) represented major politics. Putin is the main protagonist; (an interesting detail is that head of "puppet" Putin is never shown). Plays are direct "inheritors" of Parker's "Vladimir Vladimirovich" series.
ellol 21:31, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Isn't the party rep in the submarine of the movie The Hunt for Red October named Vladimir Putin? -- HJV 23:08, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
The last name of the political officer (zampolit) is Putin, but nowhere either in the movie or the book is he referred to as Vladmir Putin. Agent Smith in The Matrix is not Joseph Smith. Same thing. Just because the last name matches doesn't mean it references the same person.
-- 209.182.101.246 20:19, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
The Washington Post has an article that goes into some detail about Putin's educational background and the new charges of plagiarism. Regular editors here might want to discuss working it into the article. Jkelly 02:33, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
(Google is your friend!)
Just a minor thing about the article: The text, "Vladimir Putin has been accused by fellows Clifford Gaddy and Igor Danchenko at the Brookings Institution of plagiarism" reads like Cliff and Igor are from the "Brookings institution of Plagiarism". There either needs to be commas after "accused" and "institution", or the sentence needs to be restructured, as in, "Vladimir Putin has been accused of plagiarism by fellows Clifford Gaddy and Igor Danchenko at the Brookings Institution." I'm not sure how strict the Wikistapo are monitoring the changes here, some pages are pretty lax, some are run by tyrants. -- Mcvoid 19:46, 10 December 2006 (UTC)19:46, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Are there any quotations any of you know of that were made by Putin, that don't have to do with terrorism and/or America? I think the diversification of that section would be helpful. Picaroon9288 01:09, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
Putin gives plenty of speeches, and you can get hundreds of quotations. Kremlin's press service translates some of his speeches/press interviews and makes them publicly available on the Internet. The problem is, most Americans think of Putin as this ominous creepy Cold War-type stock "bad guy" character, who spends days and nights conspiring against American "freedom" and "democracy". So, whoever wrote this article probably thought that all of Putin's remarks are about America (meaning USA). The constant rehash of "war in Chechnya" news in certain media explains the abundance of terrorism quotations. Starz
Quotations of which kind should be added? Perhaps the section is too big now, which quotations should be removed? ellol 23:59, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Any of you knows whether Vera Putina, in the Ineke Smits documentary movie is or is not the true Putin mama? Think you that this curious story should appear somewhere on the main page? Peppe (not logged)
what is different Vladimir Putin then every other leader did?
I think we may add info about referendum held on March 23, 2003 in Chechnya. Main question was approval or disapproval of constitution of Chechen Republic. According to chairman of election committee of Chechen Republic A.K. Arsakhanov, 89,48% of people in lists took part in vote, and 95,97% of them voted FOR constitution. (Russian) [10] + photo [11] . It's still inaccurate, of course, if I'll add this info I'll find english sources. ellol 16:52, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
Sorry. I wished for a short statement on the current situation. But not all like it, MarcMontoni changed it to In recent years, due mainly to the Putin government's campaign of stepped-up economic and political harassment, coupled with violent oppression [1] [2] [3] of the Chechen populace, the conflict in the Chechen Republic has largely subsided, at least as a two-sided conflict. I don't know may be mine was incorrect, but this is at least that much wrong. I reverted it to before my changes. Perhaps we have to wait for a real person from Chechnya, who would know real things. Links remained, why, good ones. ellol 20:43, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
Please, note the Chechnya was (and continues to be) the part of Russian Federation, and not the recognised souvereign state. So defining the conflict as war between RF and *part of RF* is somewhat incorrect.
Put a picture of him kissing that poor little boy.
sheez people just get up themselves at the slighest thing. People obviously have nothing to do these days. 218.101.74.127 13:27, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
I tried to work there more than on year. But unfortunately, i had to come back because of my father illness. Soon i'll try to come back to Moscow, but suddenly i've noticed that my heart beats very fast and do not want to come back. I tried to analise, what's happening with me. I do not afraid of unemploiment, i don't afraid of the law, I am afraid of militia man. They can find any fact to get some money(mobile phone, golden rings and smth) that you've earned. (to be continued)
shirin sozokbaeva
I have added this article to Category:Russian terrorists because Mr. Putin meets the criteria listed at Category:Terrorists. To wit,
Vladimir Putin is the president of the Russian Federation and has been active in managing the campaign against separatist insurgents in Chechnya. As the article on Second Chechen War notes, "Violations of human rights conducted by the Russian forces drew international condemnation."
Second Chechen War states that, "the death toll from the conflict is unknown, with estimates ranging from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands dead or missing, mostly Chechnya's civilians."
The conflict in Chechnya has been primarily an insurgency and counter-insurgency, rather than a conventional war, since 2000.
The Russian occupation of Chechnya coerces the populace of that area to remain part of the Russian Federation and sends the message that attempts to gain independence from the Russian Federation will be met with violence.— Nat Krause( Talk!) 21:11, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
The same (lack of) logic would classify George W. Bush as a terrorist, Ehud Olmert as a terrorist, etc. Lots of people would like to censor all mention of terrorism from Wikipedia (terrorism articles and categories are frequently nominated for censorship, and sometimes censored). If you don't share that goal, I suggest you refrain from debasing the language. Mirror Vax 16:46, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Some say Putin, while mayor of Lenningrad, played an important role in saving the LOMO camera. If true it should be posted to the main article, perhaps in a trivia section.
Is Vladimir Putin Orthodox? see by yourself [14], [15], [16], and especially this one [17]. -- Hectorian 04:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Praying in church at every Christmas and Easter reveals he is religious. We don't need his personal statement. Have you a statement from George W. Bush that he's United Methodist? Religion must be added. Garret Beaumain 18:33, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
on Kosovo's independence true? -- HolyRomanEmperor 20:30, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
This page has been vandalized, as I am not sure how to fix all of the problems I am hoping that someone reads this soon and fixes it. Some of the examples are most of the mentions of Putins name have been changed to Hoskins, and other random word changes.-- Wlf211 04:59, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
See under: Prime Minister and first term as President "Putin was caught..." 69.6.162.160 02:51, 9 October 2006 (UTC)Brian Pearson
"In May 1990 Putin was appointed Mayor Sobchak's prostitute on international affairs." wtf —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.226.239.87 ( talk) 23:31, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Today (October 10), 2000 demonstrators shouted angrily "Murder, murder!" at Putin when he arrived in Dresden: http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/0,1518,441835,00.html
Some were holding a sign: "Murder, you are no longer welcome." Millions of Germans are outraged because of the murder of this brave woman. - Free Europe.
Perhaps I should clarify the chronology.
89.55.95.221 's contribution about Putin-murder-of-Politkovskaya comprised with blanking of half page was removed by admin Ezhiki.
Same message by user 89.55.55.45 was soon
removed by
me. I considered it as vandalism, but yes, I disliked it as well.
Days later, user 89.55.10.62 posted the same message (removed by admin Alphachimp); twice vandalized my userpage and removed notifications by users MER-C and Gwernol at his talkpage, for which action he was temporarily blocked.
Again, days later user 89.55.39.175 posted the message on this talk page you've just read. It's curious, that the same user within 10 minutes tried to remove block notification on 89.55.10.62 's talk page.
Now, I consider it proved, that all four IP's belong to the same vandal.
But it still is curious, may be 'Putin' page is cornered by brain-washed pro-Putin Russians? No: of all mentioned users only Ezhiki and I are Russophone, and only I live in Russia; it's up to Ezhiki whether he considers himself Russian. Those mysterious "some Russians" were in fact only me; it causes to suggest a personal attack.
ellol 18:03, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
update: what can be seen on user's 89.55.39.175 talk page, as well as his vandalisms on pages of MER-C and Gwernol seem to be acts of an ill person. I shouldn't in fact write that all. I'm sorry. ellol 20:40, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Okey, we've heard adversary of "bloody gebnya" (GB), now I offer to have a look at Putin's interview with German newspaper:
QUESTION: The fact that the famous journalist Anna Politkovskaia has been shot is in the headlines of all the newspapers. Can you please tell us how you are affected by the death of this journalist who criticized you very harshly?
"VLADIMIR PUTIN: First of all I would like to say that a murder is a very serious crime both with respect to society and with respect to God. The criminals must be found out and correspondingly punished.
Unfortunately, this is not the only such crime in Russia. And we will do everything we can to bring the criminals to justice.
And now, with respect to the political aspect of this affair. The investigation is looking at all possible variants. And of course, one of them, one of the most probable, is related to her work as a journalist. She really was a critic of the present authorities — something that is common to all media representatives — but she often adopted radical positions. And recently she mainly concentrated her attention on criticizing the authorities in the Chechen Republic.
I must say — and I think that experts would agree with me — that her political influence inside of Russia was negligible and that she was probably better known among human rights organisations and in the western media. In connection with this I think that one of our newspapers was correct when it stated today that Anna Politkovskaia’s murder has caused much more damage to the current authorities in general, and to the Chechen authorities in particular, than her reporting did.
In any case, I repeat that what has happened is absolutely inadmissible. This horrendous crime is damaging for Russia and must be solved. It causes both moral and political damage and is damaging for the political system that we are building, a system which must have places for all people, independently of their points of view. On the contrary, we must ensure that people receive the possibility to expose their points of view, including in the media. "
ellol
16:21, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
User ellol and Ezhiki may work for the FSB. At least they use the same methods: They have forged the history of this article (so that it appeared that a person critical of Putin blanketed half of the page) for creating a reason to silence him.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.55.56.255 ( talk • contribs).
This section should be turned into standalone leaf article, placed into Category:In popular culture. It would make this page less awful. Pavel Vozenilek 15:57, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Why is Putin's name so gigantic on the top? BirdValiant 08:26, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
At which age did Putin start judo trainings? 12 or 13? ellol 19:41, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
It is invalid translation of Russian phrase. Putin told "The comrade wolf" and used verb кушает which is used for children. Only the little child can кушает. The whole phrase is like he spoke about a spoilt capricious child, not about an dangerous enemy. The phrase also in rhythm like a simple poetry for children. I think we must explain that in article because it shows Russian-American relations much better when both Wall Street Journal and Rossijskaya Gaseta.
HE IS AN EVIL MAN !!!!! 21:11 November 26,2006 HE ORDEDERED THE KILLINGS OF THE RUSSIAN JOURNALIST AND THE FORMER SPY.
he is evil
Maybe i´m wrong! (UTC)Dave
MAYBE THE ANTICHRIST?
that´s too silly!
The section on "Family and personal life" was stuck between two political controversies, so I moved that up for organizational flow. And, there were two "Trivia" sections, so I merged them together. Carmela Soprano 23:43, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
I still think my reference to Patriarch Alexius II as a former KGB agent DROZDOV was appropriate, because that would explain to a reader what is going on the picture. Without my remark, this portion of the text is misleading. It basically says that Putin is a religious man, or at least he respects religion. But nothing can be further from the truth. Putin is not speaking with a spiritual leader. He is speaking with his subordinate. What do you think? Biophys 05:56, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Also read this: [18], [19], [20], [21] (should be an original paper in The Washington Times) Biophys 06:32, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Okay, so I know that the spy has proportedly been posioned by Vlad, but this as of current, has not been proven. This is an encyclopedia, not a place for conspiracy theories. The article should be very careful to ensure that blame is not placed on any one until the investigation has been finished.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.157.42.230 ( talk • contribs) 15:51, 28 November 2006
In this edit, the following passage was recently removed from the article on the allegation that it added nothing to the article and that it was unsourced:
Litvinenko publicly accused Putin in a statement, which was released shortly after his death by his friend Alex Goldfarb [22]. Critics doubt that Litvinenko is a true author of the statement released. They refer to the fact that the idiom "angel of death" encountered in the statement is not common for a native Russian speaker and it could rather be used by a person who natively speaks English. They also doubt that by the time of writing he was mentally capable of performing such complex activity as writing a public statement. They point out that it took 16 hours for him to recall the details of his meeting in the restraunt "Itsu" at about the time of alleged writing. Critics also refer to the fact that no video or audio recording of his words exists. [23] When asked about Litvinenko statement at a press conference after joint Russia-EU summit, Putin doubted its credibility by raising a question as to why it was not published before his death and saying that there could be no comments on a statement released after death of its author. [24]
I don't know, but I clicked on those links and those look like sources to me - the only unfortunate detail being that they're in Russian. Non-English sources are not forbidden on wikipedia, especially in cases where the argument in a certain language can be one-sided. Perhaps the section could be shortened and the user directed to the Litvinenko article instead, but I'm not sure that it was a good idea to just delete it outright. Esn 21:15, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
I am open to addressing the reaction to the Litvienko death in this article, but, without offering any context, devoting an entire section to a narrative of conspiracy theories is about as unencyclopedic as anything that can be done to this article.
Earlier today, I converted a new section of the article that consisted of a narrative of conspiracy theories into a section on Putin's crime policies-- important material that makes the article more encyclopedic previously not addressed. [25] But then I was reverted by editor accusing me of "suppressing documented information." [26] Frankly, this is a dishonest misrepresentation of my edits. My rewrite mentioned, "the poisoning of Litvinenko raised suspicions that his death might be the work of Putin's security service colleagues." I contextualized the discussion on the basis of two relevant topics to an encyclopedic biography on a Russian president: (1) a discussion of the politics of crime and (2) the notability of the allegation in Western circles. The previous version, however, discussed Litvineko under the heading "Unnatural deaths of political critics"-- an obvious attempt to spoil the well against the subject of the article (and, I think, afoul of the Wikipedia living persons guidelines). 172 | Talk 03:05, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
The large number of unnatural death of Putin critics is, like it or not, causing political repercussions in Europe [29]. Don't these deaths and political repercussions merit even mention in the article? If so, why is this information being repeatedly deleted? I note that article manages to find room to mention that Putin "works out regularly" and once kissed a little boy on the stomach. This People Magazine style trivia is evidently considered "encyclopedic", but the fact that 14 journalists critical of Putin have been murdered in recent years evidently is not. I would like to have the rationale for that explained to me. -- BrianH123 03:13, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
under the section on putin's second term:
"One of the most controversial aspects of Putin's second term was the prosecution of Russia's richest man, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, President of Yukos oil company, who knowingly and purposefully robbed the Russian State and Russian people of hundreds of millions of dollars. While much of the international press saw this as a reaction against a man who was funding political opponents of the Kremlin, both liberal and Communist, the Russian government has argued that Khodorkovsky was in fact engaged in corrupting a large segment of the Duma to prevent changes in the tax code aimed at taxing windfall profits and closing offshore tax evasion vehicles. Certainly, many of the initial privatizations, including that of Yukos, are widely believed to have been fraudulent (Yukos, valued at some $30bn in 2004, had been privatized for $110 million), and like the other oligarchic groups, the Yukos-Menatep name has been frequently tarred with accusations of links to criminal organizations."
smacks of pro-putin propaganda
This piece does not belong to a biographical article, hence removed. You may want to create Crime in Russia.
`' mikkanarxi 20:10, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
subjective removal. I don't approve of what you did. 216.37.86.10 17:59, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
What has happened to the quotations section and why has it been deleted without discussion? User 81.106.199.17 ( talk).
Two fifths (almost a half) of this wiki article on Putin is devoted to "humor" about Putin, comparisons to unlikable characters from films, and various negative perceptions coming from dubious sources (is "citation needed" a source?).
Compare that to the George W. Bush article which has less then 1/10 of it devoted to his "criticisms and public perception", not to mention that there are absolutely no citations or images of him as the "Mad" character or him holding the children's book upside down, or his antics with things like "nucular weapons" (giving a middle finger to cameras?)? Or perhaps an explanation how he ever graduated from Yale, since wikipedia seems to investigate one's academic work quite deeply (as in the allegation of Putin's plagiarism)...
I know that this is an article about Putin and not G.W.B., but wikipedia needs to apply the same standard to all world leaders, whoever they are, limiting it's articles to balanced reporting of facts. I actually have no objections to G.W. article (above questions are meant to show how ridiculous this POV approach is); rather, all world leaders' articles should follow the same standards and not sound like someone's personal soap box. In this case Putin's article leaves a lot to be desired, like more serious approach to descibing his actions and/or achievements and failures rather then concetrating on negative suggestions and painting his image in certain colors.
Compare beginings of paragraphs about Bush and Putin:
Bush article:
"Time magazine named George W. Bush as its Person of the Year for 2000". (That's the first sentence of Bush "criticism" paragraph)
"Bush enjoyed strong support among Americans..."
"Bush began his second term with an emphasis on improving strained relations..."
"As one of the most popular governors in the nation..."
"Days into his first term, Bush announced his commitment to channeling more federal aid to faith-based service organizations..."
Compare that to beginings of paragraphs in the Putin article:
"Putin was appointed Prime Minister ... making him Russia's fifth prime minister in less than eighteen months."
"... Putin, a virtual unknown, to last any longer than his predecessors..."
"...This put all of his opponents at a disadvantage, giving him the element of surprise and an eventual victory..." as if he stole his victory (which could be said of Bush)
"One of the most controversial aspects of Putin's second term was the prosecution of Russia's richest man...". (note: Putin was not the judge nor in the jury and was certainly less connected to the affair then Bush was to Enron).
"...Kremlin-controlled or allied media accused Putin's chief rivals..." (I haven't seen a single reference as to president Bush's media connections in Bush article. Does that mean that they don't exist?)
"In international affairs, Putin has been trying..." - yet another negative conotation...
"While President Putin is criticized as an autocrat..."
"Putin surprised many... "
"During his time in office, Putin has attempted to..."
Putin has been trying, has been criticized, and has been attempting things. He has also "surprised" (a quality no one would want from a leader who has his finger on world's second largest nuclear arsenal).
Putin article needs to be neutral.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.148.97.140 ( talk • contribs)
What's your point? Many of the sentences you refer to are just stating facts, and the "negative connotations" are in the eyes of the beholder. For instance, Putin was completely (not "virtually" as the article says) unknown before becoming the PM -- which is not surprising for an FSB agent. Or you don't like that the article mentions criticism of Putin -- but article on Bush does so too. Lebatsnok 14:09, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
To which particular period does this refer? When did it originate? Do we think the phrase warrants a mention in the article? -- 80.1.72.245 00:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps it is not appropriate to look into future for wikipedia but I find it appropriate when talking about this individual. It is now a very popular joke in Russian Federation that Putin will change law just before the third term and will be once more the president. What do You think.
Today there were news that Russian Federation democratic parties link here [33] (Sorry i'm bad at using wiki and giving links) - Jabloko, SPS, DPR didn't join. But I hope (though it is not a wikipedia style) that in two years they might bring out a new contendant. But the question is will he/she succeed.
What is the relation between Vladimir Putin and Boris Jelcin? It is largely argued now in Russia and outside that Russia is at a deadlock (Ofcourse taking into consideration that the only thing that brings money is recources and not business). So what sources can be placed to clear up the relation between the two and say why 'Jelcin (democrat) gave power' (i'm not saying he gave it himself) to Putin who 'definetly smells of nothing near to democracy'.
I guess the answers can be found at Alexandr Letvinenko. But I still believe that this topic should be here in for discussion and perhaps listed in a bio of Putin Vladimir.
Dzerzhinsky 23:41, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
I temporarily removed the new contribution for further discussion:
I don't doubt in your literature talents, but can't not to raise a question: are we a wikipedia article or yellowish papers?!! As it is now, it doesn't pass. The Russian government comprises executive, legislative and judiciary branches. Be more strict: who were 'government agents', MVD, FSB or OMON? What was the official reason for intrusion and arrest (for several hours or for 2 days????) 'It is said' doesn't fit. The last sentence of first passage is propaganda. Above all, the whole message is not sourced.
About Litvinenko murder, let's wait for the end of the official investigation, and then put it into the article or not. ellol 23:00, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, she was the thirteenth journalist to be killed in Russia in 2006. We had this nonsense in the article for almost two months, and people read this as credible source. In fact, Politkovskaya was thirteenth journalist killed after Putin's inauguration in 2000. What irresponsibility! It should be a lesson for us all. ellol 17:09, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
First it occurred in Nov 25, it was vague, but not a mistake yet. In Dec. 2 it already took the form mentioned above. ellol 17:47, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Why adding opinionated stuff is considered OK, while removing seeming bias is seen as pro-Russia propaganda ?! ellol 17:47, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
On the election article, it says the European group has criticised the elections and that the CIS have called them free and fair.
However on this article it says the European group has called them free and fair and fails to mention the CIS at all. -- TheSeer ( Talkˑ Contribs) 15:28, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Товарищ Волк знает кого кушать. Кушает и никого не слушает. - the proper translation is "Comrade Wolf knows who to eat. (He) eats and doesn't listen to anyone." The explanations that follow are fine as they supplement nuances lost in the translation, but the translation itself given in the article is innacurate. With respect, Ko Soi IX 09:55, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
I compiled an annotated list of important laws proposed by Putin, but User:Colin Keigher deleted it. However, the article about George W. Bush does contain a link to such a list, and I think it is an important mean to characterize Putin's policy. Is it worth including or not? Here is the section:
Vladimir Putin legislation and programs
Legislation proposed by Putin, approved by the Federal Assembly of Russia, and signed by Putin [35]
Federal Law On Modifications and Additions to the Federal Law On General Principles of the Organization of Legislative (Representative) and Executive Bodies of State Power of the Subjects of the Russian Federation
О внесении изменений и дополнений в Федеральный закон "Об общих принципах организации законодательных (представительных) и исполнительных органов государственной власти субъектов Российской Федерации"
It authorizes the president to dismiss the heads of Federal subjects of Russia.
Federal Law On the Formation of the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation
О порядке формирования Совета Федерации Федерального Собрания Российской Федерации
It replaces the heads of the legislative and executive Bodies of the Federal subjects of Russia with representatives of these bodies as Members of the Federation Council of Russia.
Federal Constitutional Law On the State Anthem of the Russian Federation
Федеральный конституционный закон "О Государственном гимне Российской Федерации"
It changes the Russian anthem to a version based on the musical score of the pre-1991 Soviet anthem.
Federal Law On Guarantees for Former Presidents and Their Families
О гарантиях Президенту Российской Федерации, прекратившему исполнение своих полномочий, и членам его семьи
Federal Constitutional Law On Modifications and an Addition to the Federal Law On the State Anthem of the Russian Federation
О внесении изменений и дополнения в Федеральный конституционный закон "О Государственном гимне Российской Федерации"
It approves the new text of the anthem written by Sergey Mikhalkov.
Federal Law On Modifications and Additions to the Federal Law On the Status of Judges in the Russian Federation
О внесении изменений и дополнений в Закон Российской Федерации "О статусе судей в Российской Федерации"
It introduces disciplinary and administrative responsibility of judges.
Federal Law On Basic Guarantees of Suffrage and Right of Referendum of the Citizens of the Russian Federation
Об основных гарантиях избирательных прав и права на участие в референдуме граждан Российской Федерации
It prohibits to conduct a referendum within the last year of a term of the president or State Duma and disallows mass media to comment on election campaign.
Federal Law On Modifications and Additions to the Russian Federation’s Legislation in Connection with the Passing of the Federal Law On Countering Extremist Activities
О внесении изменений и дополнений в законодательные акты Российской Федерации в связи с принятием Федерального закона "О противодействии экстремистской деятельности"
Federal Law On Countering Extremist Activities О противодействии экстремистской деятельности
These regulations define the notion of extremism and establish measures to counter it, including procedures of suspension of political parties, public and religious associations.
Federal Law On the Election of the President of the Russian Federation
О выборах Президента Российской Федерации
It considerably changes regulations concerning the nomination procedure and doesn’t require the nominees of political parties that are represented in the State Duma to collect one million signatures in support of their registration anymore. Each of the other nominees has to collect two million signatures rather than one million required before.
Federal Law On General Principles of Organization of the Local Self-Government in the Russian Federation
Об общих принципах организации местного самоуправления в Российской Федерации
It establishes a limited list of powers of the local self-government and defines the circumstances under which they have to be delegated to executive power bodies of the Federal subject.
Federal Law On Modifications and Additions to Some Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation in Connection with the Passing of the Federal Law On Basic Guarantees of Suffrage and Right of Referendum of the Citizens of the Russian Federation
О внесении изменений и дополнений в некоторые законодательные акты Российской Федерации в связи с принятием Федерального закона "Об основных гарантиях избирательных прав и права на участие в референдуме граждан Российской Федерации"
It establishes that a mass media can be suspended if it violates election legislation twice during an election campaign.
Federal Constitutional Law On Formation of a New Subject of the Russian Federation within the Russian Federation as a Result of Unification of Perm Region and Komi-Permyak Autonomous Area.
Об образовании в составе Российской Федерации нового субъекта Российской Федерации в результате объединения Пермской области и Коми-Пермяцкого автономного округа
It merges the Perm Oblast and Komi-Permyak Autonomous District into the Perm Krai.
Federal Law On Modifications to the Federal Law On General Principles of the Organization of Legislative (Representative) and Executive Bodies of State Power of the Subjects of the Russian Federation and the Federal Law On Basic Guarantees of Suffrage and Right of Referendum of the Citizens of the Russian Federation
О внесении изменений в Федеральный закон "Об общих принципах организации законодательных (представительных) и исполнительных органов государственной власти субъектов Российской Федерации" и в Федеральный закон "Об основных гарантиях избирательных прав и права на участие в референдуме граждан Российской Федерации"
It replaces the direct election of the heads of the Federal subjects of Russia with a system whereby they are proposed by the President and approved or disapproved by the legislative power bodies of the federal subjects.
Federal Law On the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation
Об Общественной палате Российской Федерации
It institutes the Public Chamber of Russia.
Federal Law On the Election of Deputies of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation
О выборах депутатов Государственной Думы Федерального Собрания Российской Федерации
It establishes that the State Duma will be elected by closed party-list proportional voting only, entirely eliminating the single-member district plurality voting system that accounted for half of the 450 seats before, and raises electoral threshold from 5 to 7%.
Federal Law On Modifications to the Russian Federation’s Legislation on Elections and Referenda as well as other Legislative Acts.
О внесении изменений в законодательные акты Российской Федерации о выборах и референдумах и иные законодательные акты Российской Федерации
It considerably toughens formal requirements for nomination, allows electronic voting, makes funding the parties participating in the State Duma receive from the government ten times higher and establishes that a member of the State Duma loses his/her seat as (s)he leaves his/her faction.
Federal Constitutional Law On Formation of a New Subject of the Russian Federation within the Russian Federation as a Result of Unification of Krasnoyarsk Krai and Taimyr (Dolgan-Nenets) Autonomous District and Evenki Autonomous District.
Название: Об образовании в составе Российской Федерации нового субъекта Российской Федерации в результате объединения Красноярского края, Таймырского (Долгано-Ненецкого) автономного округа и Эвенкийского автономного округа
It makes the Taimyr Autonomous District and Evenki Autonomous District parts of the Krasnoyarsk Krai.
Federal Law On Parliamentary Investigation by the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation
О парламентском расследовании Федерального Собрания Российской Федерации
It regulates the parliamentary investigation and prohibits parliamentary investigation of the activities of the President, court and investigative authorities if they comply to the processual law. Also it establishes that no parliamentary investigation should last longer than a year and that the cases processed by a court should not be subject to it.
Federal Constitutional Law On Formation of a New Subject of the Russian Federation within the Russian Federation as a Result of Unification of Kamchatka Oblast and Koryak Autonomous District
Об образовании в составе Российской Федерации нового субъекта Российской Федерации в результате объединения Камчатской области и Корякского автономного округа
It merges the Kamchatka Oblast and Koryak Autonomous District into the Kamchatka Krai.
Federal Constitutional Law On Formation of a New Subject of the Russian Federation within the Russian Federation as a Result of Unification of Irkutsk Oblast and Ust-Orda Buryat Autonomous District
Об образовании в составе Российской Федерации нового субъекта Российской Федерации в результате объединения Иркутской области и Усть-Ордынского Бурятского автономного округа
It makes the Ust-Orda Buryat Autonomous District part of the Irkutsk Oblast.
Colchicum 18:41, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
I don't know if it would be good to add in this article (or his list of quotes article) this quote about his recent criticism of the U.S foreign policy that he made yesterday
“ | Unilateral, illegitimate actions have not solved a single problem: they have become a hotbed of further conflicts. | ” |
[36]-- JForget 21:42, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
I think it's normal to put this quote in list of quotes article. As for Putin page, this speech is viewed in the beginning of Foreign policy (btw I was an anon user who took part in its editing). The general problem here is we shouldn't make it too long. Any way, the current version is not ideal, so be bold and if you see how you may make it better go ahead. Just one proposal, imho it's better to work with the speech itself. Thank you for the interest. ellol 22:04, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Hey guys, Is there really a need for so many references to the one statement (e.g. In the Chechen war section, there are seven references to the one statement)? You may improve the article by picking the best sources out of the lot. 59.101.176.223 09:27, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
This was the original text:
“ | On March 3, 2007, a demonstration of several thousand opposition protesters (see Saint Petersburg March of the Discontented) was suppressed by city authorities in St. Petersburg. Several thousand members of liberal and leftist groups (the number differs from 1,500 to 15,000 according to different estimates) chanted "Down with Matviyenko", "Shame to Putin", "Revolution", "No to police state" as they marched down Nevsky Prospekt. OMON beat dozens of protestors with truncheons but several thousand broke through police cordons. Officials stated that 100 people were detained, including heads of National Bolshevik Party and Vanguard of Red Youth and a member of United Civil Front. Organizers of demonstration state the number of detainees is several hundreds. The action was not sanctioned by сity authorities. Governor of Saint Petersburg Valentina Matviyenko called the action "provocation". Analogous demonstration took place in December in Moscow, though was of less scale. Russia's television stations covered these protests only briefly. | ” |
Ok one sentence at a time.
On March 3, 2007, a demonstration of several thousand opposition protesters (see Saint Petersburg March of the Discontented) was suppressed by city authorities in St. Petersburg.
Several thousand members of liberal and leftist groups (the number differs from 1,500 to 15,000 according to different estimates) chanted "Down with Matviyenko", "Shame to Putin", "Revolution", "No to police state" as they marched down Nevsky Prospekt.
OMON beat dozens of protestors with truncheons but several thousand broke through police cordons.
Officials stated that 100 people were detained, including heads of National Bolshevik Party and Vanguard of Red Youth and a member of United Civil Front. Organizers of demonstration state the number of detainees is several hundreds.
Governor of Saint Petersburg Valentina Matviyenko called the action "provocation". Analogous demonstration took place in December in Moscow, though was of less scale. Russia's television stations covered these protests only briefly.
Lastly I would question the actual inclusion of this information in the article - it is of trivial importance considering the fact that we are dealing with a presidential term - this information may be better left on Matviyenko's page on events in St Petersburg. Please discuss this otherwise I will consider deleting this addition. 59.101.157.29 14:10, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
SPAG
I have removed a political edit from the article. Below is the sections removed with the reasons for removal.
“ | While heading the Committee for External Relations, from 1992 to March 2000 Putin was also on the advisory board of the German real estate holding St. Petersburg Immobilien und Beteiligungs AG (SPAG) which has been investigated by German prosecutors for money laundering.[10][11][12][13][14][15][16] | ” |
See http://www.buzzflash.com/mediawatch/03/10/03.html
My question is why are you guys adding this? The whole thing is questionable, as Ritter has not been convicted of anything. How about innocent until proven guilty? Try to assume good faith, besides why is there guilt by association of Putin on a possible fictitious charge that isn’t even addressed to him?
I see this as politically motivated information as at the moment it is only based on speculation and not proved fact. Therefore I have removed it. 59.101.157.29 05:55, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
I think it is important not to remove sourced stories of controversies surrounding any politician. I think the the fact that Putin was on the board of a firm investigated for the money loundry is relevant and important and seems to be very good sourced. I do not see much of the misrepresentation of the sources there. If you have source of the other side of the story you are welcome to put them to the article (if the addition will grow above a couple of sentenses we would have to put it into a separate article. I am restoring deletions Alex Bakharev 07:49, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Considering that Senator Allen's wikipedia page had an entire section dedicated to his use of the term "macacca" and wiki's were very very quick to add an entire section for Ann Coulter's use of the word "Faggot"....when wikipedians go into a frenzy when it comes to controversey over politicians, I think it is absolutely relavant to add to this page Putin's controversial and accusatorial involvement in recent deaths of his critics. If this is not relevant, then NOTHING is on any other politicians page. Wiki's love to add "controversey" sections to political pages...especially conservative ones. Now this communist needs his fair share. Putin is looking very suspicious and it IS relevant.
Please, better formulate your thoughts. I removed the following passage:
Russians have good reasons not to trust or respect the press, but they are nonetheless affected by what they read in the newspapers and watch on television. As a result, the outcome of elections is greatly influenced by press coverage. Vladimir Putin has shown himself adept at manipulating public opinion. He has also demonstrated a desire to exert more control over the lives of the country's citizens. That makes sense for a man who spent most of his career in the KGB, but it augurs badly for the future of independent journalism in Russia.
What exactly did you want to express? "Russians have good reasons not to trust or respect the press, but they are nonetheless affected by what they read in the newspapers and watch on television. As a result, the outcome of elections is greatly influenced by press coverage." Sky is blue. What you said here might as easily refer to any country, including U.S. "Vladimir Putin has shown himself adept at manipulating public opinion." You convicted Putin of manipulating public opinion and suppressing independent journalism without providing any proofs. It's good that you did it politically correct, but still you need solid proofs. ellol 02:22, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
The article indicates that on the day on which Putin was nominated as prime minister, he volunteered to run for the presidency. ("Yeltsin also announced that he wanted to see Putin as his successor. Later, that same day, Putin agreed to run for the presidency.") The source for this is a BBC article that appears to based on an incorrect translation. (Mr Yeltsin said he wanted Mr Putin to succeed him as president in next year's elections. Mr Putin immediately responded by saying: I shall definitely stand for the post of Russian president.") It seems that Putin actually said that he would support the office of the presidency, and not that he was planning to run for president. I certainly do not recall Putin saying this in August of 1999. Would it be possible to find the Russian text for this? - JackRus
JackRus, that moment is viewed in memoirs of Boris Yeltsin [38], if you can read this extract it would be great, if not I'll translate most important parts. The passage refers to August 5, 1999, when Yeltsin offered Putin to become a Prime Minister. Before this, Yeltsin thought of his candidature as a future president, but never shared his thoughts with anyone. The extract proves that Putin wasn't eager to become a president. So, at least from POV of Yeltsin, "I shall definitely stand for the post of Russian president" is nonsense.
ellol 21:39, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
User 212.125.64.141 made the following contribution into the article. Perhaps it could be added if properly formatted:
Same user voiced the opinion concerning "Popular Support" section:
"His biography, От Первого Лица" -- We should add the English translation of this to the article. -- 201.50.254.243 14:21, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Guys what do you think if we combine all the controversies in the article into one section at the bottom of the article above the Criticism section? It would be a better read then and from what I've seen is the more common format in Wikipedia. If I wouldn't have naysayers I will proceed to create the section through cutting and pasting of existing information. 59.101.205.24 08:29, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
I believe this article is extremely biased in favor of putin. What the hell? seems like it's been edited constantly by kgb sons of bitches. Wikipedia belongs to KGB!
There is LOTS of mistakes in the article. -- HanzoHattori 11:27, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks 59.101.161.148 13:19, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Who is editing this article? Putin himself?
Here is a list of journalists killed under Putin's reign, each one listed in the SOURCE cited within the article:
Vladimir Yatsina (shot by Chechen militants 2000) [2] Aleksandr Yefremov (remote-controlled mine on Russian controlled Chechen road 2000) [2] Igor Domnikov (beaten to death in entry of his Moscow apartment building 2000) [2] Eduard Markevich (shot in the back, Sverdlovsk, Russia, 2001) [2] Natalya Skryl (beaten to death near her home in Rostov-on-Don, Russia 2002) [2] Valery Ivanov (shot 8 times, while entering his car in Togliatti, Russia 2002) [2] Roddy Scott (body found shot to death, in Galashki Region, Russia 2002) [2] Sergei Kalinovsky (murdered beside a lake outside the city of Smolensk, Russia 2002) [2] Aleksei Sidorov (murdered in Togliatti, east of Moscow 2003) [2] Adlan Khasanov (by bomb in Grozny, Chechnia, claimed by rebel leader Basayev 2004) [2] * Paul Klebnikov (drive-by shooting, described by police as contract murder 2004) [2] Pavel Makeev (hit and run, body found hidden in ditch 50 meters from impact area 2005) [2] Magomedzagid Varisov (machine-gunned outside Makhachkala, Russia 2005) [2] Vagif Kochetkov (beaten/assaulted near his home in Tula Russia 2006) [2] Anna Politkovskaya (shot in a Moscow elevator, 2006, exclusive critic of Putin) [2] Ivan Safronov (thrown out a window for reporting a 3rd Bulava launch failure, 2-3-2007) [3]
He was also working on a story about Putin personally selling arms to Iran freak, Ahmadinejad [4]
additionally, three Russian journalists are listed as killed in Chenchnia in October 1999. Since Putin officially controlled the reigns in August, 1999, those fall under his watch as well.
This makes a total of NINETEEN journalist killed in Russia, under Putin.
I will change the article again, and contact the administrators of WikiPedia to settle this dispute. My version is fair, because I do not list 19 victims, I list 15, since the 3 killed in 1999 are not presently suspected of Kremlin fault, and Basayev has claimed Khasanov. The other 15 are brutal mob-like barbaric acts, unworthy of any democratic leadership and cannot be whitewashed. I refuse to allow that.
FOOTNOTES: [2] Archive list of victims, all years, http://www.cpj.org/CPJ_killed_data_12.06.xls [3] Current 2007 list from above source, http://cpj.org/killed/killed07.html [4] http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6426043.stm DanaSaurSchloss 05:51, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
No more questions. I stand corrected. Thanks for educating me about WikiPedia.
I remember when I first heard about this, I thought it was absolutely great. An unbiased, factual encyclopedia on line. For 3 years I have let my subscriptions run out, and left a few trees in the forest by not buying hard copies.
Now, it appears, I was entirely wrong. Any topic can have a bunch of hooligans hanging out all night, playing Goebbels with their favorite subject, and there is no accountability? No oversight? No final authority? No final review? That is not an encyclopedia. That is propaganda anarchy.
The most attentive (or those with the most spare time on their hands) can rewrite history any way they see fit, and keep writing retrograde versions over the truth?
So Putin's KGB, which certainly has the most resources to dedicate to the task, can man this web page "behind the curtains" and make sure he looks good 99.9% of the time that anyone seeks data.
And, although I do not care to see what lies they have about Dubbya (almost as sick and vile a cretin), I am sure Libby and Rove are keeping their guys up at night, to whitewash his lies. But as much of a fascist as he and all his lying pals are, they do not dare condone -or ignore journalists murdered during his administration, no less 19, or being the prime suspect in two of the assassinations. That is the DEFINITION of Putin. Besides the deranged company he keeps -and defends (Kim-ill and Ahmadinejad). This article reads like a tour guide. Girls want to kiss Putin.
Right. Kiss Polonium Putin. OK, take it away. You can have it. You can erase this farewell. I will go shell out the bucks for a new encyclopedia and whack a few trees. At least there, somebody with a real name and address has to accept responsibility for any lies, slant or spin they print. This is no encyclopedia. It is a bloated blogsite -with a veil of academic legitimacy.
you are 100% correct. Wikipedia is nothing more than force-fed propoganda. Wiki-hawks impose their view using "NPOV" as their disguise. in reality, they are forcibly imposing a single viewpoint and they absolutely will not tolerate any dissent. This site is a farce.
i understand that this is an article on a russian topic, but is it ok to have russian lang. sources for an english encylopedia?
The section on Media Freedom seems somewhat journalistic (e.g. "The toll of the past week in the city of Samara alone is very worrying"). Furthermore, the content of that section seems a bit detached from the subject of Putin himself, perhaps warranting inclusion in another article or at least a bit of NPOV summary.
As an inexperienced and junior "wikipedian", I'm hesitant about making such major changes myself (plus time pressures currently deny me the means), but I thought it best to make a note of my concerns.
Edit; just saw some of the comments above about this article's impartiality etc. Well, I can assure all the critics I'm a fresh-faced, totally neutral student of politics, and have no bias one way or another! My concerns are with style, and placement of content - the content itself seems acceptable to me.
Why is this section under Putin's biographical entry? It has nothing about Putin in it, it should either be an article in its own right . I dont understand why its there at all Pubuman 07:09, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Again somebody claims "The high approval ratings must be seen in a context of a country where the government controls most of the mass media."!! Read at least Media freedom in Russia, it's incomplete yet, but there's no total control of the government over informational flows. ellol 16:18, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Is it possible for someone to arrange his foreign policy in chronological order.
Putin recently said if US puts missiles in Europe, Putin promises to target Europe. [39] - Yancyfry 02:44, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Half of this supposedly biographical page is occupied by the very partial examination of media freedoms in Russia. As most people living in Russia are not concerned about this (see the polls) and the section explicitly contradicts WP:UNDUE, I suggest we move it elsewhere. Instead, it would have been helpful to mention some of the topics that Putin himself considers important (see his assessment of his term here). -- Ghirla -трёп- 13:42, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
"I think there are things of which I and the people who have worked with me can feel deservedly proud. They include restoring Russia’s territorial integrity, strengthening the state, progress towards establishing a multiparty system, strengthening the parliamentary system, restoring the Armed Forces’ potential and, of course, developing the economy. As you know, our economy has been growing by 6.9 percent a year on average over this time, and our GDP increased by 7.7 percent over the first four months of this year alone.
When I began my work in 2000, 30 percent of our population was living below the poverty line. There has been a two-fold drop in the number of people living below the poverty line since then and the figure today is around 15 percent. By 2009-2010, we will bring this figure down to 10 percent, and this will bring us in line with the European average.
We had enormous debts, simply catastrophic for our economy, but we have paid them off in full now. Not only have we paid our debts, but we now have the best foreign debt to GDP ratio in Europe. Our gold and currency reserve figures are well known: in 2000, they stood at just $12 billion and we had a debt of more than 100 percent of GDP, but now we have the third-biggest gold and currency reserves in the world and they increased by $90 billion over the first four months of this year alone.
During the 1990s and even in 2000-2001, we had massive capital flight from Russia with $15 billion, $20 billion or $25 billion leaving the country every year. Last year we reversed this situation for the first time and had capital inflow of $41 billion. We have already had capital inflow of $40 billion over the first four months of this year. Russia’s stock market capitalisation showed immense growth last year and increased by more than 50 percent. This is one of the best results in the world, perhaps even the best. Our economy was near the bottom of the list of world economies in terms of size but today it has climbed to ninth place and in some areas has even overtaken some of the other G8 countries’ economies. This means that today we are able to tackle social problems. Real incomes are growing by around 12 percent a year. Real income growth over the first four months of this year came to just over 18 percent, while wages rose by 11-12 percent.
Looking at the problems we have yet to resolve, one of the biggest is the huge income gap between the people at the top and the bottom of the scale. Combating poverty is obviously one of our top priorities in the immediate term and we still have to do a lot to improve our pension system too because the correlation between pensions and the average wage is still lower here than in Europe. The gap between incomes at the top and bottom end of the scale is still high here – a 15.6-15.7-fold difference. This is less than in the United States today (they have a figure of 15.9) but more than in the UK or Italy (where they have 13.6-13.7). But this remains a big gap for us and fighting poverty is one of our biggest priorities." [42]
A lot of Putin's alleged successes have more to do with looting the private sector. For instance, his government may have paid off its foreign debts, but the way it did it was by theft of resources previously held in the private sector. The re-nationalization of the oil and gas industries, or their illegal transfer to the corrupt friends of Putin, are perfect examples. MarcMontoni 16:10, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
Why does anything added to this page about the unnatural deaths of people who are critical of Putin always removed? wrc_wolfbrother 17:26, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
It's worse than that, because it's not just information about his dead opponents. It's **anything** critical of Putin. For instance, he had his military conduct a bloody massacre of Chechens. When I tried to provide that for balance in the section on Chechnya, it was promptly removed. Soviets used to have a joke about their televisions: "Q: Why do Russian televisions have windshield wipers on them? A: To wipe the spit off." It's unfortunate that WikiPedia has become a tool of Putin's propaganda machine. MarcMontoni 16:15, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
I've been trying to add the comment that Putin strangely uses interpreters when conversing with english-speaking people, but someone keeps removing it.
Has it ever been explained why he feigns a lack of understanding of english, to the point of using interpreters when talking to english-speaking people?
According to Putin's own words, he started learning English during his first term but does not have enough time for extensive practice. He understands English but would not speak in public. Besides, the United Kingdom and United States are perceived as alien countries here, and their language as a tool of modern cultural imperialism. It would have been preposterous to broadcast interviews of a Russian president speaking some foreign tongue, with a Russian translation. I don't think many Russians would appreciate that. -- Ghirla -трёп- 09:01, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Seems to me that Putin's language skills are somewhat exaggerated. It is probably true that his passive knowledge of English and German is quite good, but that is where it ends. The few times I heard him speak Englsh he was merely reading out a pre-written speech, stuttering and mispronouncing many words. The claim that he 'speaks German with near-native fluency' is way over the top. Listen to him speaking some German here. At best, I'd assess it as 'intelligible'. His Russian is probably better than mine though... Vlaflipje1982 18:23, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
I think I've seen an old TV interview when he was in the KGB where he was speaking english.
Shouldn't it be noted that Putin laughed after he said that? QZXA2 19:18, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Historian Anne Applebaum believes that "Whether by waging cyberwarfare on Estonia, threatening the gas supplies of Lithuania, or boycotting Georgian wine and Polish meat, he [Putin] has, over the past few years, made it clear that he intends to reassert Russian influence in the former communist states of Europe, whether those states want Russian influence or not. At the same time, he has also made it clear that he no longer sees Western nations as mere benign trading partners, but rather as Cold War-style threats." Putin is playing a dangerous game By Anne Applebaum, 05/06/2007 British historian Max Hastings also now described Putin as a " Stalin's spiritual heir" in his article "Will we have to fight Russia in this Century?", and tells that although "a return to the direct military confrontation of the Cold War is unlikely", "the notion of Western friendship with Russia is a dead letter" A blundering Bush, Tsar Putin, and the question: will we, in this century, have to fight Russia? by Max Hastings
I removed these quotes for now. The problem is that they seem to illustrate Western comments to Putin's proposal on Gabala Station. But, both these articles are dated June 5, while Putin's proposal was made on June 7 [43]. So this is more of desinformation, rather than actual comments of Western analytics on Putin's proposal. ellol 07:17, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
I want only to say, that as these quotes were added again to the article, I left them in the text but marked as an example of surge of rhetorics following Putin's Munich speech. ellol 14:20, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
I had a look at the text, and noticed some problems. I changed "study judo" into "practise judo" - since I suppose that was a mistranslation from Russian. I still have no clue what is meant by "disappointed Major". The major problem concerning the language of the artticle is the mixture of British and American English.
Some of the things in the humour are trivial and could easily be deleted. However, if we do keep something about "uncanny resemblances", should not we better refer to Arnolfini Portrait. I have seen the portrait in London, and the Arnolfini-Putin likeness is indeed striking. The pregnant Flemish lady bears an uncanny resemblance to Inge Vervotte, a young Belgian politician. Considering that a number of esoteric websites quote the Arnolfini-Putin resemblance as evidence of Putin being the Anti-Christ (yes, really - eg [44] ) I think that would be more noteworthy than some silly jokes about flying a whale to the moon (not presently relevant with all the oil money) or resembling a Harry Potter character. -- Pan Gerwazy 09:25, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
I think it would be great to have a section placing Putin's views in context of the political spectrum. They may look trivial to some Russians, but in fact they aren't. Colchicum 14:23, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Marktwain403's edits to the Media freedom seem completely inappropriate. It makes the section way, way too long. It's also a very poor cut-and-paste job from the already-existing article on the very same topic. It's also, as others have argued, inappropriate for this biography. I'd like others to weigh in before I revert Marktwain403's latest edit. -- ElKevbo 02:35, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
You are going to have to work with me too, Elkevbo, if you want to avoid a continuous revert war on this. It may well be that Putin's suppression of the media may turn out to be the most important aspect of his administration and I will continue to try to post this information. I am willing to shorten it and provide better references if you will allow a good portion of it in the biography. Even though I may not have provided the best references, they do exist and the information I posted is valid. You can find that out for your self with a short search on the Internet. Also, Putin's primary opposition right now is Kasparov and a biography of Putin would not be complete without that information.
I removed the "Selected quotes" section yesterday but that change was reverted without discussion. I assert that the inclusion of such a section is inherently POV as it is the work of Wikipedia editors cherry-picking quotes they (the Wikipedia editors) believe represent Putin or his views. Further, all such quotes belong in Wikiquote or, at best, integrated into the body of the article in the appropriate place(s). -- ElKevbo 15:55, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
"Selected quotes" section is very informative and absolutely necessary; your subjective judgment is no reason for removing it. If you want to remove it, you must provide a better reason than your likes or dislikes (which include applying labels such as POV without giving a reason for it other than saying "inherently"). If you think it's biased, you're free to provide other quotes. Note that most of these quotes were first "cherry-picked" by journalists -- I don't think many Wikipedians are listening to the Putin's speeches and doing the "cherry-picking". -- However, "anecdotes" section is not really necessary: most of it could be included in "selected quotes". Lebatsnok 15:05, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Ellol, Why are you such a fan of Putin that you don't want any negative information in the biography? All of your edits serve to show him in the best possible light when in fact he is rapidly becoming a dictator in Russia. Your edits are not from a neutral point of view.
I occasionally read the Putin biography and notice that often the biography does not contain important information about the lack of press freedom in Russia. This is one of the most important developments in the Putin administration. He has gone to great lengths to suppress freedom of the press to an extent that is unheard of in most democracies. Yet when I try to put detailed information about that, including well sourced information, it is usually quickly removed. My understanding is that it is being removed by a Russian. It is also noteworthy that many websites in Russia frequently are defaced if they contain material that is critical of the Russian President. It is a fact that most of the media in Russia is now controlled by the government. Is that going to hold true for Wikipedia also? I will try again to insert information about the problems that journalists face and the problems that anyone faces when they are critical of the Russian President. For example, a few weeks ago, supporters of the opposition were prevented from going to the city where a conference was being held with European countries. The government prevented that by simply declaring void the plane tickets of the opposition and preventing them from boarding the airplane. This forum ought not to echo the methods of the Russian government and therefore I request that true information about the lack of press freedom in Russia not be deleted from this site. Neutrality is one thing but aiding a dictator is quite another.
Marktwain403 00:38, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
I would say that if we are going to have a section about Media freedom in Russia it must be argumented talk. There are positive and negative sides and trends in situation about independence of media from the state. Simply blaming the situation in general would not help neither Russian journalists nor people of Russia, but hazard reputation of Wikipedia as a truthworthy source. Again, there's no point in removing info that Putin is supported by 80% of population or writing it's about lack of media freedom. Better high approval rating is about economic recovery after Russian financial crisis of 1998. Nobody is going to claim that Vladimir Putin is an ideal person or president. But his high approval rating obviously certifies that his policy is supported by majority of population. Usually to the end of second term people start to get annoyed by their president. But as it still holds at 80%, it means that either people notice certain positive changes in their lives which happened during Putin's terms, or he managed to give them the hope for decent future. 99% of info about Putin at Russian three major TV channels are mere information blocks without positive or negative emotional background.
If Vladimir Putin was a dictator he wouldn't be named in ironical context "Uncle Vova", "Mister Pu" or other ways that I heard myself. If Vladimir Putin is a dictator and Russian a dictatorship, shouldn't we just nuke each other to end this all stuff? Look around, more than half of the world are ruled by regimes sufficiently more undemocratic than Vladimir Putin's government, shouldn't we nuke them as well? ellol 20:42, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Elkevbo and Ellol, you are living in a fantasy world. Anytime a ruler has control of the press or most of it, it is not surprising that they will get high marks in the polls. What ridiculous reasoning you are using. The brutal dictator Stalin had the affection of a very substantial segment of the Russian people. He killed millions! The reason is that most of the time his terrible crimes went unreported.
I note also that there are a substantial number of complaints from other visitors to this site that anything critical of Putin gets promptly removed. You fans of Putin need to realize that he is not viewed as a democratic leader by very large numbers of people.
MarkTwain, I'm not fan of Putin. There are no complains, there were few complex issues but we got through them. Leave bones of Stalin rest in the place. It was long ago. There was cult of personality. There was a threat of physical destruction of dissidents. There was total censorship, i.e. all newspapers were to reconsile their issues with bosses from Communist Party. Nothing of that can be seen now. Compared to Stalin times media freedom in Russia is absolute: you took a wrong example. I live in a real country among real people. Russian private company Medialogy investigated Russian television in 2006: of all 13890 messages about Putin, 118 contained positive background and 38 contained negative. Positive and negative are about 1% of total messages. [46] This rejects any your suggestion about cult of personality of Putin. ellol 21:15, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Ellol, organizations of professional journalists disagree with you on whether or not there is a free press in Russia. There are many people who say there is very substantial suppression of dissent that happens in many ways. Do you deny that Kasparov's people were prevented from flying to Samara by the government? They certainly were prevented. Why do you deny what is a proven fact about the lack of media freedom in Russia? I don't contend that it is total, but it is very much present. Did you read the reports of "Reporters without Borders" and "Freedom House"? They have no motivation to lie about Russia.
Yes, detaining some Other Russia people for several hours so they were late to get in Samara by airplane and missed Russia-EU summit was a dubious covert action of Russian authorities which perhaps directly contradicts Russian constitution which guarantees freedom of transition. How does this concern media freedom? Stop spitting around, lay your arguments on table. ellol 21:33, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Ellol,
Surely you can see that one type of suppression is not really any different from another type. Those people wanted to travel to Samara wanted to do so to express their opposition to the government. That is just another aspect of free speech. And with respect to travel to Samara, they were not just delayed but prevented entirely from going. How do you answer the statements of professional organizations of journalists who are highly critical of the lack of press freedom in Russia? Are they just lying?
Marktwain, the source sais there were 38 negative, not positive, statements on Russian TV about Putin. Stop reverting negative to positive. Or, are you just playing? It's unimportant what the source sais? Also, "The above should be understood in a context where the Russian government has almost complete control of the means of mass communications. It should not be very hard to be popular in a country where dissent is largely prohibited." statement is original research, which contradicts policy Wikipedia: No Original Research. ellol 21:52, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Ellol,
I don't understand your statement about 38 negative statements on Russian TV. I never mentioned that, you brought it up. As for references, it is a standard scholarly practice not to have to reference things that are generally known. I would say that it is generally known and generally accepted that there is very little media freedom in Russia. You didn't answer my question about what you think of the formal statements on press freedom put out by the two professional organizations, Reporters without Borders and Freedom House. Do you disagree with the consensus of reporters and others that media freedom has declined under Putin? Just to refresh your memory Eloll, here is what was said by Freedom House. Do you dispute this assessment? Do you prefer a regime that goes to great lengths to suppress criticism? Tell us, Ellol. Is that why you go to such great lengths to suppress any unfavorable comment about Putin in Wikipedia?
[2] A report from the Organization "Freedom House" contained the following comments about Russia: "Media freedom was further curtailed in 2006 as President Vladimir Putin’s government passed legislation restricting news reporting and journalists were subjected to physical violence and intimidation. Although the Russian constitution provides for freedom of speech and of the press, authorities are able to use the legislative and judicial systems to harass and prosecute independent journalists ...Despite public objections, Russia’s parliament also passed amendments to the Law on Fighting Extremist Activity, which Putin then signed in July. The measure expanded the definition of extremism to include media criticism of public officials, and authorized up to three years’ imprisonment for journalists as well as the suspension or closure of their publications if they were convicted ...Authorities continued to exert influence on media outlets and determine news content in 2006."
Marktwain403
Forger about negative statements. You just weren't enough accurate and reverted my change "positive" to "negative". All is long ago written down: see this article [47]. I am too tired today and not going to repeat all its statements. Read it yourself. What Freedom House speaks are just words, not fully supported with facts. Then read at Media freedom in Russia certain claims from this article which exactly answer your question. There's no consensus, other than that in your mind. ellol 01:31, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
"It's generally accepted there's very little media freedom in Russia." Hm. I always thought there are certain problems with it, and the problem is the improve the situation. Hey, move in Russia, and watch Ren-TV. Or ask Marianna Maksimovskaya, whether she has only little freedom of speech when she discusses Other Russia organization or makes report about some new tensions between Russian journalists and authorities, or makes a sharp analysis of top political figures in Russia at her "Operation Successor" series. I'm wondered what would she answer you. ellol 01:53, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Why isn't the Russian public disturbed by the fact that their country is being led by a former USSR official who's "Friends" that had some of the highest ranking positions in the the Soviet Union.-- [[User:Franky210|Turtopotamus]] 16:16, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
-G —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.230.161 ( talk) 23:13, August 28, 2007 (UTC)
Vladimir Putin served in Finland as young KGB officer at Soviet Embassy in Helsinki and later in Consulate of USSR in Turku. I think this Finland period should be also be mentioned in main article, before he was being transfered to DDR.
According to one French TV document Vladimir Putin´s mother is claimed to be a daughter of ethnic Russian father and Georgian mother. She claimed that her son was taken away from her from Georgia to Leningrad by her boy´s grandfather. Any prove of this story?
According the just published claim in Helsingin Sanomat 31.07.2007 Vladimir Putin has from his father´s side Tver Karelian roots as claimed among the Karelians in Daughter Karelia (Tver), Spiridon Putin is said to be a Karelian, not Russian.
JN
Section about anekdotes was removed by an user as trivia section. Perhaps it yet worth looking on it [48] to rewrite it in a proper manner or so. ellol 21:10, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Vladimir Putin/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
needs better referencing plange 05:47, 30 July 2006 (UTC) |
Last edited at 05:47, 30 July 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 20:58, 4 May 2016 (UTC)