User talk:Sashazlv/Archive1

Welcome to the Wikipedia

Here are some links I thought useful:

• Wikipedia:Tutorial
• Wikipedia:Help desk
• M:Foundation issues
• Wikipedia:Policy Library
• Wikipedia:Utilities
• Wikipedia:Cite your sources
• Wikipedia:Verifiability
• Wikipedia:Wikiquette
• Wikipedia:Civility
• Wikipedia:Conflict resolution
• Wikipedia:Neutral point of view
• Wikipedia:Pages needing attention
• Wikipedia:Peer review
• Wikipedia:Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
• Wikipedia:Brilliant prose
• Wikipedia:Featured pictures
• Wikipedia:Boilerplate text
• Wikipedia:Current polls
• Wikipedia:Mailing lists
• Wikipedia:IRC channel

Feel free to contact me personally with any questions you might have. Wikipedia:About, Wikipedia:Help desk, and Wikipedia:Village pump are also a place to go for answers to general questions. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~~~~.

Be Bold!

Sam_Spade (talk · contribs) 02:48, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Renaming pages

Hey Sashazlv! I forgot to tell you something. You did an excellent job renaming the articles about Moroz and Symonenko. However, there's a little trick to do that in a slightly more simple manner: by using the "move" option (on top of the screen, next to "edit" and "history"). That way, the content of the original page is transferred to the new page, the old page becomes a redirect automatically and history is transferred to the new page as well. All in one! :) Cheers, IJzeren Jan 15:52, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC).

Your contributions re Ukrainian government etc

Thanks for your work on the Ukrainian government, politics and judicial system articles. Wikipedia's coverage of Ukrainian issues needed some major improvements, so your contributions are very useful. -- ChrisO 10:45, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Yes, great job you're doing. Please go on with it! Also, it's good that someone is finally bringing some order into the categories, because frankly, these are a mess. My suggestion would be to reduce the amount of categories for one article to a minimum. For example: for Leonid Makarovych the category "Ukrainian presidents" would be sufficient; adding him to "Ukrainian politicians" wouldn't be necessary, because the Ukrainian presidents are already a subcategory of the Ukrainian politicians. That's at least how I did it in the Dutch wiki. BTW, are you Ukrainian yourself?... Cheers, IJzeren Jan 13:52, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC).

BTW - yes. Categories: I'll try to follows your advice. Sashazlv 18:10, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Let me put my own BTW too:)) Sasha, if you live in Ukraine, there is a big and nice WikiProject Ukrainian subdivisions. It would be great if you were routinely updating and expanding info for Ukrainian oblast's and cities (e.g. about your neighborhood). This don't require a specific qualifications, but gives a lot for the less-informed Ukraine-curious readers. And thank you again for Ukrainian politics. Pryvit and wellcome onboard WP, AlexPU

Ukrainian Prime Ministers

I do see that there is some problems with the current setting, and a table format may well be the way to go, but that table did a whole bunch of other things, like installing non-standard naming conventions. I probably should've talked it over before reverting, but anyway. Ambi 23:51, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Sovnarkom

Please always look into article histories, if you see and "obvious mistake". If the editor who did it is anonymous, i.e., an IP address, then fat chances are he is vandal, and all his contributions must be scrutinized. Mikkalai 08:01, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Image:Yushchenko OurUkraine.jpg

This image you uploaded has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems. Thuresson 06:06, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Language template colours

Привіт! I happened to notice you donned the Ukrainian template with the proper colours, very nice work indeed. I liked the idea, so much so that I did the same to the Finnish template. It took a couple of people maybe an hour to start complaining (on the Finnish Wiki)....oh well. Бувай. --Lumijaguaari 11:41, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

Well, it is impossible to satisfy everyone. Sashazlv 23:04, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

Ukraine related topics

Hi Sasha, regarding our disagreement on Holodomor article, please do not take my edits over yours personally. The article was in the form achieved through a long way to a compromise and I agree with you it needs expansion. Let's use it's talk page to discuss the improvements.

Recently several editors created a draft of Ukrainian portal at my user space. Please check it out at User:Irpen/uawp. Please do whatever you like with sections, layout, content, etc. In a couple of days we would like to have it exposed to the community, by moving it to Wikipedia:Wikiportal/Ukraine and placing it into a couple of major UA articles, like Ukraine, Ukrainian language, etc, similarly to what was done with Russia article. Hopefully, it will bring more exposure and editors to Ukrainian topics. In the meanwhile, please play with it in your free time. So I would be grateful for your contribution to the portal, if you have time. Thanks! -Irpen 18:08, May 29, 2005 (UTC)

Hi again, pls take a look at Wikipedia:Wikiportal/Ukraine/Ukraine-related Wikipedia notice board -Irpen 03:59, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

Kherson

Hi Shashalv. I just updated the Talk:Kherson discussion with a link to a map. (Hope this is the correct way to send a wiki-message)

Hero of Ukraine

Yeah, I can wait a few minutes. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 05:29, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

You also mentioned that the "Hero of Ukraine was substantially devalued during Kuchma's time." I am willing to introduce this, but I need to see something, like commentary from the Ukraine. I also cropped the photo I am going to use for the lead section. I just need to find a good copyright, which I could say it is his service photo (eg. it is public domain). Zscout370 (Sound Off) 06:22, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

I got some of the sections translated, mainly by comparing different sections. Article 4 calls for the storage of the medals, while the sections after that talk about the designs of the medals. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 05:20, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Award

For your work in the area of Ukrainian articles, I award you the Barnstar of National Merit. Congratulations. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 03:40, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. Sashazlv 03:43, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

Your welcome. You can display this on your user page, if you wish. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 03:51, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

Check your user:Sashazlv page. You've got another one! :). Move it around your userpage, if you want, as you see fit. --Irpen 01:50, August 12, 2005 (UTC) Thanks. Sashazlv 03:31, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

Conflict re Ukrainian topics

Take a look at this. --Irpen 00:20, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, we'll see but I am getting pessimistic :(. Ukrainization article wasn't too good but now it is as good as dead. UA L is damaged significantly and the latter was the one I hoped to bring to FA some time. And it was us, who were UA POV adders (perhaps you slightly more than me but I was too accused a couple of times by our Russian brothers in "Ukrainization" and even "Russophobia"). Thanks anyway. I will try to hold on. Cheers, --Irpen 02:33, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Hi, of course you are well aware that I have no objections to Ukrainian names when they are appropriate :). Anyway, I wrote this message at Talk:Oleg_of_Chernihiv#Maidan.org.ua. Do you think it may be worth it posting it or something along these lines in Ukrainian at Maidan? I would be interested in knowing your opinion. I could write and post it myself of course.

AndriyK is blocked now for disruptive activities but when he is back, we can expect more page moves and more mess in which I hope I am wrong. Cheers, --Irpen 03:10, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Well, we should be consistent: either it is Mykhaylo of Chernihiv or Mikhail of Chernigov (and, likewise, Oleh vs. Oleg). Russian-English-Ukrainian combo Mikhail of Chernihiv looks weird. On these grounds, I support reversions. Alternative name/spelling could be appended later with a footnote.

Regarding your question, I think that posting anything at maidanua.org is a waste of time. AndriyK will just drown your message in offensive comments. For the same reason, I do not reply to his "recommendation" to get a dictionary and improve my command of Ukrainian.

When his block expires, he is sure to create more mess for mere spite. We can only hope that in time he outgrows his psychological complex and will use his time for productive purposes. Sashazlv 03:47, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Ok, I think you are right. Well, we tried all we could. We will see whether that would be enough. I also hope that some of the new faces that are arriving from Maidan will start adding info to Ukrainian topics. Cheers, --Irpen 03:52, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Have you seen this too? What a scum! --Irpen 08:44, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

If they put such things in writing, then they should seek psychiatric help. I can understand that the wording is ambiguous, but my first reaction is that he is planning to implement the mass murder scheme himself. Sashazlv 14:36, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Kiev

I see you are spinning off the History of Kiev article? I was about to do it in minutes, but was finishing a Beregynia draft first. Should we just paste the current history there? I would think so, and the history paragraph in the lead would serve as a base for a briefer history section. Check your email! --Irpen 05:01, August 14, 2005 (UTC)

Please check my message at Portal:Ukraine/Ukraine-related_Wikipedia_notice_board#Bringing_publicity_to_Ukrainian_topics. --Irpen 03:42, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Image:VRU Jan23 2005 president.jpg has been listed as a possibly unfree image

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:VRU Jan23 2005 president.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page to provide the necessary information on the source or licensing of this image (if you have any), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Thuresson 17:24, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Sasha, I responded there already. Feel free to add. --Irpen 17:51, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

I noticed that Thuresson too often makes overly restrictive interpretations of copyright laws. Too bad, he'd better find a way to help me/us than to kill a barely alive willingness to contribute to Wikipedia. Sashazlv 19:24, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

I can't agree more. For similar reasons, the Kiev metro maps were deleted from Commons. Thanks god, we had a duplicate in en-wiki. I had hard time to defend even a Kiev CoA. Sasha, I know life is busy, but we miss you here :). Cheers, --Irpen 19:32, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Sometimes it's too hard for me to intervene, because I often have a very tight schedule. I posted my comments at the "problem with images" page and must leave now.Sashazlv 19:56, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Sasha, the image deletionists work hard and I had several skirmishes lately about certainly acceptable images. But this one Image:Kyi Shchek Horyv Lybid.jpg is yours. Could you take a look and see whether we can satisfy them? --Irpen 03:18, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

And make sure you manually add all the images you uploaded to the watchlist. By default, they are only added during your further editing them but not during the upload. So, there must be many images that you uploaded not in your watchlist. You can get the list of all your images from your user log. -Irpen 03:20, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

I think we can do without it. There's one more photo of the monument (see to the right)

File:Founders of Kiev.jpg

- it was uploaded by the photographer. The image I uploaded was a reworked version of someone else's photo and they should, probably, delete it. Sashazlv 06:34, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Naming conventions/Geographic names

I think there is quite a good discussion with an excellent proposal being hammered out by several users at Wikipedia:Naming_conventions/Geographic_names. The latest version is very close to what I would like to see as a Wikipedia policy and, if implemented, it would also help to keep certain behaviours of certain users at bay if you know what I mean. --Irpen 02:51, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Which one of the versions should I read? Sashazlv 02:54, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

The last one is the closest to the ideal IMO, but the discussion is also helpful, if you have time to read it. --Irpen 02:55, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

RfAr

An arbitration request against User:AndriyK has been filed. If you intend to participate/co-sign, please add your name to the "Involved parties" section and write a statement.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) 18:01, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

ArbCom accepted

This is the generic message left at several editors' talk pages in relation to the ArbCom case Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Community_vs._User:AndriyK. Since the fourth ArbCom member has recently voted to accept the case, the case is now considered accepted by the ArbCom as per Arbitration Policy. Please make sure your statement for the ArbCom is on the page if you are willing to write one (OTOH, being named as a party does not require you to make a statement, it just gives you a right to write one) and please make sure your statement is proofread if you wrote it earlier. Please, also, make sure your statement is in the appropriate place of the ArbCom page and not interjecting with others' statements. You are welcome to read up on the Wikipedia:Arbitration_policy and the associate pages.

--Irpen 04:00, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Patriarch Filaret

If you consider the informtion I added "incorrect", please explain it properly.

Would you at every metioning of every protestant church add that "it is considered uncanonical by the Catholic Church"?

See also User talk:Yakudza. --AndriyK 00:41, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

1. What I meant by incorrect is your sentence: "Stricktly speaking, Russian Orthodox Church did not have authority to defrock or excommunicate him."

"Excommunicate" in ROC decision literally means that ROC orders all priests in all churches under ROC control to withhold communion from Filaret, should Filaret ask for it. By implication, it effectively prohibits all priests in ROC from providing Filaret with all other church services. Since Filaret could receive communion in ROC churches before this decision, it is within ROC authority to do so.

This is your own interpretation quite different from what ROC declared [1].--AndriyK 17:32, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Just to give you an incorrect analogy and correct analogy. Incorrect analogy (maybe, you were thinking along these lines): Russia issues an order to arrest Kuchma on the territory of Ukraine. Russia has no authority to do so. Correct analogy: Russia announces Kuchma persona non grata and issues an order to refuse Kuchma entry into Russia. This is within Russia's authority.

2. "Considered uncanonical". I am personally in favor of stating that UPTs-KP is "not in communion with other Orthodox churches". This is technically more correct than "uncanonical" and has less of negative connotation. But it should be discussed with other editors. Sashazlv 02:03, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Please see also Talk:St_Volodymyr's_Cathedral#Relevance_of_canonicity_issue and more at Talk:St_Volodymyr's_Cathedral#Canonical_status_KP_in_differents_article for the discussion of the relevance/irrelevance of canonicity or lack of it to what articles and why. --Irpen 02:06, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Arbitration accepted

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/AndriyK has been accepted. Please place evidence on Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/AndriyK/Evidence. Proposals and comments may be placed on Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/AndriyK/Proposed decision. Fred Bauder 02:26, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

From my talk page

This is in response for wishing for your contributions to be "destroyed:"

Hello,

I happen to monitor this page (User talk:Zscout370) and saw your comment above. Please note the terms of the GFDL. You don't actually own your edits/contributions, by submitting them you have released them under the GFDL and cannot, therefor, 'destroy' your 'own contributions'. Please clarify if you are stating that you intend to vandalize Wikipedia. I understand your frustration, but this isn't the way to fix it.

Best regards, CHAIRBOY (☎) 08:35, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

I do not think you will be the only who wants to do what you said to me, but there is nothing I can do at all. Zach ^{(Smack Back)} 08:38, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

З Новим Роком!

. --Irpen

Image:Yuriy Yekhanurov VRU Sep22 2005 vote.jpg, Image:VRU Jan23 2005 guests.jpg

I think fair use is more correct terms of using this image here. --EugeneZelenko 04:17, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

==Image Tagging Image:Yevhen Marchuk.jpg==

This image may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Yevhen Marchuk.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Admrboltz (T | C) 17:47, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

AndriyK RfAr closed

The AndriyK RfAr has been closed. Until by consensus he has agreed to a suitable and mutually agreed naming convention using the guideline Wikipedia:Naming conflict, AndriyK is prohibited from moving pages, or changing the content of articles which relate to Ukrainian names, especially those of historical interest. AndriyK is banned for one month from Wikipedia for creating irreversible page moves. Andrew Alexander, AndriyK, and MaryMaidan are warned to avoid copyright violations and to cooperate with the efforts of others to remove copyright violations. Ghirlandajo is warned to avoid incivility or personal attacks.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Kelly Martin (talk) 04:57, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

WP:DYK

Sasha, plese look at Verkhovna Rada building article and the talk page where we are trying to formulate a DYK proposal. --Irpen 18:31, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Kofi Anan JPII funeral.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Kofi Anan JPII funeral.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- Longhair 05:56, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Delete as you wish, I don't care. Sashazlv 17:26, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Question

Thank you.—Ëzhiki (ërinacëus amurënsis) 04:34, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't think I am the person to thank in this particular case. Sashazlv 04:43, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your voting!

Thanks!

Hi, thanks for your voting on my RFA. It has finished with the result 88/14/9, and I am promoted. I am really overwhelmed with the amount of support I have got. With some of you we have edited many articles as a team, with some I had bitter arguments in the past, some of you I consider to be living legends of Wikipedia and some nicks I in my ignorance never heard before. I love you all and I am really grateful to you.

If you feel I can help you or Wikipedia as a human, as an editor or with my newly acquired cleaning tools, then just ask and I will be happy to assist. If you will feel that I do not live up to your expectation and renegade on my promises, please contact me. Maybe it was not a malice but just ignorance or a short temper. Thank you very much, once more! abakharev 07:34, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Yuriy Yekhanurov

Hi, Thanks for spotting that. Incidentally it's not a bot, it's search and replace, I always do show changes before saving, and I normally spot problems with image names. I'm not sure if I can improve the search and replace to avoid images automatically. Thanks again. Rich Farmbrough 13:48 26 February 2006 (UTC). 13:48, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Asking for help!

If it's not to much trouble: would you like to have a look at (my) latest edits on the Yulia Tymoshenko Wikipage. As a Dutchmen I jumped to conclusions before there and would like the article to be factional. You (unlike me :) ) seem to know what the #%^&*(*&# is going on there. So thanks for your help in advance and your work on the Moroz article.

PS I planing a holiday to Ukraine! PS2 I hope for Mr. Moroz I'm not going to meet him there! --Mariah-Yulia 20:41, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your help on the Yulia Tymoshenko article! As long as the sun comes up in the morning there is hope for a better day.--Mariah-Yulia 21:29, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Chairmen of Supreme Soviet of Ukrainian SSR

I moved the list of Chairmen from President of Ukraine article to Verkhovna Rada article, as Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine inherited power from the Verkhovna Rada of UkrSSR. In 1991 it was the Verkhovna Rada of Ukrainian SSR which declared the Ukrainian independence, and continued acting as Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. The history of Verkhovna Rada is already mentioned beginning from 1938 in the Verhovna Rada article. Thus, the Verkhovna Rada article seems to be the most appropriate place to keep the list of Chairmen of Presidium of Verkhovna Rada of UkrSSR. These Chairmen have neither been the Presidents of Ukraine, nor they were the acting rulers in UkrUSSR. The real power in the Ukrainian SSR was in the hands of Communist Party leaders, i.e the First Secretary of KPU, and this is already mentioned in the President's article.

But, in any case, if you are reverting an article ([2],[3]) please accomplish it with some explanation. KPbIC 01:01, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Reply:

You've broken the logical ordering and composition of both articles and I don't buy your arguments.

First, in Verkhovna Rada. A list of names that pops up without any explanation in history subsection does more harm than good. If you are willing to write a few paragraphs and then illustrate it with a list of names, you are welcome to do that. And even more welcome to write separate articles on all those people. Otherwise, keep everything as is and first discuss on the talk page what you want to do before making a drastic change.

Second, in President. The article is intended to be about the head of state of Ukraine and not about what you call an "acting ruler". Perhaps, you meant "effective ruler". Heads of state make hold different titles and have different scope of authority. The article's focus is on who's legally the head of state. Chairman of the presidium is the closest analog to that, since he/she promulgated laws (i.e., signed and sent them for official publication), although very formally he/she did that together with the rest of the presidium.

Sashazlv 03:11, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

One more comment:

It's not that you did something completely wrong. I agree that both articles are far from perfect. However, your changes made them even worse. Sashazlv 03:23, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

First, Verkhovna Rada article can only benefit out of additional information related to the activity of Verkhovna Rada. The list of Chairmen of Soviet time, even it's not accomplished by any additional explanation, by itself is a valuable piece of information. Your claim that the list "does more harm than good" is quite counterintuitive, and requires clarification. Speaking on writing separate articles on all these people, I agree that it would be a good idea, and in fact a few days ago I started Oleksandr Tkachenko article, only because it was the only Verkhovna Rada Chairman left without an article. I don't think, I would go over Chairmen of Soviet time at this point. But it's strange that you don't even want to list them in the Verkhovna Rada article.

Second, I noticed that it not the first time you claim that the President article "is intended to be about the head of state of Ukraine". I see it as the wrong intention, and you keep confusing people. It's wrong to start an article named Dog with the intention writing inside the article about all animals, and in particular writing inside about cats. If you want to write an article about all animals, then name it Animals. Similarly, if you want to write an article about the head of state of Ukraine, but not only the President, then name the article accordingly.

From the formal point of view, I see your claim that Chairman of the presidium is somehow related to the President of Ukraine as an original research, i.e. an original historical interpretation not supported by reliable sources. And the policy is Wikipedia:No original research.

In support, let me refer you to the "Історія президентства" webpage at the official website of the President of Ukraine [4]. It is not me who is "broking the logical ordering and composition" of the article. It is such Ukrainian history that Ukraine lacked such institution as Presidency (and independence) after Tsentralna Rada and before modern time. KPbIC 02:40, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I am not against including those chairmen in the Rada article per se. However, history subsection is a bad place. Much better to put them in the section about the speaker. If want, add a sentence "Here's a list of chairmen of VR of Ukrainian SSR" and use a table similar to the one already there.

Someone may argue that the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine has only existed since 1991. The Verkhovna Rada (Supreme Soviet) of UkrSSR is a precursor of Verkhovn Rada of Ukraine, and all info about the former should go into History section.

But, I’m not the one who mind to put all Chairmen together.

As far as the president is concerned. Following your logic, only Kravchuk, Kuchma, and Yushchenko should be kept there. If you do want to make such a change explain it on the talk page and put it on vote. I don't buy your claim about original research and I don't have time for writing an essay here. Sashazlv 00:39, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

On the talk page you pointed out that Hrushevky was not formally nominated as the President. I think you are rather wrong, however I don't have a proof at this point.

I got to wonder why the heck do we argue bitterly about these things. I've been editing and "watching over" the articles on Ukrainian government for almost two years now. My feeling is noone reads them and few, if any, people care in what state those articles are, even among those who contribute to Ukrainian "section". Sashazlv 00:48, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Not so inspiring comment, but thanks for the honest overview. Thing are going up and down, you know. Two years ago there was a great movement in Ukraine, and everyone wanted to contribute. But these days the news from Ukraine are not so bright... It's nice to know that there is someone watching these articles.

One more moment. I’ll restore a link to the English version of Constitution. I know it’s an old version which does not include 2004 changes, and I’ll try to label it as such, but that’s the only version in English, thus better this than nothing. KPbIC 02:46, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

BTW, I guest, you are Sasha iz Lvova, a student in the U.S. I'm from Kyiv, also a student. My nick is rather misleading. Nice to meet you. KPbIC 02:49, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

promtness

This was the most prompt update I ever seen at wiki. I know how you feel and I share your thoughts :( but thank you for keeping this updated. Would you go over my elaborations in the Gov of UA article at some point? I think that while each branch has its own article, the gov article is the place to elaborate on their relationship and I started doing that. TIA and cheer up! :) --Irpen 16:49, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Actually, I am neither upset, nor happy about the appointment. Being a cynical economist, I think it's better to suffer the humiliation of Yanukovych as PM than to once again experience Tymoshenko's methods of interfering with the economy. However, my recommendation right now is to sell all hryvnia-denominated assets. Yanukovych's team will soon be changing monetary and exchange-rate policy. Sashazlv 17:06, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Regarding your correction regarding suffrage are you sure that persons currently serving a sentence following the conviction are still allowed to vote? --Irpen 05:30, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, quite sure (to my best knowledge). You can check law and see article 2, point 9. You can also check article 21 about special polling station (e.g., in the penitentiary system), article 26, point 4 - and so on - which answers your question indirectly.

Formally, this all goes back the decision of the Constitutional Court decision. Check point 7 in the motivating part and point 2.1 in the resolution part.

In practice, criminals vote and typically the turn-out rate in such institutions is 100 percent. Sashazlv 05:57, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I will check this but I am sure you know what you were doing. My doubts were caused by my memories of the Soviet system. At the time, those under the detention awaiting the trial could vote (and they did have the polling stations for those). Those released following the sentence were also allowed to vote. But those serving the sentence were not. Perhaps this was changed after independence and I missed that change. Thanks, --Irpen 06:02, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the whole thing is quite weird. Most countries (including the U.S.) temporarily suspend both "active" and "passive" voting rights for convicted individuals. Ukraine suspends only "passive" (to be elected) rights, but not "active" (to elect/vote) rights. Why this thing ever happened? My guess is that the constitution was approved and edited very hastily. It cannot be undone, as the KSU must strike down any constitutional amendment to suspend "active" voting rights for criminals on grounds of article 157 of the constitution.

Well, in many US states, those released after serving the conviction are also not allowed to vote. In Florida 2000 the issue got the press attention.

On an unrelated issue (it is useful to read constitution, I must say), Article 25 states that "Громадянин України не може бути позбавлений громадянства і права змінити громадянство." That reminded me of the issue I discussed earlier. Have I known that back then, I would have ammended my statements. --Irpen 06:25, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Happy Independence Day

::August 24th, 2006

Happy Independence Day - Ukraine!

З Днем Незалежності України!

--Riurik 05:26, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Lazarenko_convicted.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Lazarenko_convicted.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:02, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

WP:NC(GN)

I apologize for spamming your talk page, but since you had contributed in the past to the WP:NC(GN) proposal, which is currently ready for a wider consultation, I thought you might want to give it another look now and, hopefully, suggest some final improvements. Thanks. --Lysy^talk 22:56, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Ukr. © law

I noticed that you have tagged a few images with a Ukranian public domain image designation which you obtained from official Ukranian government web sites. Can you give me a link to any texts that interpret the Ukr. copyright law? I'd like to review this to determine if the law does, in fact, cover all works distributed by offical organs as the American law, or if it is limited to:

(c) official documents of a political, legislative or administrative nature (laws, decrees, resolutions, court awards, State standards, etc.) issued by government authorities within their powers, and official translations thereof;

or

(d) State symbols of Ukraine, government awards; symbols and signs of government authorities, the Armed Forces of Ukraine and other military formations; symbols of territorial communities; symbols and signs of enterprises, institutions and organizations;

It seems to me that photographs of buildings might not be covered by either of these exemptions to copyright and it might be necessary to have someone take a picture of these buildings to claim copyright on the photographs and either release them under the GFDL, CC or a private PD release. Alex756 04:03, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your interest in the issue. An official interpretation of the copyright law does not exist, because the Constitutional Court of Ukraine has never reviewed the law. There may be unofficial interpretations (say, in textbooks for law students), but they are no more valuable than some blog discussions, i.e., you are free to ignore them. It is likely that general jurisdiction courts applied the law in litigation, but such cases are not available on-line. You can try and do some research on your own. Sashazlv 15:44, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Sounds to me like these images may not be in the public domain, then, perhaps the image tag should be changed until there is some definitive interpretation by Ukranian courts. In most civil law jurisdictions the treatises written by law professors are afforded great weight (I have a civil law degree even though I practice law in a "common law" jurisdiction). Do you know for a fact that there are no doctrinal interpretations that would be used by the Ukranian courts should there be a dispute about this issue? Unfortunately, and I know this from speaking to a Ukranian lawyer in Kiev, the law in that country is very spotty, so it is perhaps best not to try and use such things in an open source license until the exact effect of the law is known. Alex756 02:53, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Speaking of interpretations, consider the following line of argument. Images of governmental buildings (particularly those downloaded from gov. sites) in some instances are symbols of governmental authorities. For instance, take this image: [5] and just have a look at the site of the cabinet [6]. Why does it appear there so often? Because in reality this image is the only recognizable visual symbol that the cabinet has.

Another issue here is whether the cabinet can in principle be the subject of copyright for the image, as they claim on the website. Well, the cabinet is neither a physical, nor a legal entity (as you come from civil law you probably know what this means). So, it cannot be the author of the image, since an author must be a phycial entity (the copyright law defines this). Nor can it be an entity to whom the copyright was transferred, since an entity is restricted to either physical entities or legal entities. Nice loophole, isn't it? Sashazlv 07:53, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, first the fact that the building is a symbol does not mean that someone taking a photograph of the building is exempt from copyright. This would mean that everyone who takes a picture that includes that building cannot claim copyright on their photograph? It would seem to me that if the picture is taken from a particular angle, or showing the building at a particular time of day, or any other potentially creative element, that someone can claim copyright on that photograph. Of course if the government hires an artist to photograph the building that might be a question, but even then, the copyright does not say that all governmental works are free of copyright, so probably the photographer would even own the copyright in that fact pattern. I would say that maybe an engineer's drawing of the building might be considered a pure "symbol" but even the engineer could argue that they had to make creative decisions regarding the "work" and this can be covered by copyright law. It is like that in all countries whose copyright law I am aware of. As far as that website is concerned, the "symbol" is like a trademark and in that way you could say that the abstract rendering of the image would fall under this government provision. This does not mean that when I went Kiev and took a picture that included that building that my photo is exempt from copyright. Do you understand the distinction?

The fact that the cabinet does not have juridical personality does not mean that the cabinet members as a group cannot claim copyright under the provisions mentioned in your Ukranian copyright law. Why? Because the cabinet is a group of people and they all have juridical personality as natural persons (as opposed to moral persons like corporations) and the association of natural persons can hold copyright under the general provisions of civil law in all the jurisdictions I know about. Also the concept of the contract of association is fundamental to civil society (which is why you are probably not aware of it so well as most people from the FSU do not often see the link between obligations and entitlements). In civil society the "freedom of association" is considered one of the fundamental rights of a "free and democratic society" and the law of contractual law of obligations that relate to the nominate contract of "voluntary association" are fundamentally connected with these deep philosophical ideas that are the basis of any civil code. I am sure it is the same in Ukranian as elsewhere in the Former Soviet Union where they have decided to go back to their civil law roots (pre-Soviet Revolution source of law in Russian Empire was civilian). Good luck in your study of civil law and copyright law, hope you learn more about it! Alex756 03:50, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Summing up, just to cite you: "most people from the FSU do not often see the link between obligations and entitlements". . Typical example of obnoxious arrogance. Go teach your lectures elsewhere. I have wasted too much of my precious time on you. Sashazlv 04:20, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

My criticisms are very valid, and your oppobrium is uncalled for. I charge $540 per hour for my time. How much do you charge for your "precious time"? And by the way, what law school did you go to? Alex756 01:31, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:VRU Jan23 2005 results.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:VRU Jan23 2005 results.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Conscious 14:55, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

User Sashazlv finds copyright paranoia disruptive.

Hero of Ukraine medal

I was notified at a forum that the Ukrainian trident is in the center of the Civilian wear medal (that looks like the Soviet hero medal). Can you confirm this? If so, I can remove the medal drawing I have and can try and get permission to use photos of the medal. Thanks User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 01:11, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Anatoliy Kinakh 2002.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Anatoliy Kinakh 2002.JPG. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sherool (talk) 15:43, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

User Sashazlv finds copyright paranoia disruptive.

Image:Anatoliy Kinakh 2002.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Anatoliy Kinakh 2002.JPG. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sherool (talk) 15:43, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

User Sashazlv finds copyright paranoia disruptive.

Image:Cardinal Husar.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Cardinal Husar.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sherool (talk) 16:25, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

User Sashazlv finds copyright paranoia disruptive.

Image:Sofia Rotaru.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Sofia Rotaru.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Chowbok ☠ 16:54, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

User Sashazlv finds copyright paranoia disruptive.