Talk:2014 Donbas status referendums
Add topic| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2014 Donbas status referendums article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
| This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| The content of Luhansk status referendum, 2014 was merged into 2014 Donbas status referendums on 13 May 2014. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. For the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Want to add in following info
[edit]I like to add in the following edit. That for the polling in Donetsk that; 72.5% said that if given the chance, people of Donetsk was polled to vote for entry into the Customs Union with Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan. But only 9.4% supported entry into the European Union. Reason why I think it should be included into wiki article, because such a true fact would show the background that people in Donetsk wanted to be part of Russia's economic sphere but not the European union economic spheres. One editor said it was not relevant to the topic but I do not agree. So I opened this chapter to discussfairly on the matter.49.186.90.34 (talk) 11:56, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, I said so. Why should something that was not even on the ballot should be relevant ? This article should not be an arbitrary selection of details from primary sources, but should follow reliable, secondary sources. "Background" is exactly what should be provided by secondary, preferably academical sources. Rsk6400 (talk) 12:49, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
- Well, I wanted to be helpful and add what I feel is a highly relevant fact. It's like the only question in the polls that gives an indication on whether the people in Donetsk leaned towards Russia or European union. However you say it's not in the ballot question in the referendum hence irrelevant. So I guess I can agree with that and won't contest your reverting, as I find that to be a valid enough reason. Thanks for the reply. 49.186.90.34 (talk) 13:08, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
Bothsidesism
[edit]The article reflects a false balance because it consists largely of attributed quotations. The fact is that expert consensus assesses the “referendums” as not meeting democratic standards, fraudulent, and illegal. The article should say so in so many words. —Michael Z. 15:57, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
Pew Research Poll is falsely represented
[edit]The background section contains an assertion that “18% of Eastern Ukrainians favour secession, while 70% favour remaining part of Ukraine”. This is a completely false statement because the source provided used a national, and not Eastern Ukrainian sample. This statement should either be removed or amended to reflect that the poll does not reflect the attitudes of Eastern Ukrainians as suggested, but rather all Ukrainians. ~2026-11412-75 (talk) 19:45, 20 February 2026 (UTC)
- Start-Class Ukraine articles
- Low-importance Ukraine articles
- WikiProject Ukraine articles
- Start-Class Russia articles
- Low-importance Russia articles
- Low-importance Start-Class Russia articles
- WikiProject Russia articles with no associated task force
- WikiProject Russia articles
- Start-Class Elections and Referendums articles
- WikiProject Elections and Referendums articles