Talk:Volodymyr Zelenskyy/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Odd/wrong word choice

a) not the "territory" of Ukraine, just Ukraine

b) should be: "banned for display in Ukraine in 2017"

Problem section is in second last paragraph under the "Entertainment Career" heading -->

Zelenskyy's comedy series Svaty ("In-laws") was banned for display on the territory of Ukraine in 2017.[30] The ban was lifted in March 2019.[31] 2604:3D09:A47E:42E0:62FE:D3E6:2044:5ADF (talk) 07:18, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

“banned for display”, grammatically correct or not, does not sound like natural English AndrewKkh (talk) 12:33, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Grammatical error

Political Views

Z stated that if people would notice… they would… this is incorrect; Z stated that if people NOTICED.., they WOULD…

This is a site of reference for many people. Such mistakes in written language should be avoided. 193.162.14.1 (talk) 20:38, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 February 2022

62.117.159.247 (talk) 21:51, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Entrepreneur should also be added to his bio.

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:31, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

The Bio currently lacks a reliable source for the claim about the "Servant of The People party's political being Populist. … The Bio states "Identifying as a populist…" & is not only untrue, but, also unsourced. Libertarianism, not populism, is stated as the Servant of The People party's ideological underpinnings. This is according to a dated, Ukrainian source from 2019. 112 is a Ukranian news agency: "Servant of the People party of Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky has declared libertarianism as the basis of its ideology.…'We have started to form our relations with him (Zelensky, - ed.) on this very ground – a liberal economic model, a liberal model of relations with relevant national characteristics,' Ruslan Stefanchuk, Zelensky’s adviser and representative in the Verkhovna Rada, said in an interview." — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrQbi (talk • contribs) 15:21, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. 2402:3A80:1A46:2C97:C92C:8366:A4BA:98B (talk) 10:55, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

"Hero" in lead

Tataral has added the following content to the first paragraph of the lead, arguing that it is well-sourced.

He rose to great international prominence as the wartime leader of Ukraine during the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and has been described as a national hero or a "global hero" by many commentators.

I and Rui Gabriel Correia have both removed it, arguing that it seems like praise for it's own sake that doesn't summarize his political career. Should it be added? To be clear, I don't have a problem with that information being in the body. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 01:42, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

"Hero" is too emotive/subjective, but I do think we should say something along the lines of "he has become a symbol of Ukrainian resistance", as this is well supported by RS. Jr8825 • Talk 08:31, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

I wouldn't be opposed to that, because it's more substantive. I think the last paragraph would be more appropriate than the first, though. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 08:36, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

I think it's a central part of Zelenskyy's international image at this point, as well as much of the sourcing discussing him, so I'd prefer first. Jr8825's proposal seems more tightly focused and a decent compromise. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 12:29, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

I agree, using hero typically shows bias but a notable resistance figure describes him well and is not an opinion. Though, national hero is also unequivocally true. DannyDouble (talk) 21:19, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Changing profile picture of Volodymyr Zelenskyy

Considering very few politicians actually go to war with and for their people, can we underscore this by using pictures of him demonstrating this as his "profile" image? This is kind of a good way to show solidarity by showing a more up to date image and also, showing his valor for risking his life like this. A few sources for a potential image: https://www.webpressglobal.com/international/ukraines-president-arrives-at-border-wearing-army-uniform-threatens-war-with-russia/ https://knewsonline.com/ukrainian-leader-puts-on-military-uniform-to-fight-for-his-country/ https://nationaldailyng.com/reactions-as-ukrainian-president-zelenskyy-was-spotted-in-military-uniform-leading-his-soldiers/ https://globalcirculate.com/old-images-of-ukrainian-president-zelenskyy-in-military-uniform-shared-as-him-joining-his-soldiers-on-the-war-front-factcrescendo/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.66.193.193 (talk) 19:57, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

The issue with that is Wikipedia:Copyright policy. Is that image of him in fatigues in the public domain? I doubt it. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:01, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Well, we can ask the person who took the pictures, it seems to be https://twitter.com/AsaadHannaa as seen in the following tweet: https://twitter.com/AsaadHannaa/status/1497617865192656909/photo/1 Also, he has contact information on his private website: https://www.asaadhanna.com/contact --76.66.193.193 (talk) 20:13, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

If the photographer is willing to give up their copyright, they'd have to go through Wikipedia:Volunteer Response Team. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:16, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Which can be done through Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries. - FlightTime (open channel) 23:55, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Any chance I can convince anyone to reach out to him to try this? I have 0 experience in those matters, just an idea. (Sorry for the bad edits, first time trying this.) --76.66.193.193 (talk) 20:18, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

You could reach out to him and ask him to upload it to Wikimedia commons, if you believe that the photo would improve the article. — Mhawk10 (talk) 20:20, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Just as a general note: I'm not exactly sure that changing his image from his official profile (which is by far the ordinary thing for heads of state) is going to be the best photograph of him. If he gets a new portrait in military garb, then perhaps it's worth pursuing, but I'm not really sure that the photographs linked are the best photograph of him to use. — Mhawk10 (talk) 20:20, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Echoing the above, official portraits (which are usually high quality and front facing) are what is generally used in the infobox for office holders. Not sure this case would warrant an exception. By the way, there are picture of him in military harg on the page, and they should be included, just likely not in the infobox unless it's a portrait. Eccekevin (talk) 23:51, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Agree! Republicanblake (talk) 05:45, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 March 2022

Add that Zelenskyy is a lawyer in his intro (comedian, actor, lawyer, & politician. He has a L.L.B. making him a lawyer whether practicing or not so this addition should be added. Republicanblake (talk) 05:42, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: Disagree per MOS:ROLEBIO. Article notes he has not pursued an actual career in law so having a law degree has pretty much nothing to do with his notability Cannolis (talk) 06:24, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

addressing the nation/world

I can't tell the difference as I don't speak either language, but post-invasion, how has Zelensky been addressing his people in his speeches - in Ukrainian? Russian? Do we have a source for this? 50.111.36.47 (talk) 00:30, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

Reorganization of article sections

I'd like to reorganize and condense a few of this article's sections, specifically:

• Merge "start of political career" into "2019 presidential campaign"
• Combine the "Honcharuk Governemnt" and "Shmyhal governemnt" sections into a single "Cabinets" section
• More clearly separate out policy proposals from political views in the section "Political Views" (hard policy proposals should go into the main "Presidency" section, maybe under a "Domestic Policy" subsection)
• Add a "Public image" section - the significance of Zelenskyy's identity as a Russian-speaking Ukranian who rejected the linguistic divide that often characterizes Ukranian politics, his status as a political novice and outsider, and some of the initial (now laughable) perceptions of him as too sympathetic to Russia don't really come across in the article at the moment. Some of the controversies listed throughout the article and in the "controversies" section could also be integrated into "Public image," especially in how they relate to his self-styled image as a reformer and political outsider (both positively and negatively).
• Remove news and excessive detail. I'm thinking especially:
  • the Bukovina mistranslation "controversy"
  • the "List of questions that were mentioned" in the presidential campaign section - they're not all that interesting and, more importantly, completely without context

Feel free to correct or revert if someone feels I've gone too far (or not far enough). --Tserton (talk) 11:30, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 March 2022

There is a section describing the on going invasion of Ukraine in past tense. I don’t understand how that could have been added. 2600:1009:B140:3878:30DC:72CB:40F2:AC6C (talk) 20:37, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Additionally, some of the paragraph is in past tense because certain events happened in the past. 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 21:15, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

Mother engineer

The tradition in Eastern European (Central European) countries is to give the title "Engineer" to anyone who has a degree from a Polytechnic. I have a degree from a British Polytechnic, so when I lived in Poland I was referred to as Engineer, even though my BSc is in Psychology. It would, therefore be better to have clarity about what Zelensky's mother actually did. Francis Hannaway (talk) 12:51, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

How do you spell his last name?

Someone on another site spells it differently when looking at UK sources, and when I asked, I was told there are at least three spellings.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:54, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

I did finally see the note at the bottom of the article so I guess that's enough.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 23:07, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

Yes, because scripts are not directly transposable, several variations are possible. Neighbouring Poland uses Roman script and so spelling can be easier. 😊 Francis Hannaway (talk) 12:54, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Strange and miswritten phrasing in the very first paragraph

Volodymyr Oleksandrovych Zelenskyy[a] (Ukrainian: Володимир Олександрович Зеленський, pronounced [woloˈdɪmɪr olekˈsɑndrowɪdʒ zeˈlɛnʲsʲkɪj]; born 25 January 1978) is a Ukrainian politician, he has a Ukrainian-Jewish background [4] and former actor, who is the sixth and current president of Ukraine.

The part "he has a Ukrainian-Jewish background [4] and former actor" seems strangely inserted and is not part of the typical format for biography introductions, and breaks the grammar of the sentence. Typically, it would end with something like this:

...is an Ukrainian politician who is the sixth and current president of Ukraine. A former actor, he...

Or alternatively:

...is an Ukrainian politician. A former actor, he is the sixth and current president of Ukraine.

Additionally, "a" before "Ukrainian" should be "an", and the [4] reference should not have a space between itself and the preceding word. I personally suspect that this "Ukrainian-Jewish background" part was coarsely inserted in the first sentence by an editor who wanted to make this aspect widely read for personal motivations, though of course this cannot be proven. I can't edit this myself because of the extended confirmed protection that is on the page at the moment, but would appreciate if an extended confirmed user could act on this. Minindo (talk) 19:01, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

 Done The apparently misplaced insertion in the lead was removed earlier today by another editor. Note that the article preceding the word "Ukrainian" was maintained as "a" (not "an"), as is correct. The convention in English is that "an" is used before "U" only when the letter U is not pronounced as "you" (e.g, "an umbrella"), as it is pronounced in the word "Ukraine." General Ization ^Talk 00:14, 8 March 2022 (UTC) General Ization ^Talk 00:14, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 March 2022 (2)

Before they have mobilization spelled incorrectly and thearmed forces as one word instead of two After the commencement of the invasion, Zelenskyy declared martial law across Ukraine and a general mobilisation of thearmed forces.

after After the commencement of the invasion, Zelenskyy declared martial law across Ukraine and a general mobilization of the armed forces. Ewan Davidson (talk) 23:06, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: Please see MOS:ENGVAR - FlightTime (open channel) 23:22, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

To clarify the above: "-ise" endings of words like mobilise (instead of mobilize) are used in British English, which is the variant of English this article is written in. — AFreshStart (talk) 23:48, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Shortdesc phrasing

This page's shortdesc is currently "6th president of Ukraine since 2019". I changed this to "Sixth and current president of Ukraine, in office since 2019", on the grounds that the current phrasing would indicate there have been five other presidents since 2019, and Zelenskyy is the sixth. (Also on the grounds that low-value ordinals should be spelled out—even in a shortdesc, IMO.)

That edit was reverted by Thrakkx, with an edit summary pointing to WP:SDDATES. While that page does recommend a style of "[Office description] since startyear" (e.g. "President of Mexico since 2012"), I would note the lack of "6th" and suggest that this difference is very significant! Either that style recommendation should be followed exactly ("President of Ukraine since 2019"), with no mention at all of him being the sixth office holder, or some other phrasing is needed.

However, I don't want to jump straight in and make another change to the shortdesc myself, not until there's been a chance for some post-revert discussion here first. And I hope this doesn't get lost among all the protected edit requests!

(Oddly enough, this isn't the first time I've been in a disagreement over phrasing in this article around the word "since". Is there some Ukrainian idiom that's being translated too literally to English or something?) -- Perey (talk) 12:23, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

In addition to reverting your edit with SDDATES as my basis, I had two other reasons: 1) the new short description, Sixth and current president of Ukraine, in office since 2019, is 60 characters, i.e. too long compared to the original 35, and 2) it becomes inconsistent with the remaining 5 modern Ukrainian presidents' short descriptions.

Don't get me wrong, I dislike ordinals in short descriptions. Too many editors are obsessed with counting the number of people holding a given office, no matter how little it makes sense (the Ukrainian presidency is a great example; there were many "presidents" before 1991) or how long it makes the short description (see: Grover Cleveland: 22nd and 24th president of the United States (1885–1889 and 1893–1897) – 69 characters).

I agree that the ordinal should be removed and the short description should be President of Ukraine since 2019, but you should understand that we will be endlessly fighting to keep it that way. Thrakkx (talk) 16:28, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Agreed and done. We will be endlessly fighting to keep it that way—nothing new about that! :) -- Perey (talk) 09:25, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Views on right-wing nationalism in Ukraine

With regard to current events this issue should be addressed. Here are some sources that provide enough information for a section:

• https://www.bbc.com/ukrainian/news-47962172 - Zelenskyy on Bandera remembrance, taking a carefully distant position against using Bandera for national symbolism.
• https://www.dw.com/uk/%D0%BD%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%94-%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B7%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%87%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D1%96-%D0%B7%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BD%D1%81%D1%8C%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9-%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B7%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%96%D0%B2-%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%BE-%D1%81%D0%B2%D0%BE%D1%94-%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%BD%D1%8F-%D0%B4%D0%BE-%D0%B1%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B4%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B8/a-53752589 about his rationale in avoiding Bandera as a political topic; basically he's saying that this is a difficult time for Ukraine and you have to be careful with deviding issues
• https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/4140693 article about Zelenskyy's visit to the Lugansk region in 2019 and his clash with an official of the Asov batallion.

--Jazzman (talk) 17:47, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

I believe the issue with Bandera has been mentioned in the "Social issues" subsection of the article; I think it covers his position sufficiently. I added the clash with an Azov official in the "Attempts to end the Donbas Conflict" subsection of the article; I'm not sure where is most appropriate, but I agree that this should be included. —AFreshStart (talk) 00:03, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

I think you are technically right but considering this is a central issue in the current war this should be featured more prominently instead of a paragraph under the chapter title "Social issues". --Jazzman (talk) 12:19, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Fair enough. Do you think this content should be moved to its own section? -AFreshStart (talk) 14:09, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Ukraine did not ban all Russian artists and Russian works of culture

Hello, I suggest an edit to: 'Since 2015, Ukraine has banned Russian artists and other Russian works of culture from entering Ukraine.[33]' as this doesn't accurately reflects the facts.

My suggestion is that the sentence is amended to:

'In 2015, Ukraine banned a number of Russian artists and Russian cultural artefacts that were spreading hate ideology from entering Ukraine.[33]'Giulio Camillo (talk) 12:57, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

"that were spreading hate ideology" doesn't sound neutral. I'm not sure what the facts are, but how about "In 2015, Ukraine banned a number of Russian artists and Russian cultural artifacts from entering Ukraine.[33]" ☺Coppertwig (talk) 21:09, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Sorry: "artefacts" is a correct spelling. And depending on what the sources say, something like "that were considered to be spreading hate ideology" might be OK. ☺Coppertwig (talk) 22:50, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Christian?

"Boleslav Kapulkin, the spokesman for Chabad Lubavitch in Odessa, said that he is under the impression that Zelensky converted to Christianity. 'I don’t know for sure if he converted, but I heard that he mentioned that he is the godfather of his friends’ children, or that they are the godparents of his children, something like that,' Kapulkin said. Indeed, five years ago, numerous Ukrainian news outlets reported that Zelensky christened his son Kirill in one of the oldest churches in the Ukrainian capital. As gifts, the baby received a Christian Bible and a cross on a chain. The reports never mentioned that Zelensky was Jewish" https://www.timesofisrael.com/is-ukraines-top-presidential-candidate-jewish-even-his-spokesman-wont-comment/ --Alvaria (talk) 20:18, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

None of the sources say what is his religion if any. He seems to be a non-religious person. Christening kids is more like a cultural tradition in these countries. My very best wishes (talk) 23:55, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 25 February 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: SNOW keep. This may fall a bit shy of the normal threshold expected for the snowball clause, but, a mere three weeks after the last RM, a very strong consensus would be required to reverse, and I see the proverbial "snowball's chance in Hell" of that very strong consensus being reached. It bears emphasis that, while consensus can change, discussions so quickly relitigating a previous one are generally expected to justify why an early reconsideration is called for—for instance, procedural defect in the previous case or some change in the facts. This nomination has not made any real effort to argue that. Those who feel the previous consensus was wrong are welcome to start a new RM after a suitable period of time (probably 6-12 months). (closed by non-admin page mover) -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 21:56, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

---

Volodymyr Zelenskyy → Volodymyr Zelensky – Per WP:COMMONNAME. English Language media seem to most widely be using "Volodymyr Zelensky" to refer to the President of Ukraine, including media based within Ukraine. This includes WaPo, BBC, Ukrinform, Kyiv Post, NY Times, CBS News, Axios, The Times (of London), CNN, ABC News, the other ABC News, The Globe and Mail, and many others. People are searching for the spelling of his name with one terminating with one "y" more frequently than the name with two terminating "y"s, while Google Ngrams confirms near-exclusive use of "Zelensky" prior to 2019. Overall, the transliteration of his family name without a second "y" seems to be more natural, more consistent with how coverage of him spells his name, and seems to be the dominant way to transliterate his name (even among Ukraine-based English-language media). — Mhawk10 (talk) 16:39, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

• Support as nom. Note that Ukrainian state media dominantly uses the transliteration with a single terminating y, even well after 2019. Per WP:SPNC The determination of how much extra weight should be given to more recent sources is guided by the likelihood the new name is going to stick – while Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, it needs to be unavoidable that the new name will soon be the most common name. In this case, the name change plainly did not stick, not even among Ukraine government-affiliated English language media. As such, the current title seems to be inferior to the proposed title, since the proposed title is the unambiguous WP:COMMONNAME. — Mhawk10 (talk) 16:50, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
• oppose per WP:SPNC he uses 'Zelenskyy' [1] —blindlynx 17:03, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
• Support per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:USEENGLISH. Rreagan007 (talk) 18:06, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose: He uses 'Zelenskyy', this is the correct transliteration of his name. This was already discussed less than a month ago and the consensus was to move the article. I don't know why WP:SPNC is being cited in this proposal when it clearly states that for minor spelling variations, "when a consistent and unambiguous self-published version exists, it is usually followed". —Legoless (talk) 18:24, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

  My point is that there isn't a consistent and unambiguous self-published version when his own state media uses a different transliteration. — Mhawk10 (talk) 18:43, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

  How would state media, even if the President were to exert an iron grip on content (which isn't the case here, as evidenced by the fact that they don't even get his name right), be more self published than direct communication from said president? Acebulf ^{(talk | contribs)} 23:39, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:SPNC. His official twitter and FB pages for example use the "yy". This was just litigated above, should be re-litigated in the future, not now. Eccekevin (talk) 19:50, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose He literally has his name as "Zelenskyy" in his official pages. Wikipedia does not replace correct with wrong. SteelerFan1933 (talk) 20:08, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose We just had this discussion (see above RM which was closed 3 weeks ago.) 162 etc. (talk) 20:12, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose The current spelling is fine, and is the official one used by the Ukrainian Govt. We already have had a discussion about this less than a month ago. If the proposer thinks that closure is incorrect, then they should request a review. Hemiauchenia (talk) 20:21, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose/Snowball There is already a very recent discussion on the subject. Unsurprisingly, as evidenced by the strength of argumentation above, is appears that the consensus remains unchanged from a month ago. Acebulf ^{(talk | contribs)} 23:37, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
• Support Snowball. this discussion has ben litigated less than a month ago, it should be closed. The nom can ask to review the original discussion. Eccekevin (talk) 03:30, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose per SteelerFan1933 -- HurricaneEdgar 23:40, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose: No. Mr. Zelenskyy's name is literally that on his passport, the one used by the Ukrainian government, and the one we use, too. I should mention that the discussion from 3 weeks ago chose to move his name, and rightfully so. — Javert2113 (Siarad.|¤) 00:32, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose per SPNC and the previous move discussion. I also suggest a WP:SNOW close. Jr8825 • Talk 00:40, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
• Support: There is one correct spelling (in Ukrainian) and many acceptable transliterations to English. And the single-"y" transliteration is the most common in RS, because there's really no such thing as a double-"y" in English, and transliterations are intended to be intuitively pronounceable. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 02:58, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
• Support: His name is widely reported with one "y" throughout international media. Miss HollyJ (talk) 03:15, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
• Support: I opposed the original move and I'll briefly restate my support for the simpler and more common transliteration. What's on his passport is less relevant than what media are commonly using. --Killuminator (talk) 03:50, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

  The media uses both (Zelenskyy is used by USA Today , ABC , FoxNews , Al Jazeera , LA Times , Chicago Tribune and many more) so it makes sense to use the official/more accurate version with is "yy". As per the discussion above: Arguably, Volodymyr Zelenskyy better satisfies the WP:CRITERIA of precision and recognizability. He’s the only one we’ve ever heard of with that official spelling of the surname, and lets us redirect to the article from Zelenskyy. It also represents a WP:NPOV by respecting the living person’s own spelling, instead of imposing someone else’s preference (see WP:BLP, “high degree of sensitivity”). WP:COMMONNAME also lets us consider exceptions for accuracy and neutrality.Eccekevin (talk) 04:01, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose per blindlynx, Legoless, Eccekevin, SteelerFan1933, 162 etc., Hemiauchenia, Acebulf, HurricaneEdgar, Javert2113 and Jr8825. "Zelenskyy" is how he and the Ukrainian government transliterate his surname into English and, inconsistencies in media coverage notwithstanding, that transliteration does appear in such form among various print and digital sources. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 03:55, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
• Support per nom and WP:SPNC; it’s clear that the name change (in English) has not stuck in the time since 2019. Arguments based on WP:OFFICIAL usage are not valid. — HTGS (talk) 04:24, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose: As stated in WP:SPNC, "when a consistent and unambiguous self-published version exists, it is usually followed". State media are not under his personal control and no more official than his passport. I'm not sure why we are re-litigating this when the consensus was reached less than a month ago; hopefully not racists trying to start an edit war.—Egawaryuki21 (talk) 09:51, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

  What does this have to do with race? ― Tartan357 ^Talk 09:55, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

  That the English-speaking media is more relevant in determining the spelling of his name than how he personally chooses, with insistence to the point of reopening discussion to break the last consensus within the month? To be clear I’m not yet making accusations here but stressing the importance to speak up with good-faith reasons (as many did here). —Egawaryuki21 (talk) 12:57, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

  @Egawaryuki21: This is the English Wikipedia. We write in English, and so we use common English transliterations, per WP:TRANSLITERATE. — HTGS (talk) 20:40, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose: He uses Zelenskyy Jacksonisamazin (talk) 13:23, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose: Zelenskyy is his real name, if we want to use Zelensky then just note that Zelensky is the shorten version — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peatta (talk • contribs) 13:43, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose: It is spelled Zelenskyy in his passport and also spelled the same way by his administration; most sources also use this spelling. Something that is not broken does not need to be fixed. ➤ Zᴇᴇx.ʀɪᴄᴇ ✪ (ᴛᴀʟᴋ) 14:50, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose: for many reasons. However, compelled to add my opposition by the 'people are searching for the singular 'y' spelling more' reasoning offered in support. I'm not WP:NOTE, but if I was most people would be spelling my name wrong on search engines too. Soothrhins (talk) 15:29, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose The Guardian calls him "Zelenskiy", just to complicate matters. PatGallacher (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 21:15, 26 February 2022
• Oppose Some people choose to change the spelling or pronunciation of their name and I believe we should follow that rather than media narratives. The media is supposed to follow the leader. Hell, there are people who are convinced that it’s Zelenskiy too. Trillfendi (talk) 21:37, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

I agree with changing it back from Volodymyr Zelenskyy to Volodymyr Zelensky

Please check the blog post I wrote about linguistic reasons for the spelling "Zelensky"

https://yourwordmonger.com/is-the-ukrainian-presidents-name-spelt-zelensky-or-zelenskyy-kako-se-pise-zelenski-ili-zelenskij/ Lingcro (talk) 22:25, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

References

Misspelling

There is a misspelling of Zelenskyy's name in the final paragraph of the section '2019 presidential campaign'. It reads "Polish President Andrzej Duda was one of the first European leaders to congratulate Zelensky".

Agree, should be fixed. Republicanblake (talk) 05:43, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Zelensky is not a misspelling, please check https://www.britannica.com/biography/Volodymyr-Zelensky and my blog post https://yourwordmonger.com/is-the-ukrainian-presidents-name-spelt-zelensky-or-zelenskyy-kako-se-pise-zelenski-ili-zelenskij/ Lingcro (talk) 15:40, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Numerous Misspellings

Volodomyr Zelenskyy's name is frequently spelled as 'Zelensky'. This page is protected so I cannot edit it, can somebody else please do this? This is a major mistake ans should be corrected. Hoodiesandboba (talk) 04:27, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

[2] ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 14:17, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

I did not see this, thank you Hoodiesandboba (talk) 16:56, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Zelensky is not a misspelling, please check https://www.britannica.com/biography/Volodymyr-Zelensky and my blog post https://yourwordmonger.com/is-the-ukrainian-presidents-name-spelt-zelensky-or-zelenskyy-kako-se-pise-zelenski-ili-zelenskij/ Lingcro (talk) 15:40, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 March 2022

In the Presidency section it is mentioned that "In June 2019 it was announced that the president's third major initiative, which seeks to remove immunity from lawmakers, diplomats and judges, would be submitted after the July 2019 Ukrainian parliamentary election.".

While that is accurate, there is no follow-up on this whatsoever in the Presidency section. We should definitely mention that a measure stripping lawmakers from immunity was passed in September 2019.

My suggestion:

Right before the line beginning with "In 2020,", insert the following: "On 3 September, parliament passed a bill stripping lawmakers of legal immunity, delivering Zelenskyy a legislative victory by fulfilling one of his key campaign promises." using this as source: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-parliament-immunity-idUSKCN1VO0YU CrazyPredictor (talk) 19:21, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

 Done P1221 (talk) 09:45, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

New stub

I've created the stub Assassination attempts on Volodymyr Zelenskyy, since there's an entry at uk.Wikipedia. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 23:38, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Spelling

Some sources say the surname is spelled Zelenskyy in English. However many others spell it Zelensky, and others also spell it Zelenskiy. I suspect that the reason that some sources change the spelling of the name is to make it look more normal since there are generally no consecutive "y"s in English. I am asking to consider adding the fact that the name is also spelled differently in different sources. Bernspeed (talk) 21:58, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

This is already mentioned - see citation [a] by Zelenskyy's name. Réunion (stylised) - (talk to me) 18:41, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

https://yourwordmonger.com/is-the-ukrainian-presidents-name-spelt-zelensky-or-zelenskyy-kako-se-pise-zelenski-ili-zelenskij/ Lingcro (talk) 00:51, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Yet another Zelensky or Zelenskyy discussion

Sorry, but please see WT:WikiProject Ukraine#Zelensky or Zelenskyy. Johnuniq (talk) 08:10, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

2021–22 Russo-Ukrainian crisis

To include something to such section, one must have RS saying that an event X belonged to 2021–22 Russo-Ukrainian crisis. Also, that something should be significant. My very best wishes (talk) 20:08, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Speaking more of the edit [3]: (a) how is the story with Poroshenko related to views by Zelensky? (b) how is moving personnel from US embassy is related to BLP of Zeknsky? (c) we are not going to include every comment by Zelensky. My very best wishes (talk) 00:11, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

(a) Poroshenko denied the allegations, calling them "fabricated, politically motivated, and black PR directed against [Zelensky's] political opponents. There is a long-standing personal and political feud between former President Poroshenko and current President Zelensky, and it should be mentioned in the "Controversies" section. — diff, diff

(c) He has been saying it for weeks. — diff -- Tobby72 (talk) 11:08, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

(a) - There is no proof that Zelensky was personally involved here, although he certainly could; this does not seem sufficient for inclusion; (b) - yes, that does sounds exactly like official statments by the Soviet government just before the Nazi invasion in 1941, so might be notable in retrospective, but right now is covered by WP:NOTNEWS. My very best wishes (talk) 18:59, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Is it appropriate to cite Russia's claim of performing a "special military operation" when the consensus seems to be they started a war? Seems like unnecessary use of propaganda.70.95.177.35 (talk) 05:18, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 March 2022

Suggest addition of link to Wikisource section:

Consideringadditional (talk) 23:13, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

 Done - FlightTime (open channel) 00:37, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Russian claims of "incitement to hatred"

The russian embassy posted a list of supposed quotes inciting to hatred. They list Zelenskyy as having said

> “You call them human [referring to people subject to NSDC (National Security and Defence Council of Ukraine) sanctions]? But they aren’t all the same. There are human representatives. Not all human representatives are human. There are species as well, I believe.” (Vladimir Zelensky’s marathon press conference, Nov. 29, 2021)

I can't find a transcript of this press conference, it would be nice if one is available so this can be debunked (I'm assuming it's out of context or badly translated, and even if it isn't it doesn't justify anything Russia is doing right now). Wout.mertens (talk) 16:22, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Not a member but suspected sayed unlegitement change in wiki page

someone change zelenskyy from president to polltician and added incubent president pls fix this — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.221.118.59 (talk) 08:22, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 March 2022

NickkkkBozekk (talk) 04:47, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Although Zelenskyy has been met with international commendation for his role in defending against the invasion, he has received backlash, even from western countries, on his banning of opposition parties during the invasion. I think it's worth noting this to not paint a one-way picture of Zelenskyy as some of his decisions have been controversial.

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:54, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

@ScottishFinnishRadish: I believe it is a reference to his banning of 11 political parties, mostly on the left, who he accuses - not without evidence - of pro-Russian sympathies. This has been criticised among some Western leftists. Reliable source coverage of the issue, which doesn't mention the backlash: Axios (very brief), the Guardian. I think this should be included in the article. QueenofBithynia (talk) 18:18, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Feel free to add it. I just closed the request procedurally, as it was more of a regular discussion than a specific edit request. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:13, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Not sure how this wasn't specific, as they mentioned the specific incident I clarified. I would add this to the article myself, but I cannot as I am not extended-confirmed. QueenofBithynia (talk) 15:05, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

RfC on lead description

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Should we describe Zelenskyy in the lead as a "politician" or a "statesman"? Векочел (talk) 17:41, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Politician adheres to WP:NPOV and seems like a MOS:PEACOCK term. As much as editors may personally admire him, as per statesman a statesman has a "long and respected career".Park3r (talk) 05:03, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

I updated the opening sentence to "politician", and included "statesman" further down, with more context, in line with WP:NPOV. Park3r (talk) 05:14, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

You don’t become a "statesman" or a "national hero" overnight. These are cumulative processes that evolve over years of consistent meaningful action, deeds and – above all – moral rectitude, in pursuit of the greater good, at the same time enjoying such recognition not only by the people, but also peers, scholars and reputable journalists alike. Being a statesman does not depend on newspaper headlines calling anyone that – they are exactly that, headlines. Any leader of any country, no matter how good or ineffectual, will be seen by some as a hero by doing very little, if that country happens to be invaded or suffer a major disaster, calamity, etc. It is a natural human reaction to look to leaders for guidance and source of hope. let's wait for Ukrainians and history to acclaim his as such. By comparison, Nelson Mandela as president – in a featured article – is not called a "statesman" or "hero". Likewise, Rudy Giuliani is not called a hero in three articles dealing with the role he played in 9/11; in fact the articles mention that he cast himself as a hero for political gain. User Tataral has a long history of POV edits (more about that in the appropriate place), often bordering on WP:PEACOCK and making up stuff such as "[Zelenskyy] contributed to the renewed popularity of the salute Slava Ukraini as a symbol of resistance"; whereas the source merely says that he signed off in a video message with the words "Slava Ukraini". That entire paragraph should de deleted. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 12:16, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

I was not going to edit the article until there was consensus on all elements of WP:PUFFERY, but now I see that a completely falsified statement is being copied in good faith by wikipedias in other languages, so to prevent futher replication, I have removed it. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 14:19, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

• Prefer politician – statesman to me implies long-established reputation. Jr8825 • Talk 14:51, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Yep, statesman sounds to me >20-30 years in politics; someone like Anthony Eden or Clement Attlee of the old British elite, a term for more conventional high-class/social-club politicians if that makes sense. DannyDouble (talk) 21:26, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Politician per wP:RECENTISM. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:50, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

• Politician, as per Muboshgu. PeaceThruPramana26 (talk) 23:26, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
• Comment Has this been discussed in a an informal discussion before being put in a RfC? If not, this should be procedurally closed, since RfC's are only supposed to be for contentious disputes that editors couldn't fix through normal discussion. Iamreallygoodatcheckers (talk) 01:06, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
• Politician. What else is he? This is also a case where the word politician is much more commonly used than statesman, so it only makes sense.shanghai.^{talk to me} 13:42, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
• Politician. This is the standard descriptor for an elected political officeholder. — Mhawk10 (talk) 16:40, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
• Politician. There is no need to change what is presently there. Unless you can demonstrate that reliable sources are describing him as a "statesman" more than a "politician", I advise we keep the lede as it is. MOS:LEADBIOWritethisway (talk) 00:03, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
• Politician by default. If someone can provide evidence that he's widely known as a statesman in reliable sources, it's possible I could be persuaded to change my mind. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 19:36, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
• Politician. There are many more sources defining him this way. Moreover, I believe "statesman" usually applies for politicians with long-established reputation. P1221 (talk) 09:38, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

"Stepan Bandera, a controversial figure in Ukrainian history"

There must be a better way to contextualize Bandera for the reader. As it is, it tells the reader next to nothing about why Bandera is controversial or what Zelensky's statements mean in context about his political positions.

I don’t know enough about WP policy to say how much info should be added (ex: I assume something like “Nazi-collaborator Stepan Bandera" would be going overboard and crossing into other POV territory), so I’m wondering if any other editors have ideas. HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith (talk) 00:42, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

@HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith  Done, on the basis that I've found inline references regarding Bandera's Nazi collaboration at Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists and the article on Bandera himself, and I've verified a source provided for this assessment written by Jeffrey Kopstein, who looks to me to be a strong subject matter expert. However, as I'm a non-expert and Bandera's legacy is controversial, I invite others to scrutinise this. Jr8825 • Talk 01:32, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Should this page be saying he is a comedian in the lead?

... or should it say "former comedian", or that he was a comedian in the past? This would seem to reflect the sources and article. --QueenofBithynia (talk) 16:18, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Good point. I've revised. CAVincent (talk) 02:54, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

There is a stray comma on the page now as a result of this edit. —Legoless (talk) 11:39, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 April 2022

Add the following to the Russian Invasion 2022 section: On 12 April 2022, a photo was released by Zelensky of arrested and detained Victor Medvedchuk (Putins top Ukrainian ally) in handcuffs. 2603:7000:D53F:5980:18B4:57A3:ACA6:1266 (talk) 19:58, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. MadGuy7023 (talk) 19:59, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Relationship to oligarch Ihor Kolomoyskyi removed from the article.

Ihor Kolomoyskyi owned the TV stations Zelenskyy rose to fame on, and was widely reported as supporting Zelenskyy's rise to power. Zelenskyy was also reported to have favoured Kolomoyskyi while in power. All references to this in the article have recently been removed without discussion. ♥ L'Origine du monde ♥ ^{♥ Talk ♥} 21:30, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Well, I can currently see at least two explicit references to Kolomoyskyi. They seem OK to me, at least a the first glance. My very best wishes (talk) 02:55, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Pandora Papers

Should his Pandora Papers scandal really be in its own separate section? Comparing this to the articles of other heads of state/government who were also implicated in the Pandora Papers, like Sebastián Piñera, Guillermo Lasso, Uhuru Kenyatta, Ali Bongo etc–none of them have a separate, specific section dedicated to it. So I don't see why this information can't go to the #Presidency subsection, as these things normally do. The way it currently is makes the article more cluttered. Rousillon (talk) 18:08, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Not only I agree, but this entire controversy does not seem to be notable and deserving inclusion to the page, in context of his biography as it looks today. My very best wishes (talk) 02:48, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Since the removal caused objections, I indeed moved this content to another most relevant section. My very best wishes (talk) 20:32, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 April 2022

Change serves in "who serves as the sixth and current president of Ukraine." to "is serving" Loganp23 (talk) 17:12, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

It looks like at somepoint since you made your request it has been changed to "who has served as . . . since", which is more gramatically correct. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 04:22, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Transliteration of the surname

Two standard transliterations of the surname Зеленський should be added: Zelenskij and Zelenskii. Compare [4] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Onomasticguru (talk • contribs) 16:07, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Even more importantly, we have a mismatch of other zelinskyi/kyy/ky/kij/kii/ki's Nikolay_Zelinsky

And then there's the issue that there are only 55k in google for Zelinksyy, over 2.5 million for Zelinsky, and 116 million for Zelensky Chaosdruid (talk) 02:01, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Zelenskyy shared an image with a soldier with nazi insignia on the day of the victory over Nazism

According to some sources[5][6] Zelensky posted a photo on the day of the victory over Nazism, 9 May, of a Ukrainian soldier with a Totenkopf on his chest. When the scandal on social media began to grow, he removed the post. Do you think this is an important enough event to put in the article? It could be of the same importance as what happened to the head of the Donetks People's Republic.[7] I'd be to avoid putting this stuff on both the articles.--Mhorg (talk) 18:30, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

If you would "avoid putting this stuff on both the articles", then what was the purpose of this posting? Remember, WP:POINT. My very best wishes (talk) 23:19, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

The purpose of this question is to know what other colleagues think about a fact of this kind. Whether it is important enough to be mentioned in the article or not. I don't understand your criticism. Mhorg (talk) 19:38, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

So, you say you would "avoid putting this stuff" yourself, but others might. Hence you did think this is something potentially worth inclusion. But did not you see this is not reliably sourced? My very best wishes (talk) 20:15, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

@Mhorg: It's not important to the article. It's a non-event. Best regards, BetsyRMadison (talk) 13:28, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

"former actor, and former comedian"

I don't see why this cannot be phrased as "former actor and comedian". No need for two former's Rousillon (talk) 19:40, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes, that makes more sense. Furius (talk) 21:06, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

No, it doesn't. It can still be easily read as a former actor, but still a comedian - or that he used to be an actor, but then became a comedian.

Consider something like "former comedic actor", or "formerly an actor/comedian", as they cannot be misinterpreted. Chaosdruid (talk) 06:18, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

I still believe he should be described simply as "former actor". We could say "comic actor" because he mostly acted in comedies. He was not a stand-up comedian. My very best wishes (talk) 02:53, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 May 2022

Please change the "57th Guards Motor Division" to the "153rd Rifle Division" in his early life period. During WW2, it was called the 153rd Rifle Division still. 70.89.96.6 (talk) 17:41, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: A source provided within the relevant sentence refers to it as the 57th, so it would probably be best to stick with the source unless there is consensus to do otherwise. —Sirdog (talk) 06:36, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

A "Public image" section in this article

Bit of a Wiki amateur here, but does this article need a "Public image" section, as there are in articles for other world leaders? Zelensky has been propelled into an international limelight as a result of the invasion, his response to which has won him international praise but also concerns about his governance. Before the war, he was also known in Ukraine - and likely won the election - because of his communication style and social media savvy. Doesn't his domestic and international public image - pre and post invasion - deserve a separate section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.180.192.10 (talk) 12:27, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes, sure, and you are welcome to suggest your version here. My very best wishes (talk) 03:18, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

A touch late but I want to add to this point that his "reaction image" to the atrocities committed in Bucha should be included in this article somewhere. It's a haunting photograph and conveys his emotions regarding the current war incredibly well. Ruby.Boulton (talk) 00:00, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Suggestion

Hi, would it be possible to change Zelenskyy’s 2019 official portrait to the one after Kyiv was liberated? Just to bring it up to date. Devdevo1919 (talk) 16:06, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Statesman

Isn’t it time to add “statesman” to the introduction. Considering the amount of international diplomacy he is doing and the impact he has had on the world. I can’t think of a modern politician who deserves this label more. Even the Russian Wikipedia describes him as such. Come on! Kaprekar30 (talk) 07:21, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Russian name removal

I suggest we remove the Russian name since he's the president of Ukraine and Ukraine has only one official language. It was added on [21 April 2022]. He considers himself Ukrainian and Jewish at the same time. What's the point of having the Russian name here? Is he Russian? 212.191.80.243 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

@212.191.80.243 Zelenskyy was born in the Russian speaking region of Ukraine, and his first language is Russian. Ukrainian isn't the only language spoken in Ukraine, there's a very large population of Russians living in Ukraine and the Russian language is recognised as a minority language. Gorrrillla5 11:24, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Zelenskyy’s first language is Russian.Supernt7852 (talk) 03:22, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 August 2022

With recent statements wrt same-sex partnerships and marriage, I propose adding this paragraph to #Political views:Social issues:

In responding to a petition demanding equal rights for same-sex couples, Zelenskyy echoed the view that family does not depend on sex and asked the Prime Minister of Ukraine to review civil partnerships for same-sex couples. With regards to same-sex marriage, Zelenskyy cited a provision in the Constitution of Ukraine barring same-sex marriage, as well as a ban on wartime changes to the Constitution, ruling out an introduction of same-sex marriages during the ongoing war.[8] Civil rights organizations praised the statement, though criticizing its vagueness, as Zelenskyy eschewed details about legal proposals for civil partnerships.[9][10]

Editors notes: 0) The primary source is blacklisted as a petition site, but linked within the nytimes article. It's probably relevant enough to be whitelisted, but I'm tired because it's 2AM in my timezone. 1) I don't know how to cite in source editing mode, so please replace the bare links with citations. 2) This may need some copyediting. 3) Feel free to add more appropriate citations. Mirrortemplar (talk) 00:13, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

 Done: Completed in this edit. Thanks Mirrortemplar Your Twitter reference is currently included but invisible so that some future editor who is more familiar with requirements can confirm it meets criteria as an appropriate source for the claim it supports. It seems fine to me but I always lean toward an abundance of caution with BLP and in particular high profile ones such as this.

Side note - Citation bot can do a big chunk of the work in source editing mode for citations. --N8_wilson 🔔 14:11, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Thoughts on decommunization, Stefan Bandera, nation-building and historical context

Under the section Social issues there is a paragraph that reads:

Zelenskyy stated in April 2019 that "of course" he supports the decommunization of Ukraine, but is not happy with its form. In an interview with RBC-Ukraine in April 2019, Zelenskyy said that Stepan Bandera was "a hero for a certain percentage of Ukrainians, and this is a normal and cool thing. He was one of those who defended the freedom of Ukraine. But I think that when we name so many streets, bridges by the same name, this is not quite right."

I'd like to deconstruct it in some detail. Please bear with me. The first sentence states that Zelenskyy supports decommunization of Ukraine with an unspecified caveat. In the first source referenced Zelenskyy is asked a direct question if he supports decommunization and he answered simply "of course". The second part of the sentence: "but is not happy with its form" seems to be an interpretation of a Google translation of the following paragraph:

You talk about things that separate and unite. How do you feel about decommunization? Will it continue in the event of your presidency? After all, on the one hand, there is decommunization, on the other hand, there are avenues of Stepan Bandera. How do you think it should be?
- In general, I'm okay with decommunization. Society has chosen, and it's fine. There are undeniable heroes. Stepan Bandera is a hero for a certain percentage of Ukrainians, and this is normal and cool. This is one of those people who defended the freedom of Ukraine. But I think that when we call so many streets and bridges by the same name, this is not entirely correct. By the way, it's not about Stepan Bandera. I can say the same about Taras Shevchenko. I have a lot of respect for his amazing work. But we must remember the heroes of today, the heroes of art, the heroes of literature, just the heroes of Ukraine. Why don't we call them by their names - the heroes who unite Ukraine today? There is such tension in society that everything possible should be done to unite Ukraine. Once I was asked Why wasn't a street named after Andriy Shevchenko? For me, he is a hero, I really think so.

Zelenskyy seems to be trying to deflect away from the sensitive issue of Bandera and his legacy, by shifting focus on from hard power militants onto softer cultural power (which was firmly his team at the time).

The thing I find problematic is the interpretation that Zelenskyy "is not happy with [decommunization's] form". It's an ambiguous statement.

There is a logical connection between decommunization and Stefan Bandera, in the source paragraph cited above Zelenskyy immediately references Bandera when asked about decommunization and this logical connotation is preserved in the Wikiepda article paragraph.

But for such a complex subject the context is not apparent. It should be apparent why Bandera is being discussed, what is his significance with regards to decommunization? Bandera seems to be a highly controversial historical figure, perhaps polarisng, seemingly emblematic for decommunization. And so the interesting thing is to establish Zelenskyy's opinion on Bandera, which seems to be tacit approval and a subtle change of subject.

Earlier versions of the paragraph included a critical description of Bandera but was removed by @My very best wishes with an explanation I don't understand: "citing and translating primary sources might be fine, but this is already an interpretation; we also have such page, one check what it is about)". It is hardly an interpretation of a primary source to state that Bandera "led the ultranationalist OUN-B during the Second World War and collaborated with Nazi Germany".

Furthermore, there are two discussions in talk space about giving more berth to this subject: see here and here

I suggest therefore firstly that the first statement, generally about decommunization, needs to be improved. And secondly that @My very best wishes's edit to remove contextual information about Bandera be reverted.

I welcome discussion about the points I have raised here.

Thanks for your time, Jabbi (talk) 00:00, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

• I think this whole paragraph is poorly sourced and poorly written and therefore better be removed. Consider the sources (in order how they appear in the paragraph). #1 is a Ukrainian WP:PRIMARY and better be avoided. #2 is very brief and hardly a good RS for this page. #3 is Ukrainian Independent Information Agency, a part of media group of oligarch Ihor Kolomoyskyi. Do we have any mainstream news or scholarly sources covering this issue? I am not aware of such. I know that another Ukrainian president (Yushenko) was indeed heavily criticized for supporting Bandera, but not Zelensky. What I can find in mainstream RS is this [11], i.e. Zelensky actually fired a Ukrainian ambassador to Germany because that ambassador expressed a positive view of Bandera. But again, this is hardly due on the page. One needs very strong sources here because of the false claims of Ukrainian "denazification" used as a casus belli for the war, see Denazification#Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine. My very best wishes (talk) 01:21, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
• Speaking on the very long quotation of Zelenskiy from the interview (above), one should briefly summarize his views, but this is not easy using the primary source. Here is my summary of his words: "let's focus on the Ukrainian heroes of today when we name the streets". But why is that opinion so important to include? My very best wishes (talk) 19:11, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
  • I agree My very best wishes. The paragraph was poorly sourced and poorly written and therefore very expendable and the subject is made all the more sensitive by Russian disinformation regarding their invasion of Ukraine.

Before I go any further I would like to invite @Jazzman:, @AFreshStart:, @Jr8825: and @HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith: to join the discussion who have referenced this issue in the past.

Bandera has been divisive for a long time, back in 2015 BBC reported on a nationalistic march in support of him. And it is easy to find academic papers discussing how nationalistic Ukrainian forces try to rewrite history to distance Bandera from ethnic cleansing. I want to quote an excerpt from a transcript of a podcast hosted by Financial Times foreign editor Gideon Rachman talking to Princeton University professor Kim Scheppele.

>> BEGIN QUOTE

> Gideon Rachman

Yeah. And what is Zelensky’s relationship to this far-right group? Because you say that they do OK in some or they get up to about 10 per cent, I think, maximum in one election, but then they’ve been falling away. How does Zelensky relate to them?

>Kim Scheppele

Yeah. So this is really, I think, important. So the height of support for neo-Nazis was back in 2010 when they won about 10 per cent of the vote in national elections. By the time Zelensky is elected in 2019, the neo-Nazis get zero seats in the parliament. So he enters the political stage when the neo-Nazis are basically not a force in national politics. That said, some pieces of this Ukrainian nationalist movement are still extremely important for Ukrainians. So Bandera becomes a national hero, even not among the neo-Nazis. The organisation of Ukrainian nationalists has been sort of whitewashed in Ukrainian history to be simply sort of nationalists and not Nazis. So that version of history he’s had to kind of go along with.

>> END QUOTE

So, in a way, in Ukraine, a politician's position on Bandera is a sort of acid test of nationalism. In March 2021, when Zelenskyy had low public ratings, dr. Alexei Jakubin, a senior politics lecturer at Kyiv Polytechnic Institute, said his nationalistic political opponents were using the legacy of Bandera to pressure “Zelenskyy and [Denys] Shmygal, the prime minister, to decide if they are nationalist or not,”. The questions becomes whether or not this is enough to extract a carefully worded paragraph about nationalistic discourse in Ukrainian national politics, that explains Zelenskyy's position. --Jabbi (talk) 21:32, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

• You say: "that explains Zelenskyy's position". But what is the "Zelenskyy's position" about Bandera? These sources do not say much about it, except that Zelensky is probably supportive of Ukrainians holding nationalistic views, along with other patriotically minded Ukrainians. Yes, sure. I do not see much to include. At most your 2nd source (Kim Scheppele) say: "But what’s even more significant, I mean, is that Zelensky’s Jewish, but also that he’s from the east and he’s a native Russian speaker." and so on. Yes. That's why he is not making a national hero of Bandera like Yushenko. He also say: "..they are led by a Jewish and Russian speaking president who knows exactly how to make the appeal in such a way that it’s not the western Ukrainian nationalist appeal. It’s an appeal to an image of Ukraine that is deeply multicultural. ". True. Do you wish to include this? That could be reasonable. My very best wishes (talk) 01:21, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

• P.S. What he thinks about Bandera does not matter. Compare to this story by Yuri Shvets (some refs: [12], [13]). What a claim! But it is consistent with this [14],[15],[16]. Still, does not deserve inclusion. My very best wishes (talk) 02:43, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

• Generally speaking, I think the subject matter is central enough to domestic politics to merit inclusion, there is currently no mention either of Ukrainian nationalism, decommunization in Ukraine or derussification in Ukraine in Zelenskyy's article (but for that matter, there isn't a section on Domestic politics, anyway, "Social issues" seems a bit awkward to me). A large enough proportion of Ukrainians is willing to gloss over the more unpleasant parts of Bandera's legacy because he is in other respects a national hero (it is especially interesting to see how Bandera's popularity has reactively increased after the Russian invasion, Stepan_Bandera#Attitudes_in_Ukraine_towards_Bandera). I can't come up up with a well balanced paragraph to summarize without going into OR I think. Perhaps, the original sentence "Zelenskyy stated in April 2019 that "of course" he supports the decommunization of Ukraine, but is not happy with its form." was suitably ambiguous after all. I'll just leave it like it is. Cheers --Jabbi (talk) 12:55, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

So you need strong secondary RS saying something about views and actions specifically by Zelensky with regard to Ukrainian nationalism, decommunization or derussification in Ukraine. So far I do not see any. In addition, just generic statement "he supports decommunization" would be insufficient. What he did exactly to accomplish decommunization in Ukraine? That would be worth noticing. My very best wishes (talk) 19:04, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

TBH having now carefully read through the whole article, I find it incoherent and in need of proper structuring. Common problem. The Economic issues subsection reads like a sound bite from channel surfing, completely void of context, referring to a specific economic issue that is unclear ("communal tariffs"? "capital amnesty"?, sounds more like a spoof of an economic issue than a real one), there is (understandably) overlap between Foreign policy and 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine subsections with the latter section being bloated and listing individual facts than giving summary overview. I'm not expert enough to improve this.

We've already established that Bandera is divisive and that this has led Zelenskyy to fire an ambassador. A leading American scholar is on record saying Zelenskyy has "had to kind of go along with [a historical narrative that whitewashes Bandera and Ukrainian nationalist history]". The first paragraph in the awkwardly named Social issues is in fact about derussification, as it is about regulating Russian cultural power in Ukraine. At the bottom of 2014-22 subsection on Ukrainian nationalism there is a link to a news article about Zelensky's envoy (don't know what being president's envoy to parliament entails in Ukraine) to the parliament and comments on his policy with regards to "Ukrainization". Furthermore, When this interview with Zelensky was published in 2019, BBC saw reason to rework it with the headline "Zelenskyi about Bandera: for some Ukrainians, he is a hero - and that's great" and so did Deutsche Welle: "Zelensky talked about his attitude towards Bandera. We have Zelenskyy on record saying that more streets should be named after others (implied criticism). But like I say, this is too sensitive for me to come up with a paragraph that takes all of this into account. --Jabbi (talk) 11:39, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Oh no, according to Ukrainian language source (this is actually DW, an RS) you linked to [17], Zelensky said he has no opinion about Bandera. He said (Google translate): "I cannot have an attitude towards such people, towards such events during such times, which you and I read about, but we did not live there. There cannot be a simple personal attitude". Of course he simply dodged the question as typical for politicians, but it does not matter. There is nothing to include to the page. And the article explains why exactly he did not publicly answer ("According to Zelenskyi, the answer regarding the place of Stepan Bandera in the history of Ukraine should take time. That is why it is not necessary to provoke Ukrainian society with such questions."). I am not sure about other issues. My very best wishes (talk) 01:45, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

References