Vladimir Putin

{{pp-vandalism|=yes}}
{{Talk header |search=yes }}
{{Annual readership}}

User:MiszaBot/config

|archiveheader =

aan

|maxarchivesize = 150K

|counter = 15

|minthreadsleft = 3

|minthreadstoarchive = 1

|algo = old(14d)

|archive = Talk:Vladimir Putin/Archive %(counter)d

User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn

|target=/Archive index |mask=/Archive |leading_zeros=0 |indexhere=yes

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beslan_school_siege] vs [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Putin#KGB career#2004–2008: Second presidential term|2004–2008: Second presidential term]-number of vixtims

Probably, there is a mistake about the number of deaths during the Beslan school hostage crisis "'in the article about Putin"':

The article about Putin tells that "The Beslan school hostage crisis took place in September 2004, in which hundreds died. Many in the Russian press and in the international media warned that the death of "'130 hostages"' in the special forces' rescue operation during the 2002 Moscow theater hostage crisis would severely damage President Putin's popularity..."

The article about the Beslan school siege "also referred to as the Beslan school hostage crisis or Beslan massacre)345 started on 1 September 2004, lasted three days, involved the illegal imprisonment of over 1,100 people as hostages (including 777 children),6 and ended "'with the deaths of at least 334 people""'.

"'ONLY THE SECOND is sourced"':

* BBC, 22 December 2006cite web|http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6202735.stm|BBC, 22 December 2006:"The Beslan school siege in September 2004 killed at least 331 people, many of them children. "

* The Washington Post, September 7, 2004cite web |http://web.archive.org/web/20180729202041/https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A463-2004Sep6.html|The Washington Post, September 7, 2004: "'"Russian officials revised the death toll Monday down to 334, including 156 children. But close to 200 people remained missing, out of the total number of hostages that officials now say was 1,180.""'

* The Boston Globe. 8 December 2006cite web|https://web.archive.org/web/20071017001115/http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2006/12/08/woman_injured_in_2004_russian_siege_dies/: "...bringing the total death toll to 334, a Beslan activist said....Two other former hostages died of their wounds last year and another died last August, which had brought the overall death toll to 333 -- a figure that does not include the hostage-takers." ".

Information relevant to Putin concerning the tragic 1999 apartment bombings

Hello again. I don't mean to cause problems, but I have noticed that the neutrality issue I raised on the Russian apartment bombings page has come to a close. To me, that seems to imply that the people concerned think that page is currently 'neutral' in perspective on the issue, with regard to the facts. From my perspective as an outsider to the field of Russian history and politics, it is manifestly obvious that if the statement included in the lead section of that page which reads:

"According to historians, the bombings were coordinated by the Russian state security services to bring Putin into the presidency."

is considered a well-cited and uncontroversial statement on the 'Russian apartment bombings' page, then it should be added to this page. My call for further citiations for that statement has been removed, and at least one new source was added. To me, it seems to mean that the statement is considered both cited and neutral by the community. The only question left is whether or not the statement is relevant to this page, and consistent with the guidelines for biographies of living persons. I am currently of the persuasion that it is, but if I am wrong, please let me know. It should be added to the fourth paragraph of the subsection entitled "1999: First premiership". The paragraph I am referencing currently reads:

"Yeltsin's main opponents and would-be successors were already campaigning to replace the ailing president, and they fought hard to prevent Putin's emergence as a potential successor. Following the Russian apartment bombings, Putin's law-and-order image and unrelenting approach to the Second Chechen War against the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria soon combined to raise his popularity and allowed him to overtake his rivals."

After my edit, the whole paragraph would read as follows:

"Yeltsin's main opponents and would-be successors were already campaigning to replace the ailing president, and they fought hard to prevent Putin's emergence as a potential successor. Following the Russian apartment bombings, Putin's law-and-order image and unrelenting approach to the Second Chechen War against the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria soon combined to raise his popularity and allowed him to overtake his rivals. According to historians, the bombings were coordinated by the Russian state security services to bring Putin into the presidency."

Here's what my edit does not do:

-It does NOT promote a claim about what actually happened in the bombings. It is a claim about what historians believe happened.

-It absolutely doesn't accuse President Putin of any wrongdoing whatsoever. This is a claim about what historians say about the FSB, not a claim that Putin "dun did it".

-It conforms to the statements made by the leading KGB FSB scholar in the Western world.

-It brings an important statement (considered to be neutral on the 'Russian apartment bombings' page) to a relevant part of Putin's page, giving us some clarity about the circumstances surrounding the ascension of Putin to the presidency.

I hope:

-It's not true and the statements made by the scholars, investigators, journalists and witnesses are all wrong.

-If this statement isn't allowed on this page because of lack of good citations, then it must be removed on the other page as well, or at least put in question with a 'citations needed' banner. It could also just be modified.

-We will treat this living person's biography like any other person's biography.

-We can maintain a respectful decorum in this conversation and just 'go from the sources'.

There is absolutely no need to label me as your enemy or your friend- I am neither. I'm not taking a position against what you believe I'm not taking a position for what you believe either. I am merely copy-pasting a sentence and the sources for that sentence from one page to a second page because the information seems extremely relevant on the second page. I think that my claim that the sentence is relevant to this page is unquestionable, but that may be wrong too.

I (or you) will make the edit to this page after a period of time if there is no discussion of what I have written here, or after a consensus is reached on this page.

My goal is 100% neutrality and verifiability- just going from the sources. Simple. No disrespect to anyone is implied by the edit.

Geographyinitiative09:10, 25 May 2019 (UTC) "'(modified)"'

What might be agreed on other pages, particularly those of less prominence, does not automatically apply here. I would point out that no peer-reviewed academic article or book published in the academic press has made that claim. Historians who believe that these were false flag operations do not agree on the reasons for it. In any case, what goes into this article is determined by the weight provided to the topic in sources about the topic. An alternative view is that Yeltsin resigned because his popularity rating was at 2%, he was a serious alcoholic with heart issues and was facing investigation for corruption. Presidents have resigned for less. The Four Deuces TFD 20:20, 27 May 2019 (UTC)