Talk:Rinat Akhmetov

message: This wikipedia page is currently linked as reference in an ongoing email spam campagin that claims Mr. Akhmetov wants to give away some of his money.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.247.42.203 (talk) 09:39, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page used in ongoing email spam campaign (Feb 2021) 

message: Why are you so intent on pushing the point of view that this man is a criminal when he has never been charged with a crime?
:Hi. First of all, let me thank you for contributing to Wikipedia on such an underdeveloped topic as Ukraine. Your input has been reasonable, although breaking some encyclopedia rules. I think I did my best to keep your info and present your POV restyled. Recently, I added links to the sources explaining the wide-spread image of Mr.Akhmetov as a gangster. Judging by the fact that you've deleted your own above-posted statement, we finally coming to an agreement :)
:However, please don't blank any pages again unless it is YOUR talk page. Talking about your pages, I invite to become a full-scale Wikipedian with a username, signed posts and other info that would help interacting with you. Best wishes, Ukrained 23:17, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  a 

message: Reminder note to me for when article protection from editing stops on October 26, 2010: Akhmetov is member of Rada since 2006. — Mariah-Yulia • Talk to me! 02:36, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rada Member 

message: There seems to be an averse reaction by at least one editor in regards to Akhmetov's connections to organized crime. What, if any, are the drawbacks from these reports that constitute "libel"? From what I see they are mentioned in government reports and academic journals, so it's very much a documented part of his biography, like it or not. Comments?--Львівське (talk) 03:42, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: He is widely reported to have ties to organized crime - this sentence has been deleted as still seems to be poorly sourced; being claimed the point of view of majority, still though needs to substantiate it by more convincing sources.    Only two references were provided, one is for Kyivpost paragraph redirecting to a dead link  , the other link seems to belong to a category of lnks to be avoided due to the fact it requires payment .  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orekhova (talk • contribs) 07:39, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:ELREG, which you mention for the second link, is a guideline for external links, not for references. Pay sites may be used as sources in articles. —C.Fred (talk) 14:00, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disputed information? 

message: When one of the alleged "unverified libels" is the addition of a scholarly journal as a source, it's pretty clear which version of the page in the dispute to protect. To the editor(s) attempting to remove the content, please explain, on this talk page, how the cited sources are flawed. If discussion yields consensus to remove them, then they can be removed. —C.Fred (talk) 05:04, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Renat Akhmetov, the richest Ukrainian oligarch and one of the informal leaders of the Party of Regions, had to leave Ukraine for some time after the “Orange Revolution” to avoid an investigation into his alleged role in organized crime in the Donetsk region. In 2005, Borys Kolesnikov, a rich businessman and a friend of Renat Akhmetov since the their alleged involvement in organized crime in the late 1980s and early 1990s and his close associate in the Party of Regions, was arrested by the Orange government on charges of extortion and conspiracy to assassinate a rival Donetsk businessman. In 2005, Yushchenko had initiated the successful reversal of Renat Akhmetov and Viktor Pinchuk’s Kuchma-backed non-competitive privatization of Kryvorizhstal, the largest Ukrainian steel mill (which later sold for $4.7 billion). However, Renat Akhmetov’s political influence rose significantly after the investigations against him and Borys Kolesnikov were dropped, and the Party of Regions formed the government in August 2006. 
Just to make clear that nothing is being misconstrued or a POV is being pushed on this matter. --Львівське (talk) 05:14, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page protection 

message: here. — Mariah-Yulia • Talk to me! 03:03, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interesting article for future editing: 

message: if you cite an allegedly official report of Ministry of Internal Affairs, why would not you provide a link to this report stored at the official website of the Ministry, instead of having referred to the website of The Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), which is an investigative journalism program and  by no means is the official source of Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orekhova (talk • contribs) 06:21, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  A reliable source? 

message: neither is any reliable English-language source provided, nor the Wiki's NPOV policy is observed. The word "thug" is offensive and endorses a particular point of view by an individual journalist and can be considered as a biased statement.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orekhova (talk • contribs) 11:20, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: would you prefer "hired goon"?Львівське (talk) 23:44, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The machine-translated quote is "Akhmetov's past is also somewhat obscure. According to its officials, he 'made a lot of money playing poker' in the years preceding the collapse of the Soviet Union. Already the journalist Serhiy Kuzin, author of Donetsk Mafia, says the billionaire would have worked like the mafia thug, which will execute the orders of several people." Is there a Portuguese speaker in the house? I'm wondering if "strongman" might be the better English approximation of the term, but I'd like that confirmed by someone who's good with the language to make sure that's what the writer of the article means (the article being cited was not written by Kuzin). —C.Fred (talk) 00:16, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The word in question here is "capanga" which also google-translates to 'henchman' or 'hitman' (I guess depending on context)--Львівське (talk) 00:23, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It was not the incorrect translation that was referred to, but the appropriateness of labeling such controversial names to a public figure, without even backing it by reliable third-party sources, which is contrary to Wiki policies as for Biographies of living persons and Neutral point of view.Orekhova (talk) 09:11, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Everything in the article has been backed up fairly reliably. All of the previous accusations of "libel" were dismissed once everything was properly cited and presented in an agreed upon, neutral, manner. I don't think there's anything inappropriate with the labelling as it stands, but if one of the above synonyms works I wouldn't mind, as long as the original source's point is not skewed.--Львівське (talk) 03:42, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

text: This just reeks of corruption leading the law. I don't think we can really take what happens in Ukraine all too seriously, at least from a historical standpoint. If matters happened after the fact disputing his past that can be included, but it doesn't retroactively rewrite what has already been alleged or proven.--Львівське (talk) 03:39, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  mind your POV, please 

message: Guys, I have protected this page due to the constant edit warring on this page. BLP policy states that we must remove any factually incorrect, dubious, and uncited information on pages of living persons due to legal and libel concerns of the such. Information from reliable and serious sources can be mentioned; again, we should be careful not to misuse this ability and not use any unverifiable sources or speculation. 
Don't edit war and rather constructively edit the page, providing reliable sources for anything that we state in this article otherwise it must be removed as per BLP policy. If anything let's create a sandboxed version that is compliant with Wikipedia policy, addresses all of our concerns, and is properly attributed on this page here.
Scouring the internet online for a little while, I have found two such sources, both of which qualify as RS;
* the OCCRP (here) "Rinat Akhmetov, the country’s richest man and member of parliament, won the judgment despite being mentioned in a report by the Chief department on organized crime titled, “Overview of the Most Dangerous Organized Crime Structures in Ukraine.” It listed him and hundreds of others. The report lists..."
* The Nation (here) "Shortly after the Orange Revolution, a murder investigation was launched against the country's richest oligarch, Rinat Akhmetov, Yanukovich's main backer. Akhmetov fled the country. In exile in Monaco, he turned to..."
Both are known and reliable publications. These can be used and referenced in the article, however we must be careful not to imply anything that is not true, just to state what is known based upon reliable sources that we may come across and properly cite and reference them as such, again following proper BLP policy. 
Other internet sources that I have come across have only provided *allegations that Akhmetov participated in organized crime without persecution (which is true, he was never officially indicted on any charges). Again, these allegations must be cited and referenced with reliable sources (newspaper articles, *official reports, etc). Would be beneficial if we can find a proper newspaper articles from RS such as Korrespondent or Zerkalo Nedeli, although I am sure they are just as cautious of publishing potentially untrue information like we are with our BLP policy. --ddima/talk 21:06, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Just in case, to avoid violation of BLP policy, I have edited out the disputed information  like so until the issue is resolved here. There is a citation which is a deadlink, unless it can be found elsewhere, we cannot use it and it must be removed. --ddima/talk 21:16, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Dear DDima, thank you for your concern and suggestions. My thinking is that to this point it is better to leave article as it is; though not disputing the existence of rumors and allegations as for Rinat Akhmetov criminal ties, I think it is better to omit them here unless they are verified by truly reliable sources.Orekhova (talk) 07:08, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This is only a temporary resolution, again WP should try to portray articles in a true and accurate light, always maintaining verifiability and accuracy and even if there are allegations they should be mentioned in the article with appropriate RS. --ddima/talk 15:34, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree, I am not against mentioning allegations, but they should not be presented as facts. Even if mentioned in reliable sources, allegation is just an wild guess unless confirmed by official accusation or judgement, and should be named accordingly.--Orekhova (talk) 06:10, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

text: Dima, I don't think a resolution can be made here. The content itself is legitimate, and CFred was fine with it and even helped in creating it after the last few attacks by Akhemotov-censor accounts. These 2 now pop up with the same arguments, even with the proper sourcing. Of course they will be fine with the content removed, they wanted it removed, but without any good reason. I feel that this should be a matter left to veteran users or maybe consult with an expert on the subject, not current makeup (vets vs. new accounts created solely to editwar on this page). I wouldn't be surprised if Orekhova/Komul were socks, either of eachother or of the previously banned users who did the same content removal attacks. --Львівське (talk) 07:51, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I have seen the history of the page and have also thought about every possibility. Then if anything, let's take this matter over to WP:BLP/N and see what they do about the matter over there and what they would suggest is accurate/verifiable that should be kept in the article. --ddima/talk 15:34, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: While this is a delayed response, considering the recent edits and my willingness to see this process through (I took a wikibreak last time in the middle of it) I'd be willing to participate over at BLP/N.--Львівське (говорити) 18:34, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected, pending constant [[WP:EDITWAR|edit warring]] 

message: Hello, could someone fix the broken reflink with a line break please?:
*[http://zik.com.ua/en/news/2009/12/15/208730 
Petro Pysarchuk (Lviv) among top 10 philanthropists of Ukraine], Z I K (December 15, 2009)]
--Ben Ben (talk) 16:13, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hello, this article is protected so far.  Orekhova (talk) 07:12, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I know, but as the edit is uncontroversial, any administrator could make the edit to the protected page. Have found the adequate tag now.— Preceding unsigned comment added by  Ben Ben  (talk • contribs)  16:28, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: . I have removed the wikilink within the reference, which has no use and upsets the format in the reflist. JohnCD (talk) 20:37, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks.--Ben Ben (talk) 18:06, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  External link with a line break 

message: The full section either should be removed as violating the WIKI BLP, verifiability and NPOV policy or fully rewritten, avoiding presentation of allegations as facts. Now come the details.  
Statement "Akhmetov is widely alleged to have ties to organized crime" is supported by a broken link. www.golocalprov.com (“GoLocalProv”) is an  Internet website based in Providence, Rhode Island , published in 2010 allegations much like those retracted by the Kyiv Post etc.  Subsequently, the Providence Journal engaged in a detailed review of the allegations on GoLocalProv’s site and published an investigative piece that fully discredited those allegations and the sources on which they were based.  The Providence Journal concluded that “key elements of the [GoLocalProv] story are false or unproven” and that the story presented “suspicions, suggestions, innuendo, and conspiracy theories” as fact - here is the supporting link http://www.politifact.com/rhode-island/article/2010/oct/23/website-ignores-key-facts-link-chafee-organized-cr/ so it is either more reasonable to delete this reference or expand to reflect the whole story, which seems to me less attributive to do.
::Fair enough, this would help debunk the Chaffee allegations, however, it is an example of another allegation linking him to the criminal world. Something like, "to which he denies" could be added to the original statement.--Львівське (talk) 17:11, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:OR is when you or I make assertions or conclusions based on things we find the source material. The source material here, buy a guy as renowned as Ivan Katchanovski, cannot be OR in its own right.--Львівське (talk) 17:11, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure the mixup with the links here, perhaps it's because I didn't have a copy of 'Donetsk Mafia' laying around, but I found it to be another example of the media reporting on these ties. The Donetsk court findings, IMO, are very dubious when you consider that the courts are run by the same mobsters that Kuzin is trying to expose. An addendum may be in order here to clarify or expand on what happened with 'Donetsk Mafia', rather than delete it in its own right. Kuzin remains a very reliable source, and that the courts found this only adds to the controversy (especially when you consider Akhmetov's 'libel wars' and censorship in the media, which should be added to the article).--Львівське (talk) 17:11, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

text: Very Soviet...yikes...--Львівське (talk) 17:11, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

text: It's from a journal article published in a book. It counts as a scholarly source, not OR.--Львівське (talk) 17:11, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

text: It's another report "linking" him and should be taken for what its worth. That Lutsenko is in prison now has more to do with Ukraine becoming an authoritarian police-state now under Yanukovych-Akhmetov, rather than whether the source is reliable.--Львівське (talk) 17:11, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

text: What do I need to verify in that statement? Ukraine's slip into authoritarianism is well documented common knowledge.--Львівське (говорити) 14:49, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

text: Thank you Komul for bringing this YouTube Channel to the article . It seems like someone is working very closely to the subject in question. Närking (talk) 10:05, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edition out 

message: I added some info and templates for further modification/discussion to the section in order to  and Wiki BLP, Verifiability and NPOV policies are observed --Orekhova (talk) 12:02, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Although I'm too busy to research right now, there most certainly are publications on Akhmetov's own public confession in close relations with organized crime, made in 2005. He then said something like "Talking to such people was the only way to do business in 1990s Ukraine". Somebody may harvest that link. Ukrained (talk) 23:31, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

text: I've finally gotten around to going over Orekhova's edits and it's very unsettling to see he added some sources which I would deem to be in bad faith, in order to discredit the Kuzin book's veracity. --Львівське (говорити) 02:17, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alleged links to organized crime section 

message: I moved it near the top but it was recently put down. What makes more sense, business or the controversy? Personally, I put it in chronological order, and since that section deals with the 80s and his beginnings, it made sense to do it before business (which starts in 1996, and mostly focuses on 2000+)--Львівське (говорити) 07:47, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Placement

message: I attempted to remove these but was reverted. Why are they in the article? They are an extreme case of WP:UNDUE and above all are poorly translated gobledy gook. Systemic approaches? The happiness of a child? #Winning? This is a joke, right?--Львівське (говорити) 14:46, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Akhmetov charity quotes 

message: Could you explain how these could be constructive edits? diff. 
*As far as I see you turned "Akhmetov is widely alleged to have ties to organized crime." which is sourced and accurate into the convoluted "Rumors about Rinat Akhmetov' criminal ties are as widespread as disputable.  Some journalists and researchers have been speculating on allegedly criminal past of Rinat Akhmetov." 
*You then proceeded to delete the entire accurately sourced Kuzin paragraph.
*Reinserted weird < br> markings into the code...?
*Inserted { main|}} links improperly
*Turned all of the info on the foundation and his rankings that I turned into prose back into lists
*Reinserted all of the junk about him visiting orphanages and other WP:UNDUE info
*All of the company info that isn't biographical nor encyclopedic. Can someone explain what the following even means? "these figures are referred to SCM assets value; growth of the value should not be attributed to coming to power of the friendly political party but to a great extent to the decision of the Company's key shareholder, according to which the profit is not distributed"?????
--Львівське (говорити) 16:01, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I won't argue here about wiki markup; as for what you call non-constructive edits - I'm afraid it is you who are exxagerating criminal theme here via putting dubious statements in each paragraph, even not related to this. Your activities here should fairly be regarded as vandalism, as the whole row of sustaining examples of vandalism actions from your side can be found here, like removing parts about Akhmetov' family, his charity activities - as considered junk by you; you are also persistently replacing paragraphs about alleged crime ties with dubious, biased statements. I did not remove any good sourced content in the past, rather complemented it with legal opinions. Any other allegations on Rinat Akhmetov' complicity for law violations are still allegations as not proven juridically and can be regarded as libel. --Orekhova (talk) 14:30, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Making things up doesn't make your case stronger. I never, as you claim, committed vandalism or removed "his family" (I moved it to an appropriate section and put it into prose from your point form list); I never removed his notable contributions, just condensed and put it into prose and copy-edited it (I removed his giant list of quotes per WIKI policy on quotes, however, which was junk). I never "replaced" paragraphs with biased statements, just included properly sourced material that you don't seem to like. How about you engage in some actual discussion here and point on what is biased, what is NPOV, and what is not properly sourced? You know, rather than making blasee comments and waving your arms about without actual making a concrete point. I've talked enough so far on this page, and in edit summaries, with you ignoring me. Just because alleged activity is not proven does not make it libel. These are notable statements in the media and other reputable sources regarding his past. That is not the definition of libel; I suggest you brush up on your legal rhetoric.--Львівське (говорити) 02:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

text: I just want to get some actual discussion going rather than the current state of affairs, which is to put tags and headers where they don't belong and petition for page-locking to lack of an actual argument. I think it's plain as day at this point that Orekhova is a PR rep, just like the previous editors who came and went who shouted libel and BLP violations to censor the negative press. Akhmetov is getting ripped apart in the press right now for his illegal/shady acquisitions, and I'd love to include more detail on this affair in the article, but can't because it's locked due to a PR rep doing damage control.--Львівське (говорити) 04:16, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

text: I hope you could find time to keep all interested users informed of this page' protection developments as well as of all relevant actions of User:Orekhova as well as counteractions. Unfortunately, (s)he forgot to inform us of their protection request. In good faith, I hope. Ukrained (talk) 04:31, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The request was denied and then put in place anywhere, which kind of irks me.--Львівське (говорити) 05:19, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orekhova 

message: Since there has been some doubt cast as to whether Kuzio is a reliable source, I figured I'd post just who he is. He's a Fellow at John Hopkins University, visiting prof @ George Washington University  and the University of Birmingham, former resident Fellow at the University of Toronto, and post-doctoral fellow @ Yale. According to his site he has authored over 14 books and 60 journal articles on Ukraine/post-communist politics. I think it's plain as day that the guy is a legit figure to be making claims on this subject matter.--Львівське (говорити) 06:26, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I have read works of Mr. Kuzio; and although I like his style (ands he has written some very interesting pieces) I can not help to think he does not bother to be neutral.... and has a strong dislike of the "Donetsk clan".... I always only use (here on Wikipedia) the facts he presents; not his conclusions (I would advice all to do the same)... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 18:32, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Are there any opinions present in the article? I've mostly used him for facts AFAIK--Львівське (говорити) 20:56, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Taras Kuzio]] 

message: This section needs to be 1) renamed as Rinat Akhmetov was never held liable and the section name seems to be POV-pushing 2) re-written as it contains serious accusations and libel elements that are either poorly supported or not supported at all. --Orekhova (talk) 13:11, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I rather wait with working on the article till after our 3th party request for neutrality advice has bared fruit... Although renaming the section is a good idea. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 18:29, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

text: Once again, Orekhova has problem with "support" (sources) without actually pointing out what is wrong with any particular source. The ambiguity continues. As far as the title is concerned, what would be more appropriate? --Львівське (говорити) 20:26, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Any title would be appropriate that does not violate Wiki BLP rule. I prefer Disputes or Controversies as his criminal ties is nothihng more than rumours. --Orekhova (talk) 10:08, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: We already have a subtopic on disputes, and while controversies is a correct topic...it's vague, the topic should be defined, and in this case it's specifically about the mafia connection.--Львівське (говорити) 19:00, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Organized crime 

message: The article (in my opinion) has a complete wrong structure... It should be more structured like Yulia Tymoshenko where all the controversies are incorporated in her biography and her image in a Cultural and political image-section. Right now there are 3 (sub-)chapters in this article about disputes and/or controversies; de-linking these disputes (in this article) from his career makes not for a good read and deprives the reader of "the big pictures" and could encourages WP:SYNTH-editing/reading. Furthermore just being a member of Parliament is not a "Political Career" (if he had been a minister like Petro Poroshenko he would have a career). A stand-alone chapter Political Career should not be in this article I believe. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 16:38, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: PS This article is not about the book Donetsk Mafia: Anthology; way too much sentences are spend on that book now.... Just state the book is controversial and info about any co-authors of the book could be placed as a footnote. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 16:47, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Where do you suggest we place all the organized crime / past stuff then, just into his early life and pre-career info? I think that would be fine. Also, I agree about the WP:UNDUE given to the Donetsk Mafia book, which itself is only mentioned in passing twice. I think the 'controversy' part of the business section could be under its own sub-topic of privatization and monopoly, which is covered in the media quite a bit (but I've yet to include it). What do you suggest we do with the political stuff? It's a career, he's the main financier of the Party of Regions and has played a role in a lot of behind-the-scenes politics.--Львівське (говорити) 17:26, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it started off as part of his early life bio, and then after an edit war and myself adding more info on it, it was spun off into its own sub-topic ("because it's unfounded allegations, BLP libel! blah blah!"). As for politics, sure, if there is a better phrasing than "political career", but the politics is its own sub section, separate from his business career. You're absolutely right about him having interest in politics solely to protect his business. He and Yanukovych go way back, a lot of this is covered in the Wilson book.--Львівське (говорити) 18:57, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

text: For the record, I did attempt to move the mafia stuff beneath 'early life' so that the article would have a chronological flow, but was reverted  --Львівське (говорити) 23:34, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

text: btw, there is a dispute open at the moment
http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard/Archive_24#Rinat_Akhmetov--Львівське (говорити) 18:57, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I had noticed that . — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 22:11, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

text: Fine by me, open to suggestions --Львівське (говорити) 00:47, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yulia, thank you for active participation in these discussions. Do you think it is better to mention all controversies in other sections, following, like, chronological order? If yes, I'm okay with it, though feel sick of all that attacks. --Orekhova (talk) 12:00, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

text: It's hard to resolve the issues filed (everywhere, there are several cases open) when the filing party doesn't want to be specific in what the issue even is.--Львівське (говорити) 22:42, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

text: I provide my arguments every time I make edits here. Do you mean I have to ask you first before doing any edit? When citing Sleddog116 I did not mean he approved my edit - I just used the phrase construction he proposed to use; I did not "just delete" any important information - I even expanded the sentence with the names. And I did not name Hans van Zon a "Geography Professor" - I just mentioned him working at Geography Department. I'm fully open for discussion --Orekhova (talk) 18:13, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: You've yet to make any sort of coherent argument so far to explain your edits, just vague nonsense. You did delete information, included sources so far today. You "expanded" the sentence with 2 names of like 6 sources used (not to mention, the phrase was meant broadly, you dont have to name them all, they are all referenced later in the paragraph). Your assertion of Van Zon working in some geography department isn't supported (as mentioned above). The latter is another example of you ignoring the talk page this entire time; if you're open to discussion, then do it.--Львівське (говорити) 18:23, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

text: I think the difference between Renat and Yanhilde is that the latter...it was a small conviction and not a big part of his bio. With the former, it's a huge part of his bio, and even with business, it's linked heavily. With Yanu, he's a politician...his small conviction wasn't really related (or was it? I mean this is OR on my part speaking freely, but he was a criminal and involved with the donetsk clan, and worked his way up, so its kinda related)--Львівське (говорити) 19:31, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

text: Objections to asking? By all means, the more the merrier! --Львівське (говорити) 23:25, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  No objections, but the dispute has been closed at the Dispute resolution noticeboard... Are you going to start a new one? --Orekhova (talk) 08:07, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  There is no requirement for sources to be in English.  Good quality English language sources are merely preferred.  See WP:NONENG.  A good quality Russian or Ukrainian language source is better than a low quality English language source.--Toddy1 (talk) 10:03, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

text: Yes the article is much too negative about its subject.--Toddy1 (talk) 18:31, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

text: By the way, it would be nice to cover the URLs.  Websites often restructure, messing up URLs.  If the citations give the source, title, and date of the story it helps a lot.--Toddy1 (talk) 18:31, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  New outline of the article is needed (in my opinion) 

message: I got the feeling that since now/today the article now has a logical chronological order. Now we need to work on the tone... For example I am not sure what the info about Borys Kolesnikov is doing now in the article.... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 16:54, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes the article is much too negative about its subject.--Toddy1 (talk) 18:31, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

text: By the way, it would be nice to cover the URLs.  Websites often restructure, messing up URLs.  If the citations give the source, title, and date of the story it helps a lot.--Toddy1 (talk) 18:31, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Chronological order now in order

message: Who calls him Renat? Seems very few, google search showed 11,000 results vs 125,000 for rinat. Seems kinda fringe to insert these in the lede, and the Tatar spelling without a source. --Львівське (говорити) 15:01, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: People in Donetsk do.  I know this from personal experience, so I do not have a source.--Toddy1 (talk) 19:12, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Except people in Donetsk don't speak English...right? I'm a bit confused about all of this. Are they spelling it 'Renat' in cyrillic? --Львівське (говорити) 22:18, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: People from Donetsk do business in English every day.--Toddy1 (talk) 05:59, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  This sounds a lot like WP:OR...--Львівське (говорити) 15:43, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well I have added some sources, so there is no problem.--Toddy1 (talk) 15:46, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  It still seems to be a fringe minority in English, so I removed the second translit since it makes the lede super long & it's not necessary because common use doesn't exist.--Львівське (говорити) 17:26, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Renat? 

message: Recent edit that needs to be removed without starting an edit war, here. Following the figures section on wealth, Orekhova inserted:
:"Actually, these figures are referred to SCM assets value; growth of the value should not be attributed to coming to power of the friendly political party (*citation from company blog*) but to a great extent to the decision of the Company's key shareholder, according to which the profit is not distributed and traditionally invested into further development of SCM (*citations from company blog*)"
This is textbook original research and synthesis. Users cannot make their own inferences, and say "actually, contrary to the above...XYZ...according to this primary source, ZXY". Can another editor chime in before without me having to be bold on this plain-sight violation? --Львівське (говорити) 17:49, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  WP:OR and unreliable sources, oh my 

message: is he Crimean Tatar???.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.164.118.2 (talk) 10:16, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Tatar??

message: example "The protests against Akhmetov are ongoing and planned to increase."
  Ongoing when? 2014? 2021? 
Nearly every article about this very fast-moving Ukraine crisis is full of such present tense statements, obviously quoting directly from the linked reference. Some of the claimed current situations are reversed in a week, but not updated (perhaps the reversal gets a separate section). 
Please whoever is in charge of this category, keep an eye on this. KoolerStill (talk) 19:08, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Please don't use present tense

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Rinat Akhmetov. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110411133255/http://www.fdu.org.ua:80/en/news/84 to http://www.fdu.org.ua/en/news/84
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:11, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 15 external links on Rinat Akhmetov. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120124205400/http://www.kyivpost.com/news/politics/detail/121085/ to http://www.kyivpost.com/news/politics/detail/121085/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090107014947/http://www.ethicalcorp.com/content_print.asp?ContentID=5567 to http://www.ethicalcorp.com/content_print.asp?ContentID=5567
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111002172708/http://www.rbc.ua/rus/newsline/2008/06/26/388749.shtml to http://www.rbc.ua/rus/newsline/2008/06/26/388749.shtml
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6CUYVsMZz?url=http://files.korrespondent.net/projects/top50/2006 to http://files.korrespondent.net/projects/top50/2006
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6CUYXhnX0?url=http://files.korrespondent.net/projects/top50/2007 to http://files.korrespondent.net/projects/top50/2007
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6CUYZQl3l?url=http://files.korrespondent.net/projects/top50/2008 to http://files.korrespondent.net/projects/top50/2008
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6CUYatHh3?url=http://files.korrespondent.net/projects/top50/2009 to http://files.korrespondent.net/projects/top50/2009
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/68pUhEOjt?url=http://files.korrespondent.net/projects/top50/2010 to http://files.korrespondent.net/projects/top50/2010
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6CUYcKteH?url=http://files.korrespondent.net/projects/top50/2011/1227619 to http://files.korrespondent.net/projects/top50/2011/1227619
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6DZRcyKR1?url=http://files.korrespondent.net/projects/top50/2012/1433983 to http://files.korrespondent.net/projects/top50/2012/1433983
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110716132449/http://donbass-arena.com/en/arena/char/ to http://donbass-arena.com/en/arena/char/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110903001307/http://www.fdu.org.ua/en/cat/47 to http://www.fdu.org.ua/en/cat/47
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6CSeuyo8l?url=http://kontrakty.ua/rankings/150 to http://companies.kontrakty.ua/rankings/150-krupnejjshie-blagotvoritelnye-fondy-publichnykh-ukraincev-2010.html
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6CUYoV9nP?url=http://www.president.gov.ua/documents/12238.html to http://www.president.gov.ua/documents/12238.html
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6CUYpkDLo?url=http://app.com.pk/en_/index.php?option=com_content to http://app.com.pk/en_/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=14775
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:22, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Rinat Akhmetov. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140213162446/http://files.korrespondent.net/projects/top50/2013/1631584 to http://files.korrespondent.net/projects/top50/2013/1631584
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:28, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I ask to discuss 1-3 paragraphs of the section "Sports and patronage" (). According the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require, I disclose my employer: Rinat Akhmetov's press service. --Kirotsi (talk) 20:53, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Sports and patronage

message: I ask to discuss the section "Philanthropy" (). According the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require, I disclose my employer: Rinat Akhmetov' press service. --Kirotsi (talk) 14:36, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Philanthropy

message: I ask to discuss the subsection "SCM Group" (). According the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require, I disclose my employer: Rinat Akhmetov' press service. --Kirotsi (talk) 06:51, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: SCM Group

message: The whole article reads almost as if written by the subject's own PR team, with detailed emphasis on philantropy and overly dismissive descriptions of accusations as "false" and "baseless", even those that have not been defeated in court or otherwise retracted.
One of the richest oligarchs of Ukraine can afford to employ tens of "voluntary" Wikipedians to polish his image, and we must not be so naïve that we overlook the possible influence of state actors, especially during such dramatic times as these. Even veteran Wikipedians can be corrupt.
I urge you to take the role of Wikipedia as a major information war battleground seriously, and to strongly regulate and constrain editing of this and all other pages that can affect public perceptions of the belligerents and their possible agents, allies and partners. If this is not feasible, you should at least liberally mark all such pages with a notice that they may be affected by information war efforts. Elias (talk) 10:25, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Objectivity/impartiality concerns 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:37, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: Rinat has financed organizations close to the Anti-Maidan movement. 2A02:3030:805:7E52:1:0:3D29:CA9F (talk) 21:27, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Anti-Maidan" funding