Talk:2007 Constitution of Kyrgyzstan

message: It too deserves mention. Biruitorul 20:39, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. I added a link to it near the top of the article. -- Hux 05:30, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. Biruitorul 05:10, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 1993 Constitution

message: Is it possible to include the text of the constitution in the article? —Aiden 11:50, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not appropriate to include the full text of legal documents in Wikipedia articles. Wikisource is the place for those. -- Hux 18:05, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Does anyone even HAVE the text thereof? I can't seem to find it easily... 68.39.174.238 21:30, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Here we go. Cosika 02:08, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Sorry it looks like this is the one. Cosika 02:12, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's actually not even the previous one. It's older than that: it still refers to two houses of parliament. ;) -- Hux 04:33, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Text

message: "For Reforms!" (plural, with exclamation point) is the correct name of the opposition coalition. It's "За Реформы!" in Russian and all the Kyrgyz news sites print it that way - Google for "за реформы" and you'll see. -- Hux 05:34, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see now. Sorry, I was going by RFE which was reporting it just as "For Reforms." KazakhPol 18:38, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: For Reforms!

message: This really should be seen as the (perhaps final) part of the Tulip Revolution. The reforms instituted are what Bakiyev had promised when he was elected and Akayev got the boot. Thoughts? I'm thinking of making a Tulip Revolution template. KazakhPol 07:12, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that we should treat the Tulip Revolution the same way that Wikipedia treats other revolutions. For example, there are separate articles for the Russian Revolution of 1905 and the Russian Revolution of 1917, despite the fact that historians tend to view "the Russian Revolution" as a long process beginning in the early 20th century, peaking with the overthrow of the Tsar, continuing through the ensuing civil war and finally ending at some more or less arbitrary point when the Soviet system was considered to be fully established. Therefore, I think the solution is to aim for consistency and treat the Tulip Revolution as something that started and finished in 2005, the start being the February elections that spawned the protests leading to the ousting of Akayev, the end date being the presidential election in July that confirmed Bakiyev's legitimacy. -- Hux 07:31, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

text: PS Regarding your last edit of the article, "protester" is a much more common spelling than "protestor" (in fact, both Google and Firefox 2.0 attempt to correct you if you type in "protestor"). There's no vandalism there! ;) -- Hux 07:36, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tulip Revolution

message: Unfortunately this page is now very out of date. A lot has happened in the two months since the signing of the new constitution: essentially all the gains that were achieved in November have disappeared and the presidency has even more power than it did before. However, my Russian isn't anywhere near good enough to get the full info necessary to accurately update this article. Can someone more qualified have a go at it? -- Hux 07:44, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead and made some changes so that at least the article would be more up to date. I didn't go into a lot of detail, which I think is appropriate since detailed discussion of the events surrounding the adoption of the new constitution probably belong in the Politics of Kyrgyzstan article. However, the "Powers as outlined" section is still out of date since it refers to the November constitution, which has now been superseded. I'm trying to find more info on that... -- Hux 17:52, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: *New* new constitution

message: The entire article currently deals with the old constitution and needs to be rewritten for the new one adopted on June 27, 2010. Joriki (talk) 10:37, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: A new article has been created.  This page is now about the old constitution, although this page should perhaps be split into two articles to document the two different constitutions during this period.  ~~Andrew Keenan Richardson~~ 01:31, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  New new new constitution 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on 1993–2010 Constitution of Kyrgyzstan. 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/20070204064819/http://www.coe.int/T/E/Legal_Affairs/Legal_co-operation/Foreigners_and_citizens/Nationality/Documents/National_legislation/Kyrgyzstan%20Constitution%20of%20the%20Kyrghyz%20Republic.asp to http://www.coe.int/T/E/Legal_Affairs/Legal_co-operation/Foreigners_and_citizens/Nationality/Documents/National_legislation/Kyrgyzstan%20Constitution%20of%20the%20Kyrghyz%20Republic.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:25, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified