Talk:Russian National Unity

message: This article has a pro-fascist bias, which as well as being unpleasant is also contrary to the neutrality policy of Wikipedia. If someone can adjust this, please do!
87.127.137.165 19:47, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is in desperate need of editing 

message: The article har obviously been rewritten by someone who's pro-nazi.
It should be locked from further editing until someone cleans it up or something.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skickahit10 (talk • contribs) 14:34, August 26, 2007 (UTC) 
:Someone seems to have added what was probably a poor translation of a symphasizer's biography of the organization as the 'history' section. Lot of praise from neo-nazi's for it . Nimmo 10:14, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Apparently, it has been neutralized since December 2007. In fact (and I can't believe I'm saying this), the current version had some anti-RNE bias - whose idea is it that it's outlawed? Anyhow, is anyone against removing the NPOV tag? --Illythr (talk) 18:02, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not neutral 

message: To me it seems like this organisation is very much active as a terrorist organisation in Ukraine these days . Närking (talk) 06:52, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Ukraine is full of various in-house far-right terrorist organizations, so that does not wonder me.89.1.57.202 (talk) 22:50, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Active again 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Russian National Unity. 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/20140105072133/http://rusnation.org/ to http://www.rusnation.org/
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 02:12, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Russian National Unity. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20100615034620/http://rne-center.org:80/ to http://rne-center.org/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:54, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Remove the following WP:OR sourced to unreliable primary source:
:"Photographs and videos posted by RNU leader Alexander Barkashov on the Russian social media website VK confirm that RNU members have been active in Russian separatist militias in Donetsk and Crimea from 2014 through at least June 2021.[19]"
Apparently the person who added it today also agreed above "". Ping protecting admin . TolWol56 (talk) 19:58, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I would like an admin to confirm that the reference and statement violate Wikipedia policy before it is removed. Meteoritekid (talk) 22:54, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

text: And that edit was not added today; it is several days old.  The page is protected and that edit could not have been added today. Meteoritekid (talk) 22:56, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It didn't exist before your 9 March addition. I support the request and also agree that VK.com (WP:PRIMARY and WP:SPS) can't be used to make claim about the group's activities. ArvindPalaskar (talk) 05:41, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: My mistake, I was thinking of this edit, added on March 1st. The UTC timestamps threw me off; for me, it was the day prior.  I would still like a moderator to review. If the source is permissible, I would ask that it stays in the article.  Meteoritekid (talk) 20:20, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: As already mentioned at ANI, there is no such thing as an administrative or moderator review of a WP:content dispute. Please work to resolving the dispute yourself by articulating why you believe the statement is supported by WP:reliable sources based on our policies and guidelines, especially WP:PRIMARY and WP:SPS. If you cannot articulate that, then you should withdraw your objection. If you really can't resolve the dispute, you can use some form of WP:Dispute resolution but none of these involving asking a moderator or administrative to issue some sort of ruling, that's simply not how things work. In this instance, WP:RSN is probably a good place to seek feedback if necessary since the dispute seems to primarily relate to the use of a social media account. All that being said, I also suggest the edit request is marked as answered for now since it seems there is a dispute meaning it is unlikely it can be considered uncontroversial WP:EDITXY. Nil Einne (talk) 01:45, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  by Cwmhiraeth. TolWol56 (talk) 17:14, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected edit request on 9 March 2022