Talk:Mikhail Khodorkovsky/Archive 1

message: I think this article is very interesting and pretty exhaustive in its level of detail. Not wanting to completely blanche it of its character, I do have one or two problems with it: in the section that essentially says, 'well, what goes around comes around' it says that the 'redistribution' going on is 'strictly within the law'. From what I can gather from following this story that is a pretty contentious comment. In fact hasn't Khodorkovsky's entire defence rested on the fact that the case against him is essentially illegal? 
I also have a problem with the word 'redistribution' as it implies that somehow the destruction of Yukos will result in more people benefitting, or even owning a stake in it. Although, on the acquisition of the subsidiary Yukansneftgas the state effectively renationalised a large slice of the oil industry I think it important to emphasise that if any 'redistribution' is going, on rightly or wrongly, it is not going to 'the people'. Basically, in my mind, 'redistribution' is a word loaded with a socialist history, and I don't think the destruction of Yukos was done in the name of socialism. Anyway I am new to Wikipedia, impressed with it and wanted to test my thoughts on the 'talk' section, before launching into anything so bold as 'editing'.
I removed some of the arrest details; they were more tabloid than encylopedic. I hope you understand. As a rule, it is best to stick with the essential facts. Hope you agree with this.  Looks like a fascinating story; I wonder how it will further unfold. -- Viajero 09:29, 1 Nov 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: and prosecuting Russia's most prominent and successful oligarch is helpful to his political career and intended candidacy for the Duma.
It is speculative and not entirely neutral (I tweaked it). In a news article, it is ok, but not in an encyclopedia.
Also, dates usually don't have to be linked; only the most important (ie, DOB). See Wikipedia:Make only links relevant to the context. 
Nice article; keep up the good work! -- Viajero 13:44, 2 Nov 2003 (UTC)

message: Graf 4: What is "BLKSM"?? The initial reference was to Communist Youth League. That was changed to Komsomol, and now it is an abbreviation that is not widely known. Could this be changed to something recognizable, or could a first reference be placed higher in the article? --Tim
:: The correct abbreviation is "VLKSM". This is the same as "Komsomol", which is the title of an article. Andres 00:06, 6 Nov 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  Khodorkovsky: BLKSM?? 

message: First, I must say great job on this article. It is a prime example of great work on wikipedia and I think it would be nominated as a featured article. But I see one possible problem currently that may need some tweaking throughout the article.
Russian president Vladimir Putin had made a tacit agreement with the oligarchs soon after he was elected in 2000 that he would not touch the huge wealth they had gained in crony dealings with state officials in the 1990s. In return, they were told to pay taxes and keep out of politics.
This statement seems logical and while I agree with it so, is there any actual way to prove this? If not, maybe the entry should be revised for a more neutral tone. Thoughts? --Dejitarob 20:44, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Russian president Vladimir Putin had made a tacit agreement with the oligarchs soon after he was elected in 2000 that he would not touch the huge wealth they had gained in crony dealings with state officials in the 1990s. In return, they were told to pay taxes and keep out of politics. 
Most of the oligarchs have chosen to keep low profiles — but not Khodorkovsky.''
It is hardly believable that this kind of deal was officially announced. Hence it is guesswork, even if correct. If it is an opinion of a serious political observer, please quote. Mikkalai 16:51, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vladimir Putin agreement with oligarchs 

message: The disputed piece removed:
:Russian president Vladimir Putin had made a tacit agreement with the oligarchs soon after he was elected in 2000 that he would not touch the huge wealth they had gained in crony dealings with state officials in the 1990s. In return, they were told to pay taxes and keep out of politics. 
Most of the oligarchs have chosen to keep low profiles — but not Khodorkovsky.''
It is hardly believable that this kind of deal was officially announced. Hence it is guesswork, even if correct. If it is an opinion of a serious political observer, please quote. Mikkalai 16:51, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guesswork removed 

message: As to the obvious, which is that the article as found was a typical up-to-the-line and sometimes-well-across piece of Khodorkovsky propaganda, and which truly needed a needle to pop that odious balloon, the reaction time proved it's pop was heard by the watchdogs. No surprise there. That you think your particular obfuscations and smokescreens (or do you prefer, "maskirovka") are effective with the masses, of course, you are partly correct... at least those Western masses who never set foot in country. EASY to fool them.
:I have removed everything, you won the argument by example, that is not good, but it worked anyway, emotional distress is natural. 
:You had one valid point, so did I - look at this banner. 
:  Gnomz007 18:56, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I know you have read my apology - my heart was in it, I should not have used those words, but if I had half an IQ point more, I should not have wrote you in the first place, personal attacks are inapropriate, replying them is wrong, in some sense I did both, I quit, I know I'm a loose cannon, from now on no politics, I've had just two articles, and I've had enough.Gnomz007 20:13, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV dispute from anonymous user

message: Was it a specific one?
-G  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.117.158.83 (talk) 14:40, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: What was the Political Party he funded?

message: MarcMontoni, what is the source for your edit claiming that Khodorkovsky was repeatedly beaten by FSB officers upon arrest? Really Spooky 00:12, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Alleged beatings

message: some of this article seems to use what can only be described as prejudicial language...reads a bit more like an editorial than an enyclopedia article. At least a few phrases do. Like the bit about favorable media, etc.Novium 21:02, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  neutrality 

message: Trying to associate Khordokvsky's prision to his jewish heritage is an offense to the jewish people and an apology to crime, even if the arrest was political motivated. Like the "italian" mob, the "irish" mob, and so on, there's also a "jewish" mob, but of course that doesn't mean that all jews are mobsters.
Those guys stole assets that belonged to the Russian People, paying much, much less that they were worth to get them, beeing financed by outsiders who wanted to take advantage of the caos Russia was (and may be still) in.
They were obviously robbers, bandits, mobsters - Just That.
--Dfv10 04:42, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  theft 

message: And as you can see by taking a look on other famous jews articles, it is written on their biography that they are jews (e.g. Albert Einstein, Franz Kafka, Natalie Portman). Judaism is not just his religion, he was born to the jewish people! The fact that he doesn't consider himself as a jewish doesn't make him a non-jewish person. He can't change his genetics. His religion is not Jewish, but he was born to the Jewish people, and he has their genetics, so that makes him a Russian Jew. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.69.68.234 (talk) 22:54, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Khodorkovsky is a jew, 

message: It is interesting to see that given the contentiousness of this person very few people have bothered to source their accusations.  If you have an opinion on this guy (or you believe that other people have such an opinion), which you have based on fact, then back it up!  Moomot 19:22, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations 

message: This is very important! Khodorkovsky met with Cheney and big oil to discuss selling a share of Yukos to big oil, in order to make sure that his company was not going to be taken over by the government, and he would not face charges, and would be protected. That was one of the major reasons for his arrest. Putin did not want American companies to enter the oil market in Russia as major players and it was in national interest to him to keep them out. Also, there was a meeting between the big money makers in Russia who have owned these oil companies, and all agreed that they will start to pay taxes and then all will be forgiven. This meeting is not a myth and happened. Everyone at the meeting agreed. There was some tension at Lukoil, but otherwise everyone started to pay, except for our dear poor prosecuted friend Khodorkovsky, who continued his illegal ways. Putin was not too happy, and as a result of his arrest, I believe the figures were somthing like 80 billion of taxes from business, went up to around 220 billion in tax revenues following his arrest. It worked! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gutsalo (talk • contribs) 06:15, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cheney Link 

message: Resored material removed from article without discussion by Sovietsky pioneer  Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim  14:25, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Restored deleted material 

message: I almost think the article should be rewritten from scratch. There are huge swaths of unsourced text. This bio deservers much better it seems, but maybe its just me as usual :) Very interesting "story" but needs help. I could try I guess? Anyways, --Tom 15:01, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Article requires serious help