Talk:Igor Shafarevich

message: The article's quality would be greatly enhanced with a picture.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.186.24.116 (talk) 17:26, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Mathematics

message: I was trying to track down published sources for Miles Reid's observations. This has led me to Krista Berglund in Finland, who is finishing a dissertation on Shafarevich, which includes much material supplied by Reid. So sources will be there, in time.
She also feels, not surprisingly, that the page is simplistic.
Charles Matthews 14:38, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources

message: The section was ORish, WP:UNDUE and read like some 'evidence' cherrypicked for a case against Shafarevich. Igor Shafarevich is both a scientist and a politician, a Soviet era dissident and Russian ultranationalist. Composing one fourth of the article on some quotations that are just a tiny piece of his writings definitely makes the article read unencyclopedic. --Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 08:31, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Shafarevich's antisemitic writings merited a section on Russian wiki, and so they are merited here. They are certainly notable, not to say notorious. All efforts to remove this will be considered WHITEWASHING.Galassi (talk) 10:25, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't try to whitewash anything: I am just writing ENCYCLOPEDIA, unlike some other users. We have guidelines like WP:V and WP:NPOV, that I am firmly committed to. And accusing me of some russophile POV is not a valid argument here. In a way I am Russophile, but if you check the accusations raised against me here, you'll notice that some people regard me as a poster of “El'tsin propaganda″, something that Shafarevich wouldn't like at all.So, one more revert, and I'll report you somewhere, e.g. at living persons noticeboard. --Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 12:04, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  That doesn't look like good faith to me... I am not interested in your likes or dislikes, but there is no censorship WP:NOTCENSORED in Wikipedia.Galassi (talk) 19:55, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

text: Why on earth do we need there in a supposedly encyclopedic article all those cherry picked quotes, both in English and the original Russian? We just have to cover Shafarevich's main theses, not to collect 'evidence' of his misdeeds here! There is no censorship here, but neither should there be a place for personal grudges!?! I'm pretty sure, if we resort to close reading, we'll find a number of anti-Ukrainian or, say, anti-Estonian passages in his opus, but do we really need to collect each and every one of them?! --Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 07:46, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Did you read the article? Shafarevich is considered sufficiently odious to have been requested to resign his US NAS membership. THis is pretty unheard of.Galassi (talk) 07:58, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

text: I appreciate Dzied Bulbash's changes and agree with the comments here. --Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 16:44, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

text: However, the accusations of ant-semitism contunued, fueled by his other publications (ref), she was accused of taking extreme liberties with histirical facts, in particular he was noted by Semyon Reznik to have claimed that the execution of the Tsar Nicolas II was a ritual murder: Shafarevich assigned Jewish ethnicity to a number of non-Jewish individuals involved in the in the execution, perpetuates the false claims of graffiti in Yiddish at the murder site (ref).
I deleted the paragraph for the following reasons:
*It is claimed that the accusations of antisemitism "continued" after 2009. This may be true, but the reference used to verify this information is a Russian blog entry dating from 2008.
*Semyon Reznik's essay from 2000 and the reference to the execution of Tsar Nicolaus II were mentioned in the article already. The repetitions serve no purpose here.
Krista Berglund's thesis dates from 2009. Allegations that the discussion "continues" should be supported by more recent sources. Nidrosia (talk) 15:59, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

text: Unnecessary. Reznik is a major scholar of antisemitism and blood libel, and as such qualifies as a WP:RS.--Galassi (talk) 19:14, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  An English translation of the relevant paragraph of Reznik's Russian essay is called for. According to Aron Katsenelinboigen and other authors, there is no mentioning of ritual murder in Shafarevich's writings.  I hope to post a more detailed look at the literature soon. Nidrosia (talk) 19:56, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Please do not misrepresent the sources. A.Katsenenilboigen only considers "RUSSOPHOBIA", not his other writings. And he says something entirely different. (http://aronkatsenelinboigen.net/Downloads/SovietUnion_empire_nation_system.htm) --Galassi (talk) 20:14, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Who is Joseph G. Abramson (Абрамсон И. Г.), to whom you attribute the notion that "the accusations of anti-semitism continued, fueled by his other publications..."? (see ref. no. 26). Is Abramson a reliable secondary source? Or is he a partisan propagandist? What is the nature of the website (blog?) called Alternatives (Альтернативы)? Can it be used as a neutral source? Nidrosia (talk) 06:09, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  ALTERNATIVES is a magazine with an editorial board, so it is a RS. Whether that Krista could be an RS: that is an open question.--Galassi (talk) 18:00, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Are you proposing that any on-line "magazine with an editorial board" is a reliable source? Nidrosia (talk) 19:13, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Not "any", but the ones specializing in history and politics would look good to me. RS=Reliable Source. --Galassi (talk) 19:16, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

text: I've made a few edits, as I was asked to take a look here by Nidrosia. First, as for my personal opinion of the Russophobia essay, I was reading it during the summer but stopped short of finishing, having got fed up with all the insinuations in there, e.g. that even Jewish scientists have somehow been promoted by others, not really deserving their scientific reputation. Apart from some interesting thoughts like the concept of a 'maly narod', that has supposedly played a role in many country's history, it seems like a rather nasty pamphlet. Now, regarding Wikipedia guidelines, that we have to follow, regardless of our own judgment on the merits of an author's work - as for Reznik, his opinions are worthy of inclusion (see google scholar ), if properly attributed. I agree that Alternativy doesn't seem like a RS on its own right, but it can be used to source the fact that Shafarevich's writings are still discussed and criticized. If there has been more scholarly discussion after Berglund's thesis, then proper sources are needed. I have made a few edits to address the concerns outlined above. Miacek 08:06, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

text: Btw, this source makes a good point on “innuendo, interspersed with the occasional qualification” being a typical feature in Shafarevich's writings. This enables him to lay a claim to erudition and more impartial look compared with impudent chauvinist propagandists like Platonov, which, however, doesn't change the essence of Shafarevich's own political writings since Russophobia.Miacek and his crime-fighting dog  (woof!) 08:25, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

text: Thank you. Also I see no reason to put an emphasis on the Berglund opinion by the inclusion of a direct quote. --Galassi (talk) 11:39, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks to editor Miacek for cleaning up the section on anti-Semitism. As Charles Matthews has pointed out at the BLP noticeboard, Berglund's thesis is not yet available as a published book. I therefore accept the assessment that the citation of her dissertation may be premature. As far as I am concerned, the citation may be deleted. However, if at some time in the future an edition of Berglund's thesis is made publicly available as a monograph, published by an academic publishing house, quotations from her work on Shafarevich may be called for, especially if reviews are favourable. Nidrosia (talk) 21:49, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

text: Pending publication -
"Krista Berglund (University of Helsinki), in her doctoral thesis of 2009, claims that Shafarevich is not an anti-Semite or extreme nationalist Krista Berglund, The Vexing Case of Igor Shafarevich, a Russian Political Thinker, doctoral dissertation, University of Helsinki, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Science, 2009. Abstract. Retrieved March 16, 2011.</blockquote> According to Berglund, the Russophobia article was first judged by a small group of emigrants whom Shafarevich had criticised in the article for their deterministic interpretation of history. She claimed that these emigrants presented their argument of Shafarevich's alleged anti-Semitism to Western readers."--Galassi (talk) 11:36, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section entitled 'Antisemitic writings' 

message: The following paragraph was added on March 17, 2011:
:However, the accusations of ant-semitism contunued, fueled by his other publications (ref), she was accused of taking extreme liberties with histirical facts, in particular he was noted by Semyon Reznik to have claimed that the execution of the Tsar Nicolas II was a ritual murder: Shafarevich assigned Jewish ethnicity to a number of non-Jewish individuals involved in the in the execution, perpetuates the false claims of graffiti in Yiddish at the murder site (ref).
I deleted the paragraph for the following reasons:
*It is claimed that the accusations of antisemitism "continued" after 2009. This may be true, but the reference used to verify this information is a Russian blog entry dating from 2008.
*Semyon Reznik's essay from 2000 and the reference to the execution of Tsar Nicolaus II were mentioned in the article already. The repetitions serve no purpose here.
Krista Berglund's thesis dates from 2009. Allegations that the discussion "continues" should be supported by more recent sources. Nidrosia (talk) 15:59, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Unnecessary. Reznik is a major scholar of antisemitism and blood libel, and as such qualifies as a WP:RS.--Galassi (talk) 19:14, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  An English translation of the relevant paragraph of Reznik's Russian essay is called for. According to Aron Katsenelinboigen and other authors, there is no mentioning of ritual murder in Shafarevich's writings.  I hope to post a more detailed look at the literature soon. Nidrosia (talk) 19:56, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Please do not misrepresent the sources. A.Katsenenilboigen only considers "RUSSOPHOBIA", not his other writings. And he says something entirely different. (http://aronkatsenelinboigen.net/Downloads/SovietUnion_empire_nation_system.htm) --Galassi (talk) 20:14, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Who is Joseph G. Abramson (Абрамсон И. Г.), to whom you attribute the notion that "the accusations of anti-semitism continued, fueled by his other publications..."? (see ref. no. 26). Is Abramson a reliable secondary source? Or is he a partisan propagandist? What is the nature of the website (blog?) called Alternatives (Альтернативы)? Can it be used as a neutral source? Nidrosia (talk) 06:09, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  ALTERNATIVES is a magazine with an editorial board, so it is a RS. Whether that Krista could be an RS: that is an open question.--Galassi (talk) 18:00, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Are you proposing that any on-line "magazine with an editorial board" is a reliable source? Nidrosia (talk) 19:13, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Not "any", but the ones specializing in history and politics would look good to me. RS=Reliable Source. --Galassi (talk) 19:16, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

text: I've made a few edits, as I was asked to take a look here by Nidrosia. First, as for my personal opinion of the Russophobia essay, I was reading it during the summer but stopped short of finishing, having got fed up with all the insinuations in there, e.g. that even Jewish scientists have somehow been promoted by others, not really deserving their scientific reputation. Apart from some interesting thoughts like the concept of a 'maly narod', that has supposedly played a role in many country's history, it seems like a rather nasty pamphlet. Now, regarding Wikipedia guidelines, that we have to follow, regardless of our own judgment on the merits of an author's work - as for Reznik, his opinions are worthy of inclusion (see google scholar ), if properly attributed. I agree that Alternativy doesn't seem like a RS on its own right, but it can be used to source the fact that Shafarevich's writings are still discussed and criticized. If there has been more scholarly discussion after Berglund's thesis, then proper sources are needed. I have made a few edits to address the concerns outlined above. Miacek 08:06, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

text: Btw, this source makes a good point on “innuendo, interspersed with the occasional qualification” being a typical feature in Shafarevich's writings. This enables him to lay a claim to erudition and more impartial look compared with impudent chauvinist propagandists like Platonov, which, however, doesn't change the essence of Shafarevich's own political writings since Russophobia.Miacek and his crime-fighting dog  (woof!) 08:25, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

text: Thank you. Also I see no reason to put an emphasis on the Berglund opinion by the inclusion of a direct quote. --Galassi (talk) 11:39, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks to editor Miacek for cleaning up the section on anti-Semitism. As Charles Matthews has pointed out at the BLP noticeboard, Berglund's thesis is not yet available as a published book. I therefore accept the assessment that the citation of her dissertation may be premature. As far as I am concerned, the citation may be deleted. However, if at some time in the future an edition of Berglund's thesis is made publicly available as a monograph, published by an academic publishing house, quotations from her work on Shafarevich may be called for, especially if reviews are favourable. Nidrosia (talk) 21:49, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

text: Pending publication -
"Krista Berglund (University of Helsinki), in her doctoral thesis of 2009, claims that Shafarevich is not an anti-Semite or extreme nationalist Krista Berglund, The Vexing Case of Igor Shafarevich, a Russian Political Thinker, doctoral dissertation, University of Helsinki, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Science, 2009. Abstract. Retrieved March 16, 2011.</blockquote> According to Berglund, the Russophobia article was first judged by a small group of emigrants whom Shafarevich had criticised in the article for their deterministic interpretation of history. She claimed that these emigrants presented their argument of Shafarevich's alleged anti-Semitism to Western readers."--Galassi (talk) 11:36, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Krista Berglund's thesis (2009) 

message: The material at the end really needs attention. If the phrase "most recently" is to be taken literally, this point should be the final one. That should be looked at. But in fact the presentation doesn't seem to be the best, anyway. Charles Matthews (talk) 15:58, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately the linked page by Gennadii Razumov is really no more than an angry rant. Considering the material, we must look for a more reliable source (not self-published) under BLP policy. It seems clear enough what kind of content the book in question covers. But to avoid OR we need a solid reference. Charles Matthews (talk) 06:20, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Ordering

message: The full citation reads ""Николай II был расстрелян именно как Царь, этим ритуальным актом (курсив мой - С.Р.) подводилась черта под многовековой эпохой русской истории... Казалось бы, от такого болезненного, оставляющего след во всей истории действия представители незначительного этнического меньшинства должны были бы держаться как можно дальше. А какие имена мы встречаем? Лично руководил расстрелом и стрелял в Царя Яков Юровский, председателем местного Совета был Белобородов (Вайсбардт), а общее руководство в Екатеринбурге осуществлял Шая Голощекин. Картина дополняется тем, что на стене комнаты, где происходил расстрел, было обнаружено написанное (по-немецки) двустишие из стихотворения Гейне о царе Валтасаре, оскорбившем Иегову и убитом за это". (И. Р.Шафаревич. Сочинения в трех томах. Т.2., Москва, "Феникс", 1994, стр. 145)." Do you need a translation!--Galassi (talk) 00:59, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: My edits are related to work of Reznik (secondary source) and his conclusions about Shafarevich. I did not comment on work of Shafarevich. Threfore this full citation is irrelevant to my edits. Please explain how this citation refutes my edits. You provided no explanation, only "full citation". This full citation only confirms the part which talks about false Jewish surnames propagated by shafarevich, which statement I did not delete from wikipedia. - Altenmann >t 14:01, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

text: The primary citation has Resnik's italics, specifically where I.Sh asserts the "ritual murder".--Galassi (talk) 20:42, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  I.Sh asserts "ritual act", to be murder of Tsar. Blood libel is allegations in  murder of Christian children with the purpose of using their blood in Judaic rituals. There are many kinds of ritual murders. Not all of them are of blood libel. To assert that I.Sh meant blood libel is a speculation. If you read Reznik carefully, you will readily see he does not directly accuses I.Sh of asserting blood libel: he merely insinuates it in a demagoigical, emotional way: "Итак, ритуальный акт. Слово произнесено! Брошено возбужденной толпе! При этом кровавому навету придано третье измерение." This is the way I changed text of wikipedia article.  Per WP:BLP, we must be careful in accusations. I admit I might have been missing sommething. If this the case please provide the quote where Reznik directly says that I.Sh. meant blood libel, an I will be happy to revert this particular edit. I also will be happy to reconsider my other several edits  if you provede reasonable arguments against my explanations. - Altenmann >t 01:27, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Altenmann's edit

message: (cur | prev) 05:45, January 5, 2013‎ Altenmann(talk | contribs)‎ . . (16,094 bytes) (-301)‎ . .(Reverted to revision 531390457 by Altenmann: i provided detailed edit summaries. yours is nothing but personal atttack. please provide detailed objection to article content. (TW)) (undo)
 (cur | prev) 20:29, January 4, 2013‎ Galassi(talk | contribs)‎ . . (16,395 bytes) (+301)‎ . .(Reverted to revision 531369705 by Galassi: rv deliberate mistranslation/misrepresentation, DISCUSS.. (TW)) (undo)
 (cur | prev) 19:40, January 4, 2013‎ Altenmann(talk | contribs)‎ m . . (16,094 bytes) (0)‎ . .(→‎Accusations of antisemitism) (undo)
 (cur | prev) 19:25, January 4, 2013‎ Altenmann(talk | contribs)‎ . . (16,094 bytes) (-301)‎ . .(my edit are explained in edit summaries. If yuoi want I can give exact citations friom references, if ou cannkt read tyourself. Undid revision 531369705 by Galassi (talk)) (undo)
 (cur | prev) 16:57, January 4, 2013‎ Galassi(talk | contribs)‎ . . (16,395 bytes) (+301)‎ . .(Reverted to revision 530860175 by Galassi: NPOV restoration, and corr. of citation misrepresentation. (TW)) (undo)
 (cur | prev) 12:19, January 4, 2013‎ Altenmann(talk | contribs)‎ . . (16,094 bytes) (+192)‎ . .(→‎Accusations of antisemitism: what REznik actually wrote) (undo)
 (cur | prev) 12:15, January 4, 2013‎ Altenmann(talk | contribs)‎ . . (15,902 bytes) (-127)‎ . .(→‎Accusations of antisemitism: Resnik did not claim that directly. He cited Shaf's phrase with word "ritual act" and then wrote that it must lead to hint that blood libel is involved) (undo)
 (cur | prev) 11:53, January 4, 2013‎ Altenmann(talk | contribs)‎ . . (16,029 bytes) (+60)‎ . .(→‎Accusations of antisemitism: correct rendering of 'small nation' in Russia per shafarevich (and 3rd party sources)) (undo)
 (cur | prev) 11:44, January 4, 2013‎ Altenmann(talk | contribs)‎ . . (15,969 bytes) (-119)‎ . .(→‎Accusations of antisemitism: russophobia was written way before perestroika, so this text is irrelevant) (undo)
 (cur | prev) 11:42, January 4, 2013‎ Altenmann(talk | contribs)‎ . . (16,088 bytes) (-307)‎ . .(→‎Accusations of antisemitism: rm editorializing) (undo)
 
I provided detailed explanations doing edits step by step. Galassi reverted with edit summaries without explanation besides personal insult. Please provide equally detailed objections to my arguments, so that we can discuss them. Surely I cannot argue against personal insults such as "deliberate mistranslation" and "citation misinterpretation". - Altenmann >t 13:50, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  recent revert war