Talk:SOVA Center

message: This NGO seems to be notable enough because there are numerous publications about it (a few of them are cited in the article).Biophys 01:19, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Does not mean it can be used as reliable source. It is not - if anything it is a racist hate website financed by radical groups in the West.--Ram2006 15:10, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Not only it is reliable source (please read WP:SOURCE), but it is notable. Our personal opinions are irrelevant.Biophys 15:42, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  It is not notable. It is spreading lies and disinformation. It exists for the sole purpose of villifying Russian people, and is financed by well known Russophobes. --Ram2006 18:29, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability

message: Please add to external links:
* Working sessions facilitated by the SOVA Center for Information and Analysis at the OSCE Conference, Human Dimension Implementation Meeting, Warsaw, 29 September - 10 October 2008
I should mention the claims that SOVA is xenophobic are quite baseless and outrageous. And lobbying to shut down hate sites is not "censorship." Hate speech is not free speech. -PētersV (talk) 04:51, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Any objections? If no objections I would include the external link tomorrow Alex Bakharev (talk) 04:57, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks, please let's also include, in cited by... opening sentence, before "and other..." inserting "Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting, "  Thanks. -PētersV (talk) 05:03, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

text: I do not think there is a serious conflict here, which would require the two week protection.Biophys (talk) 05:00, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected... 

message: As speaking on behalf of SOVA, I cannot make a censorship here or advertize SOVA, but I would like to correct some mistakes in facts:
1. Roundtable on July 2, 2007 was a very small expert discussion, which was not important enough to be mentioned here.
But the paragraph looks like our roundtable made a project of amendments to Anti-Extremism Law, which were adopted soon after that. Of course, we are not so influential. So citation of this Law as we are authors is not correct. We are against this law in general.
What really happened, we criticized first draft in Spring 2007, and may be that was one of the reasons, why second draft was radically changed. But we also have a lot of critics on 2007 amendments – and if needed I may give links to our texts.
2. I do not understand, why this thing is mentioned here – “Subsequent legislative attempts to address Internet-based hate speech specifically, however, have failed to pass, most recently in October, 2008.”
SOVA never supported such measures and many times spoke against them.
3. Savelyev’s case was closed very soon by police, as I know, according to limitations of our Criminal Procedure Code. And it wasn’t sent to the court.
4. We are not in position to facilitate OSCE events. We just participate in them (in many of them) as many other NGOs.
Shuravi (talk) 09:00, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh now, you are very welcome to correct mistakes in wikipedia. Please do. As someone more familiar with WP policies, I would be glad to check what you doing and make further corrections if needed.Biophys (talk) 11:56, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for the information, we'll be glad to look at sources and adjust. Generally people or organizations writing about themselves is frowned upon as that would be a "self-published source" and not a "reputable secondary source." We'll look at what's been written based on sources and any discrepancies with what you've communicated. PētersV <SMALL>      TALK</SMALL> 13:29, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Factual mistakes