This article was nominated for deletion on 14 March 2022. The result of the discussion was keep.
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to Eastern Europe or the Balkans, which has been designated as a contentious topic.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
This article was created or improved as part of the Women in Red project. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in RedWikipedia:WikiProject Women in RedTemplate:WikiProject Women in RedWomen in Red articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ukraine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ukraine on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.UkraineWikipedia:WikiProject UkraineTemplate:WikiProject UkraineUkraine articles
This page has archives. Sections older than 28 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.
The fine was in rubles, but ...
What currencies should be put in parenthesis? I don't think that one should skip Euros, however someone is pushing the agenda of the British pound.--Ukraina has borders with the Euro zone. 89.8.146.21 (talk) 03:57, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Considering the current volatility of ruble, I'd say it makes little sense to quote the number in any currency but ruble. Birdofpreyru (talk) 16:23, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
USD, GBP. EUR is less of an interest; English-speaking EUR users are the Irish. Not as numerous as UK/US. The other issue is what quantum; we keep going back and forth with the GBP amount: 200/214. Solipsism 101 (talk) 16:57, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The U.S. dollar is the world's reserve currency, and that's why it's usually used by sources like Reuters for the convenience of its international audience. Since exchange rates fluctuate, it makes little sense to quote the amount quoted by RS in other currencies because they apply only to the date the article was written. It also doesn't say anything about how 30,000 rubles compare to Ovsyannikova's income or how much it would buy in Russia, presumably more than $280 in the U.S., £200 in the U.K., or €255 in Ireland. Current exchange rates can be looked up here: https://www.oanda.com/currency-converter. Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 12:01, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We could specify the date of the currency exchange, i.e. "Reuters said it was X amount on YY date". Solipsism 101 (talk) 14:36, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Should the category Ukrainian people of Russian descent be included or not? Due to her place of birth (Odessa, Ukraine) and the fact that her father is or was apparently a Ukrainian citizen (and so of Ukrainian origin) I would suggest including it.—-Koelnfan (talk) 16:30, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
From the formal point of view, she never had an Ukrainian passport. She is not eligible to be an Ukrainian citizen. From the point of view of self-identification, she clearly self-identifies as Russian and not as Ukrainian. She only lived in what is now Ukraine until she was two years old.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:50, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I do not think her father ever was an Ukrainian citizen, but he presumably is/was of ethnic Ukrainian origin.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:51, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
is she a propagandist or not?
As Marina worked for years on a purely progadansit state-owned media, she is by default a propagandist journalist. Ukrainian sources write about it. Why not add this into the preamble? --Tsans2 (talk) 09:37, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Tsans2: Hey, thanks for engaging in good faith on the talk page. As a general principle, I prefer to describe what someone actually did (e.g. "so-and-so disseminated propaganda") as opposed to labeling them as a "propagandist", and only resort to label usage like that if they are widely and consistently described as such in reliable sources. I don't find the "propagandist" label used almost at all, apart from what appeared to me to be the relatively low-quality or obscure Ukrainian media like censor.net used in that edit (to be clear I'm not saying Ukrainian media is inferior to Western media, I'm saying that it appeared to me that those sources in particular weren't great).
I do think I agree with you though that more attention should be paid to her time at Channel One, where it does seem she spread Russian propaganda, but at a quick glance after her stunt it seems "ex-propagandist" would be if anything a more apt description of her. For instance, The Telegraph describes her as an ex-state mouthpiece who spread propaganda for years but has now turned on her Kremlin bosses. In her own words: “Unfortunately, I have been working at Channel One during recent years, working on Kremlin propaganda,” Ovsyannikova said. “And now I am very ashamed. I am ashamed that I’ve allowed the lies to be said on the TV screens. I am ashamed that I let the Russian people be zombified.”per WaPo
So I think we can say that in her time at Channel One she disseminated propaganda, and include her statement in which she describes herself "working on Kremlin propaganda", but I don't think we can apply the "propagandist" label to her in the lead. Does that sound reasonable? Endwise (talk) 10:53, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
yes, I totally agree with you. Actually I had an idea to add something like "former propagandist". thank you for your research and help. And again, I'm sorry if my edits were bad, vandal, etc. By the way, I think she is not anymore a journalist. maybe we should also describe her as a former/ex journalist... ? Tsans2 (talk) 10:57, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think your edits were vandalism, it's just bad practice add back things which you have been reverted on without discussing them. Endwise (talk) 11:02, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've added something to the body/lead about it, though I maintain my prior aversion to labels (even ones like "ex-propagandist"). Anything else we should add? Endwise (talk) 11:16, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Using the word "former propagandist" is problematic, because ultimately many journalists - or TV reporters - would fall into that category. I think it is best to avoid that, unless it is really a super-clear example, such as Solovyov. But even there people stated incorrect things about him. Wikipedia must be as objective and as accurate as possible. 2A02:8388:1641:4980:52EB:F6FF:FE28:C651 (talk) 17:58, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
She no longer works there and the sourcing is not good enough for such a contentious label of BLP, there needs to be plenty of high-quality sources for such a label. She herself described her time there as working on propaganda so that can be mentioned which seems to have been done in recent edits. Mellk (talk) 11:28, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ukrainian sources are clearly partisan and should be best avoided in this article. Ukrainian media also feature conspiracy theories that she was actually set by FSB, which are pure lunacy (and based on false premises such as that Russian news are not broadcast live). Let us only use serious sources here. Ymblanter (talk) 22:21, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This was indeed a surprise - Ukrainian sources seemed to be more engaged in labeling her as a pro-russian asset, than russian sources labeling her as a pro-ukrainian asset. For regular people coming to wikipedia, wikipedia has to be as objective as possible and as accurate as possible. I was not even aware that she is now in France (in 2023), considering there were other reports that stated otherwise - including sources that would claim she is still in Russia. So wikipedia really must be as objective as possible. 2A02:8388:1641:4980:52EB:F6FF:FE28:C651 (talk) 17:56, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg){kind=small}
.svg){kind=small}
