This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion.
To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites 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
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.
its a propaganda channel - it deals in propaganda, not 'controversies' - [1] - heres an of idea of its work MOSCOW Conn - its embedded with the Russian armed rebels - it is propaganda network horrendous video produced by Russian 'press' 'LifeNews, a pro-Kremlin station close to Russia's intelligence apparatus,' - and stories like 'Last week LifeNews, a tabloid TV station with close ties to intelligence and law-enforcement agencies, published the conversations of Maksim Katz, the Yabloko candidate and Nikolai Lyaskin from Aleksey Navalny's Party of Progress '[2] - Sayerslle (talk) 14:48, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Add third-party sources. Ukrainian sources can't be used cause they are even more biased. (I will write more in a second.) --Moscow Connection (talk) 23:50, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You are banning all Ukrainian sources. Bit much. What rule says that? - these awards - are they a kind of regime handing to another part of regime a badge of honour kind fo thing - can you point to articles telling the reader about these awards and why they are significant? it looks UNDUE to me - 'Ukrainian sources are all biased says Moscow connection - ffs - glass houses. Sayerslle (talk) 23:59, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
According to the Security Service of Ukraine, it is a paramilitary organization.[12]
— 1. If the Security Service actually said this (why not, it have said many crazy things), then you will sure be able to find a better source. (You can even use the actual Secret Service statement.) But if you find it, it should go into a section titled "Ukrainian opinion" or something like that.
Some journalists of LifeNews acknowledged that they arrived in Ukraine unlawfully and without journalist identification.[13]
— 2. If the journalists actually acknowledged it, you should be able to find a better source, some non-Ukrainian and more reliably looking source. Maybe even the actual aknowledgements?
The channel regularly and openly lies about situation in Ukraine, particularly about the War in Donbass. Only on 31 May 2014 the channel was proven to be lying on at least 20 occasions and suspected in incitement to ethnic hatred.[14]
— This reads like something written by an enemy of the channel. If there have been official accusations from the Ukrainian government of whatever, they can be mentioned but must start with a clear attribution like "Poroshenko / Ukrainian Secret Service has accused / said ...". --Moscow Connection (talk) 00:13, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
the article just says the SBU have said such and such - (are you saying LifeNews is an impartial news source and no-one thinks any different? ? - oh yeah, one looks at the version you left as of 10 october 2014 - no hint of anything about LfeNews 'outlook' was there? - you obviously want to censor everything that says it isn't just an award laden impartial news source. this is its territory lets face it - what about the awards? are they significant? prestigious? theres no wp articles about these awards. ( it does regularly lie anyhow - why are u outraged that a news channel like this should have enemies? should bloody well think it does and this should be reflected in the article imo. your outrage about anything not written by a friend of the channel is absurd - NOTCENSORED.Sayerslle (talk) 00:21, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think LifeNews is impartial. No source is impartial. But you wrote on Wikipedia that the channel intentionally lies like it was a universal truth while it was just something the channel's opponents said/wrote. This is an obviously non-neutral treatment of the topic. Also, you logged out to remove awards from the page. Yes, the awards are significant and prestigious. Tnere's an article about the Golden Ray award in the Russian Wikipedia. I've just linked it. Do you hate the channel? If you are driven by hatred, you have probably lost focus of why you are here on Wikipedia. --Moscow Connection (talk) 00:46, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
of course I hate the channel - ffs - but wikipedia editing is a discipline and that limits what one would write with no Rules - which is why your effort as of 10 October was so piss-poor imo , you made no attempt whatever to inform the reader in a rounded way about this channel- your version was biased as fuck. but you don't see that I guess. There's none so blind as they that won't see. (Jonathan Swift) - Sayerslle (talk) 00:53, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Oppose. This appears only to be a stylization. It is also unclear whether this name change makes it a WP:COMMONNAME. — Andy W.(talk ·ctb) 14:33, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
I have just modified one external link on Life (news agency, Russia). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
