Talk:Sofia Rotaru

Change of content

The article looks in quite bad shape at the moment, due to following errors:
1)The lead section identifies the nationality and the occupation of Rotaru based on the imagination of her fans editing the article. Proposal: to use the nationality and occupation what she herself uses to identify herself on her official biography.
2)The article includes dubious claims that are unsourced. Proposal: to either source the claims or remove them.
3)The biography section is poorly written and too long to digest. Most of the info is insignificant and the significant info could be concentrated to half the size of the current biography section.
4)The 'Fans of Sofia Rotaru' section is unencyclopedic and insignificant. I mean, If I wanted to read a whole section about her stalker or her impersonator, I'd go to Russian gossip sites. The people who created her websites are highly irrelevant in an encyclopedia and will be removed.
Dear fans of Sofia Rotaru. Please make these corrections yourself. If you don't, somebody else will in close days to come. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 07:59, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Please take a look at the comments I've made by making the changes. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 15:38, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

You haven't provided any source for your suggestions. Please discuss before changing and try to support your edits with a valid verifiable argument, for each of your points, or at least propose a new wording here before blindly changing the whole article as you simply feel. Thank you.--Rubikonchik (talk) 16:38, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't see what you mean by a "source for my suggestions". 1) You can find the source right after the proposed change, which is http://www.sofiarotaru.com/life/facts; 2)Per WP:VERIFIABILITY, all material challenged or likely to be challenged, and all quotations, must be attributed to a reliable, published source, or be removed.I have done exactly per WP:BOLD; 3) I and Lvivske have made very little changes to the Biography section, however, I placed the WP:CLEANUP tag because it is written in an excessively detailed matter which can be avoided. Remember, the article is intended for humans, not fans. Here's an example. The section:"After the tragic death of Volodymyr Ivasyuk in 1979, a number of songs by Moldavian composers appeared in her repertoire (namely, songs by the brothers Teodorovici). By that time Sofia Rotaru had ceased collaboration with Moldavian authors, primarily Eugene Doga. The latter, actively created rumors that the voice of Sofia Rotaru was created note by note on a computer. Singing in different languages became the source of fierce arguments regarding which culture Sofia Rotaru belonged - Moldavian or Ukrainian. She was also considered as a "fellow" in Russia, and in Armenia the question was debated whether to award her with the Meritorious Artist of Armenian SSR. As the USSR collpsed in 1991, a joke became popular: during talks at Belovezhskaya Puscha the question was raised "how will we divide Rotaru". The singer, who always lived in the Ukraine, considered herself to be a Ukrainian citizen, while not denying her Moldavian roots," wouldn't loose any notable info, if it read:"Losing her songwriter Volodymyr Ivasyuk in 1979, she stopped collaboration with Moldavian authors. One of the reasons was a Moldavian composer, Eugene Doga, spreading rumours about her voice being created on computers. Her ban of Moldavian songs while continuing to sing in Russian, Ukrainian, Armenian, and many other languages, and receiving merits from the representatives of the Soviet republics, raised the issue of her nationality." Otherwise, nobody will ever read this. 4) The 'Fans of Sofia Rotaru' section was a violation of WP:Notability (web). --Jaan Pärn (talk) 19:43, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Here is just a random selection of sites where Sofia Rotaru is presented as a singer of at least four countries: USSR, Russia, Ukraine and Moldova.

http://who-is-who.com.ua/bookmaket/olimp2006/12/153.html http://www.123exp-biographies.com/t/00034285611/ http://www.spock.com/Sofia-Rotaru http://www.discogs.com/artist/%D0%A1%D0%BE%D1%84%D0%B8%D1%8F+%D0%A0%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%83?anv=Sofia+Rotaru http://slovari.yandex.ru/dict/who-is-who/article/cult/cul1-159.htm&stpar1=1.12.1 http://www.peoples.ru/art/music/stage/rotaru/index.html http://www.biograph.ru/bank/rotaru_sm.htm

--Rubikonchik (talk) 22:41, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

A nation doesn't own a person, vice versa. Per WP:Citizenship and nationality:"Nationality denotes informal membership in or identification with a particular nation." It goes without saying that the membership is voluntary and the identification unilateral. None of your references state, what Rotaru herself identifies herself with. Or, by "Russian, Moldovan and Ukrainian" you mean citizenship? None of your sources say anything about her citizenship. On this page, Sofia Rotaru identifies herself as Ukrainian, not Soviet, Russian nor Moldovan. The article will reflect her self-identification. Feel free to introduce other current self-identifications. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 09:07, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

You've left my other remarks uncommented. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 08:09, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Her're some comments from the history of the article, which you've failed to discuss:

1) Krugozor was not a label but a magazine where Melodiya published flexi-discs.
2) removed the WP:PEACOCK
3) Russian edition of Postimees is not 'the press' and the article does not say 'This Is All We Have'.
4) replaced the mess of an opening statement with the opening statement from her official biography.
Please comment before reverting! --Jaan Pärn (talk) 09:05, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

And one more from Lvivske: that doesnt make sense. Please check out what's behind the comments and give your counter arguments before reverting. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 09:59, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

The proposal in a nutshell

The discussion has turned into a monologue once again, so I'll present it in a nutshell. Most of the material here is a violation WP:VERIFIABILITY, which says:"Any material lacking a reliable source may be removed," and: "It should be removed, aggressively, unless it can be sourced." My request for sources has been up on this talk page since April 28 (see Talk:Sofia Rotaru#Change of content, so I suggest anybody who is interested in keeping some specific info in the article, to start inserting citations right this moment!

Another major issue was the content of the "Fans of Sofia Rotaru". It's obviously sourced, but its topic is not the singer herself nor even her reception, but the leading fans and the webpages they've created. This was a violation of WP:Notability, specifically WP:Notability (web) and has been ruthlessly removed. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 14:21, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Please, stop contributing with cotroversial unproven information. Please contribute with proven data which finds consensus. Thank you.--Rubikonchik (talk) 17:58, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Which information exactly is "cotroversial unproven information"? WP:VERIFIABILITY, WP:PEACOCK, WP:Notability (web)? Or perhaps her official biography? --Jaan Pärn (talk) 18:14, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Constructive proposal =

Jaan Pärn, please, stop contributing with cotroversial unproven information. So far your edits seem quite disruptive to me. Please contribute with proven data which finds consensus. Thank you.--Rubikonchik (talk) 17:58, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

1) A nation doesn't own a person, vice versa. Per WP:Citizenship and nationality:"Nationality denotes informal membership in or identification with a particular nation."

- Exactly, even today Russian include Sofia Rotaru in all ratings as the person of the year and etc... even though she does not have Russian citizenship. Also, do you know any other singer not having Russian citizenship and having so many official Russian state awards (this goes without mentioning top positions in the radio charts)? --Rubikonchik (talk) 18:19, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

None of this is relevant, because nationality is not what somebody else claims Rotaru is but what she claims. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 19:09, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Exactly, that's what I'm saying, she claims to be just as Russian as Ukrainian, modlavian and Soviet after all. Are you reading through the lines? --Rubikonchik (talk) 22:12, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

- Moreover, if you check live interviews with her (on youtube "Women's stories"), you will clearly hear that she says I'm Moldavian, Ukrainian and Russian. --Rubikonchik (talk) 22:12, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Why don't you just provide it with a source instead of making a fruitless arguement here at the talk page? --Jaan Pärn (talk) 23:29, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

That could make a difference, provided with a reputable source (which Youtube isn't).

Youtube is just a support for an official movie which was aired in the entire former Sovier Union at meast on numerous times.--Rubikonchik (talk) 22:12, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

The bottom line remains it's WP:GRAPEVINE until provided with a citation. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 23:29, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

2) Krugozor was not a label but a magazine where Melodiya published flexi-discs.

- Krugozor was a magazine, but also an affiliate label of Melodiya. Flexi-discs released under this label were not labelled Melodiya.

So, what do you say? --Rubikonchik (talk) 22:12, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

3)Russian edition of Postimees is not 'the press' and the article does not say 'This Is All We Have

- To make a long story short, you may perform a search in Russian on yandex.ru, for example, with following key words "queen (koroleva), prima, rotaru, sex symbol" --Rubikonchik (talk) 18:19, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Per WP:V, the burden of evidence is with you. I'm looking forward to the sources stating that. Otherwise I'll be forced to delete the info from the article.

Looks like you do not want to contrubute constructively, but rather destructively.--Rubikonchik (talk) 22:12, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, Wikipedia is a destructive place for unverified claims and WP:GRAPEVINE. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 23:29, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

4) replaced the mess of an opening statement with the opening statement from her official biography.

- Do you know that she never wrote anythiong officially on her site? Those who contributed with the text are fans from www.fortuna-rotaru.narod.ru and partially from www.rotarunews.narod.ru (Galina Starodubova, the one who threatened subsequently Sofia Rotaru with violent death, was member of the second)

That doesn't stop the lead from being a mess. For an English-speaking audience, she is not notable as a businesswoman, producer nor an author (an author of what?). Provide reputable sources which claim otherwise or the info will be removed in the next couple of days. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 19:09, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Please, propose a lead wording here, let's disuss it here and find consensus.--Rubikonchik (talk) 22:12, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Here you go:Sofia Mikhaylivna Yevdokymenko-Rotaru (In Ukrainian Софiя Михайлiвна Євдокименко-Ротару), professionally known as Sofia Rotaru is a Ukrainian pop singer. She is known for combining a lyrical deep rich voice, sex appeal, and social or religious themes. In Eastern Europe and in the former USSR her career was marked by her stage success and numerous controversies. The Russian edition of Postimees named her the "Queen of Pop". In 2008, she declared the highest revenue in the Ukraine ($100 million).

In 1986, she was the second female pop singer to receive the title of "People's Artist of USSR". Today Sofia Rotaru is a Citizen of Ukraine and a Meritorious Citizen of Crimea and Yalta. Her repertoire consists of more than 400 songs performed in the Russian, Ukrainian, Moldavian, Polish, Romanian, Bulgarian, Serbian, German, French, English and Italian languages. The city of Yalta is her main residence, although she also lives in Moscow, Kiev, and Baden-Baden. She has received numerous awards, including: Meritorious Artist of the Ukrainian SSR, People's Artist of Ukraine, People's Artist of Moldavian SSR, People's Artist of USSR, Laureate of the YCL Prize, Hero of Moldova, and Cavalier of the Republican Order of Moldova. in August 2002 Former President of Ukraine Leonid Kuchma and President of Russia Vladimir Putin gave awards to Sofia Rotaru (for her 55th birthday), bestowing upon her the high rank of the Hero of Ukraine for her "outstanding personal merits in the sphere of art", and the Russian order "For merits before the Nation", respectively. While the singer commonly goes by her maiden name, her official name includes Yevdokymenko as the surname of her late husband.--Jaan Pärn (talk) 23:29, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

5)And one more from Lvivske: that doesnt make sense.

- What is this about?--Rubikonchik (talk) 18:19, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

This.--Jaan Pärn (talk) 19:09, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Again, these are the words of Aurica Rotaru, (Sofia Rotaru's sister) from the movie... And it's a commonly known historical fact--Rubikonchik (talk) 22:12, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

They still make no sense in the context of the name Rotaru. By the way, it's an error of style made in several places, to include information which is only remotely relevant to the topic. That's the main reason why it is impossible to read the Biography section for a non-fan human being. --

CONCLUSION: Jaan Pärn, please check out what's behind the comments and give your arguments before reverting.--Rubikonchik (talk) 18:19, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

CONCLUSION of the CONCLUSION: Youve still failed to discussed the following proposals, which have been up on the talk page since April 28:

2)The article includes dubious claims that are unsourced. Proposal: to either source the claims or remove them.
3)The biography section is poorly written and too long to digest. Most of the info is insignificant and the significant info could be concentrated to half the size of the current biography section.
4)The 'Fans of Sofia Rotaru' section is a violation of WP:Notability (web) and WP:NOTLINK. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 19:09, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

RESUME OF CONCLUSIONS: Looks like you do not want to contrubute constructively, but rather destructively. Wikipedia is not a battle ground, but a place for common healthy sense of constructive contribution.--Rubikonchik (talk) 22:12, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Your resume is correct, if that's what you call my removal of gross violations of WP:Notability (web), WP:NOTLINK, WP:GRAPEVINE, and WP:V from the article. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 23:29, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

References

How to describe Sofia Rotaru?

She is considered national singer in four countries. It is strange that Estonian Jaan Pärn tries to delete portins of the article, whereas even Estonian newspaper calls her the Pop Queen! Here is a random googling:

Romania

1. http://www.evenimentul.ro/articol/buna-vecinatate-fara-rectitudine.html
2. http://www.voceabasarabiei.com/basarabia/Scrisoare_deschisa_Dlui_Sorin_/scrisoare_deschisa_dlui_sorin_.html
3. http://www.evenimentul.ro/articol/probleme-ale-romanilor-din-ucraina.html
4. http://www.basarabeni.ro/stiri/social/sofia-rotaru-spune-adio-scenei-artistice-1561/
5. http://arhiva2004.informatia.ro/News-article-sid-90292-titlu-Vedeta_rusa__Sofia_Rotaru_s_a_indragostit_de_un_tanar_muzician.phtml

Moldova

1. http://www.music.md/news.php?nid=250
2. http://www.music.md/news.php?nid=717http://www.moldova-suverana.md/index.php?subaction=showcomments&id=1186664314&archive=1187005857&start_from=&ucat=9&
3. http://www.jurnal.md/article/13014/--Rubikonchik (talk) 22:00, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Per WP:Citizenship and nationality: "Nationality denotes informal membership in or identification with a particular nation." It goes without saying that the membership is voluntary and the identification unilateral. None of your references state, what Rotaru herself identifies herself with. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 07:07, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

False. Each of these sources clearly say how she idnetifies herself. Moreover, this is clearly in line with the Wikipedia definition. As for Ukraine, Russia, and Soviet Union, it goes without saying, I just have no time to do this random googling for each of your obviously strange questions.

Outside the material published by her or cleared by her (like her web site), it would take a direct quote to identify her nationality. I cannot see quotes in the pages pointed out by you. Please prove me wrong and point out direct quotes or material published by her. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 19:46, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Also, check this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jo7Xvv4VgSA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SzVvATkPuRQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivnHJQn5ShE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3QuahinuOI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNxuy2y7Po8 (about Galina Starodubova, the crazy fan who threatened to kill Sofia Rotaru, there are also at least nudreed articles on the internet).--Rubikonchik (talk) 23:03, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

If you think Starodubova is notable, make an article about her and see how it works out. This article is meant to be about Sofia Rotaru. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 19:46, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

"Fan scene" section is missing notability

The Sofia Rotaru#Fan scene section is unencyclopedic and misses significance. I mean, If I wanted to read a whole section about her stalker or her impersonator, I'd go to Russian gossip sites. A list of her fan clubs, websites and the people who established them are irrelevant in an encyclopedia and will be removed in a couple of days. Meanwhile, everybody has time to prove the opposite and bring sources, which discuss the fan scene.--Jaan Pärn (talk) 13:37, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

1. http://dosie.km.ru/file/index.asp?data=07.08.2007%2014:00:00&archive=on

1. http://www.segodnya.ua/news/794449.html

1. http://www.izvestia.ru/chronicle/article3125210/

and there are more, this is just about Sofia Rotaru and Alimzhan Tokhtakhounov (aka Japanese / Yaponchik)--Rubikonchik (talk) 23:05, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

here you will find hudnreds of articles about Galina Starodubova trheatening and blackmailing Sofia Rotaru...--Rubikonchik (talk) 23:05, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

These are Russian newsflicks in Russian about the two topics, you've mentioned in your last post. Such sources may serve as a basis for notability in the Russian Wiki. Here, in the English Wikipedia, a collection of gossip in Russian papers does not constitute a proof for such content being relevant.

That goes about the two topics: "Rotaru is friends with a Russian businessman" and "Rotaru is stalked by someone". However, most of Sofia Rotaru#Fan scene is a list of fan clubs and their establishers. Do you have sources (even in Russian) covering this topic in general (not one by one)? Because that could work. It's pretty logical, the fan pages itself can't serve as sources for the fan clubs. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 23:58, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Please, don't be ridiculous. It's simply funny how you turn clear evidence into "gossip" by your mere subjective interpretation, with tens and probably hundreds of articles on the topic in front of you... Please, stop your continuous disruption.--Rubikonchik (talk) 00:52, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

This is English Wikipedia. Being covered by Russian news articles does make anything notable in English Wikipedia. By the way, the article on Alimzhan Tokhtakhounov does not even mention his friendship with Rotaru. How come, an article on the more notable person as Rotaru is, should mention the connection, when the lesser article finds it not notable enough? Starodubova even does not have an Wikiarticle. The connections of Rotaru to Tokhtakhounov and Starodubova stand fair for no more than one statement each, two well-written statements each at an utmost necessity. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 11:03, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Most of Sofia Rotaru#Fan scene still is a list of fan clubs and their establishers. Do you have sources (even in Russian) covering this topic in general (not one by one)? --Jaan Pärn (talk) 10:18, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Third opinion

I'm in agreement with Jaan Pärn on this. As it stands right now, the Fan Scene section of this article suffers from extensive original research and lack of notability. Just because a bunch of fan sites exist does not mean that they get to be included - or that you can use them as references. For example, it's inappropriate to say "There are fan clubs in (x), (y), (z)" and then have refs to fan clubs in those areas. The rest of the section has no reliable sources on it, and it needs a huge cleanup. I'd support a huge, huge paring down of this section to only what's verifiable by secondary sources. For an example of a section that's at least marginally better, look at Twilight (series)#The Twilight Phenomenon. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 14:03, 24 May 2009 (UTC) Oh, and as a side note, I see at least two links to http://www.bez15mechta.org/, which is a spam site. So I'm going to remove those. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 14:04, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

• This is actually a very good example how to draft this section. I will propose a newly drafted version. In the meanwhile, I would like to ask Jaan Pärn to take a break from Sofia Rotaru and not to edit unilaterally. All the efforts put by him regarding Sofia Rotaru article seem to be distructive rather than constructive on Wikipedia. Just have a look, how he stalks me on other articles and how he tries to delete now the music files in the article on Sofia Rotaru...--Rubikonchik (talk) 13:59, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

That's not really a solution... and I don't really think you understood what I was talking about. I think that the Fan Scene section needs to be made much, much smaller than it is, and it must be sourced by secondary sources. But hey, let's see what you come up with. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 19:44, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Just started a new section below to talk about this; see #Fan scene cleanup. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 05:47, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Sofia Rotaru $100,000,000?

The source for the claim appears to be the oral statement made by Deputy Chairman of the State Tax Administration Serhii Lekar. The summary statement, as communicated by the Ukrainian News Agency can be found here: http://www.ukranews.com/eng/article/137362.html . According to it, Rotaru did declare the highest income of the Ukrainian celebrities, but does not give anything on the sum. Even if he did, an encyclopedia like Wiki cannot base such a contentious claim (Rotaru earning more than any other entertainer in the world besides The Police) on an oral statement (mis?)interpreted by newspapers before it is included in a comprehensive report like the one by Forbes. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 10:52, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

• Further discussion on this topic is here Talk:List of highest paid musicians in 2008. Also, please avoid titling sections with your personal subjective unsupported opinions and interpretations... Thank you.--Rubikonchik (talk) 20:55, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Fan scene cleanup

I've removed a whole lot of text from this section. It's sort of a violation of WP:EL to have links to all the fanclubs in reference tags. Also, I've added fact tags after every sentence. I have no idea why Alimzhan Tokhtakhounov or Dionis Kelm are notable enough to be listed here, so we need some clarification there. I don't even understand Dionis Kelm's role in this - is he/she a tribute act? Other text can be added to this section, but it must be referenced. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 05:46, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Biography cleanup

The prose of the current Early life an career section is difficult to follow. This is due to an extremely loose time frame of the section which generally should be in a strict time order. I have tried to improve that by moving general remarks about her artistry, legacy, nationality, and personal life to appropriate sections, but the Early life and career section still needs a great deal of work.

Another concern is the total lack of inline citations, which make the text unverifiable. Also please note that per WP:ALBUM and WP:SONGS, original album and song titles should be presented, not their translations. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 13:14, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

As I mentioned on your talk page, you need to clean up your additions. You've been adding entire sections to this article without any sourcing. It's not appropriate to add unsourced text and then mark the section as needing improved references; you have to provide the references when you add the text. The next chance I get, I'm going to go through the article and scrub it to remove stuff that is entirely unsourced. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 15:16, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

The material I added to the Sofia Rotaru#Legacy section was copied from the existing body of text in Sofia Rotaru#1986–1989: New wave - Europop and hard rock, re-written into a much more neutral prose. I'm trying to avoid deleting portions of the current article (which is in a shape of a poorly written fan site, I agree completely), and to move and re-write them instead. This may look confusing, I agree, but all of the peacockery was already there before me. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 15:21, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough. One other thing you might want to do is remove the peacock text as you're splitting up the sections. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 15:24, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Going forward

Rubikonchik (talk · contribs), please don't just blindly undo everything that Jaan Parn did. Their edits were really helpful to making this article better, and I fully support them. It's tendentious to ignore all of his work. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 22:41, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

I think I've just realised the essence of the problems the article suffers from. The article in its former condition was a translation from Sofia Rotaru article in Russian Wiki which originally contains as few inline citations as the translation. Rubikonchik, who appears to be a major co-author of the original Russian article and the translator to English, refuses to cooperate on providing the evidence for his creation. Alternative perspectives: the article either 1) stays tagged as lacking citations and containing WP:OR, 2) gets nominated for deletion for remaining WP:OR for too long or 3) will be downsized by the cooperating editors, based solely on the available sources. I would support option 3, but speaking from my point of view, it's gonna be a rough road because of the scarcity of material on her 1960s-1980s output available to me. The article desperately needs an editor with access to a Russian or Ukrainian library. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 23:33, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

User Jaan Pärn is continuously edit warring on articles related to Sofia Rotaru, enters into meaningless debates and basically destroys existing Wikipedia material in a disruptive manner of editing, inlcuding lying. I do not think this user has posted this file for deletion as a fully neutral and interested user in cosntructive editing on Wikipedia. For more information, please see talk pages and edit history of the following articles: List of highest paid musicians in 2008, Sofia Rotaru, File:Sofia Rotaru - Wer liebe sucht.ogg, File:Sofia Rotaru - Immensita.ogg, File:Sofiarotarucircusindialive.ogg. I would not be surprised to see Jaan Pärn nominate all together the article Sofia Rotaru for deletion here as well. The aforementioned files (i) comply with Wikipedia standards, (ii) are discussed in the article and (iii) are most certainly of reduced quality. However, taking into consideration the ruthless speed of deletion of portions of article, including music files listed there, you may also simply not see anything about these files in the article after all. All I can say: "please, help!". The curios detail, as user Jaan Pärn wants to delete this audio file, he creates other audio files. Personally, I fully agree with User:HelloAnnyong, as far as the need of modification of this article is concerned. I am ready to contribute and and work together on citations, wording, etc. Unfortunately, User:Erikupoeg, by his disruptive editing has proved not being able to do a constructive work. Some of the pther irrelevant disruptive edits of the aforementioned user: Mashina Vremeni, List of highest paid musicians in 2008, Johnny Dorelli, Anatoliy Evdokimenko and others...--Rubikonchik (talk) 09:10, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

No, I disagree with that. Jaan Parn's edits have been constructive. Take this edit, which you complained about. What is wrong with that? It went from being gramatically incorrect to being correct. Yes, "critical appraisal" needs a source, but the way it was before, "The music score was also met with praise." needed a source as well. And in that edit, he removed the word 'very' from "the soundtrack of the very popular Sofia Rotau movie", which should have been done. By and large I support Jaan Parn's edits here.

If you want to be more constructive, you need to stop attacking Jaan Parn and start working with him. Find sources for the claims in the article, don't just blindly revert things. I haven't had a lot of free time recently, so I haven't had a chance to go through and remove all the unsourced claims in this article, but I will eventually. Until then, you could certainly go through and add more sources.

Oh, and were trying to point to the links for those audio files? Try changing it to [[:File]]. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 12:59, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

"Sofia Rotaru Phenomenon"?

AnnYong's suggestion was not to copy the title of Twilight (series)#The Twilight Phenomenon but to take a look at it as an example of a better written fan section. In Twilight (series)#The Twilight Phenomenon, the term 'phenomenon' is sourced whereas in Sofia Rotaru#Sofia Rotaru Phenomenon it is not, therefore the header is WP:OR at its least and furthermore a WP:PEACOCK term. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 15:23, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Correct. I didn't mean that we should literally copy over that use; it's just an example. And in that case, like Jaan said, the word 'phenomenon' has a source attached to it. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 15:45, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

to tell you the truth, there is also a beer called Chervona Ruta with the face of Sofia Rotaru on the etiquette (as well as women's bags, etc...) I understand that the title has to be litterally be sourced. Ok, I'll check for sources. In the meanwhile, I propose either to leave the section with the name "Fan Scene" (with the actual contents) or think of a more appropriate title to cover the last edit.--Rubikonchik (talk) 15:56, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

By the way, I have provided links to three different articles (Bulagrian, Ukrainian and Russian) referring to inetrnational press regarding the latest mobster affair with Sofia Rotaru's name.--Rubikonchik (talk) 08:31, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

As I suggested, the material about her financial affairs belongs to the Personal life section. And the title does not have to be literally sourced, just the term 'phenomena' here is way too strong. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 16:01, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Why do you say the term "phenomenon" is strong here? --Rubikonchik (talk) 18:10, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

The word phenomenon has two meanings: philosophical - and cultural - phenomenon (SUCCESS) someone or something extremely successful, often because of special qualities or abilities: The Beatles were a phenomenon - nobody had heard anything like them before. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 18:30, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

This is not about HER financial affairs, but about people making money with her name, people who have studied the way she tours and her true producers act...--Rubikonchik (talk) 18:12, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Then it fits no section at all and it is too small for a section of its own. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 18:24, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

It perfectly fits the section about her fans as it existed before you deleted it: with references to Galina Starodubova and Taivanchik links.--Rubikonchik (talk) 21:19, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

If you genuinely feel, mobsters who abuse her name for deceipt, belong to her fan section, so be it. In a twisted way they do. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 22:20, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

By the way, speaking of phenomenon, just by random googling I found already many different sources mentioning Sofia Rotaru and what is going on around her as the phenomenon 1) "Небо - это ты...", Олег ВЕРГЕЛИС, - Почему возник психоз вокруг Софии Ротару - «Киевские ведомости», 5 марта 2004г; 2) http://www.segodnya.ua/interview/12050373.html 3) http://www.kp.ru/daily/23409/34318/ 4) http://www.prazdnikinfo.ru/5/18/i21_3492.htm 5) http://www.newsmusic.ru/news_3_14920.htm --Rubikonchik (talk) 21:35, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I cannot get my hands on the first source, the second one is an interview with Rotaru. How could an interview with a singer establish she is called a phenomenon? The third one is a tabloid. The title of the fourth site speaks for itself - translating into PartyInfo.ru. The fifth one is an interview with Kirkorov where I cannot spot any synonyms for the term 'phenomenon'. So what you have presented, is evidence for nothing. Try again. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 22:20, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

1) link for the first article: http://www.sofiarotaru.com/news/events/event:NeboEtoTy

2) Here is for the second article: "The family of Sofia Rotaru is considered a phenomenon of the show-business..."

See, it's the journalist who is saying this, just like in the article about The Twilight...

И САМИ ЛЮБОВЬ СОХРАНИЛИ, И СВОИХ ДЕТЕЙ НАУЧИЛИ. Семью Ротару считают феноменом отечественного шоу-бизнеса: обычно среди представителей этой профессии не встретишь человека, сохранившего свой брак на долгие десятилетия. А вот София Михайловна со своим мужем Анатолием Евдокименко прожила прожила более трех десятков лет, пока Анатолий Кириллович не ушел из жизни. Но свою большую любовь родители словно передали детям. Сын Ротару Руслан и невестка Светлана поженились в аккурат в день серебряной свадьбы Софии Михайловны и Анатолия Кирилловича. Их брак уже также можно назвать проверенным временем — 15-ю годами, и судя по всему, расставаться супруги не собираются.

«Я бы посоветовала всем молодоженам: в первую очередь научиться терпению, состраданию, взаимопониманию – и стараться подольше сохранить любовь», — как-то заметила Ротару.

Алена Медведева

3) third article: Yevgeny Yevtushenko wrote athe following poem to Sofia Rotaru "... The people are starving: they are hungry for music. And women are moaning "how thin she is!..."

By the way, this is not tabloid (see explanation above).

«Голод на музыку»

- София Михайловна, когда-то Евгений Евтушенко посвятил вам проникновенное стихотворение, где были строки: «Народ голодает: на музыку голод. И охают бабы: «Какая худая!..»

4) fourth article: "Why does Sofia Rotaru gather full concert halls, stadiums in Russia? - This is indeed the phenomenon of Rotaru herself. She is living her renaissance right now: she released a quality product, filmed expensive clips, created the image of a beautiful mature woman. This was not done either by Alla Pugacheva, nor Larisa Dolina, who are in the stage of artistic decline at this moment...."

А почему София Ротару собирает полные залы, стадионы в России?

- Это как раз феномен самой Ротару. У нее сейчас ренессанс: выдала качественный продукт, сняла дорогие клипы, создала красивый образ зрелой женщины. Это не сделали ни Алла Пугачева, ни Лариса Долина, у которых сейчас творческий спад.*

5) fifth article: speaks of Sofia Rotaru' unattained level by any other Russian singer. By the way, this article refers to her as Russian again, so this goes for the argument of who she is one more time.

6) http://www.rma.ru/show/news895.html;30 - Sofia Rotaru became in 2008 the most aired singer in Moscow with "I will call aaplanet with your name / Ya nazovu palnetu imenem tvoim" (next audio file to be uploaded)

7) http://show.oboz.ua/article/8632.htm - Sofia Rotaru took the first place in the rating of the show queens of Ukraine (goes also for the argument about "Pop Queen" as declared by the Estonian newspaper)--Rubikonchik (talk) 08:25, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Contents pushed by Rubikonchik

Here we go again. Rubikonchik, please show sentence by sentence, where exactly did we reach agreement on adding the info in your newest edits on this article? --Jaan Pärn (talk) 08:19, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Rubikonchik, you do not appear to be grasping the idea voiced in numerous times on this talk page, that a fan page as a reference does not constitute notability for the fan page itself. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 09:17, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh come on, I thought we had these issues dealt with. Rubikonchik, your edits are really not good. These huge changes you're making to the lead are hard to read and are making it way, way too long. The fan club stuff is still original research, and things like YouTube should never be used as references. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 16:15, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Why is it difficult to read the lead as it is currently edited. Check for the lead of Mina (Italian singer), where Jaan Pärn is actively involved. Should we inspire from that one as a good example?--Rubikonchik (talk) 16:24, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Ok, propose a lead here, let's discuss it and make a good one.--Rubikonchik (talk) 16:17, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

That's just one issue; there are a lot more problems in your edits that you haven't addressed, like the fan club stuff. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 16:20, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

This is what we have as of today:

Sofia Rotaru (full name Sofia Mihailovna Rotaru-Evdokimenko; Romanian: Sofia Rotaru Ukrainian: Софiя Ротару) is a Ukrainian, of Moldovan origin, formerly Soviet singer and pop star. She is known for combining a lyrical deep rich voice, sex appeal, and social or religious themes. In the former USSR her career was marked by her stage success and numerous controversies. She has been named the "Queen of Pop" by the media. Sofia Rotaru is one of the highest paid singers in the world and the highest paid singer in Ukraine. In 2008, she declared revenue significantly higher than 500 million hryvnia (about $100 million).

In 1986, she was the second female pop singer to receive the prestigious title of "People's Artist of USSR" and in 2000 she was named The Singer of the XXth Century. Today Sofia Rotaru is a Citizen of Ukraine and a Meritorious Citizen of Crimea and Yalta. Her repertoire consists of more than 400 songs performed in the Russian, Ukrainian, Moldavian, Polish, Romanian, Bulgarian, Serbian, German, French, English and Italian languages. The city of Yalta is her main residence, although she also lives in Moscow, Kiev, and Baden-Baden. She has received numerous awards, including: Meritorious Artist of the Ukrainian SSR, People's Artist of Ukraine, People's Artist of Moldavian SSR, People's Artist of USSR, Laureate of the Young Communist League Prize, Hero of Moldova, and Cavalier of the Republican Order of Moldova. in August 2002 Former President of Ukraine Leonid Kuchma and President of Russia Vladimir Putin gave awards to Sofia Rotaru (for her 55th birthday), bestowing upon her the high rank of the Hero of Ukraine for her "outstanding personal merits in the sphere of art", and the Russian order "For merits before the Nation", respectively. While Sofia Rotaru commonly goes by her last name, her official last name is Yevdokymenko-Rotaru (Ukrainian: Євдокименко-Ротару). Yevdokymenko was the surname of her late husband. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rubikonchik (talk • contribs) 16:21, July 6, 2009

Okay. First, this isn't a fansite, and all of this text makes her seem to be the greatest person ever to live. We don't need to mention every single language she's ever sang in. It's totally POV to say "She is known for combining a lyrical deep rich voice, sex appeal, and social or religious themes." All of her awards should be listed in the Awards section, not in the lead. Either way, it's not just the lead; you readded pretty much the entire Phenomenon section, which is rife with inappropriate references such as YouTube links. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 16:26, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

May be you are right, and I am most willing to change it for the better. Should we inspire from the lead of Mina (Italian singer), where Jaan Pärn is actively involved, as a good example?--Rubikonchik (talk) 16:30, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

That page is none of my concern. We should really go based on articles that have been deemed good, like Celine Dion and Gwen Stefani (FA class). — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 16:37, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Rubikonchik, you need to start listening. If several people say that the contents you are relentlessly pushing are biased and make the article sound like a fan site, then probably you need to do something. I have tried my best to change the contents towards neutrality. This has involved removing several POV and peacock statements. The burden of evidence lies on you, so start providing solid sources for your statements. Likewise, the burden of neutral tone lies on you, so please re-write your desired statements that were removed and post them here for discussion. Posting the entire lead in your version is not constructive. -- Jaan Pärn (talk) 16:54, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Alright, I've given the lead a shot. In general, leads should have a general overview of the person's career. I added in a line about how her career started (maybe I got it wrong?) and for how long it's been continuing. I also moved most of the Awards stuff down to the Awards section, and I tried to combine a bunch of the old text with the new. Oh, and I added her date of birth, which was missing for some reason. Thoughts? — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 16:56, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Generally looks good to me, apart from the fact that the only cited source that calls her Queen of Pop is the Russian edition of Postimees which to my opinion does not constitute enough notability for a lead. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 16:59, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Uh, why not? Is it not reliable? — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 17:00, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

It is but it is a minor news channel with just a few tens of thousands of readers. -- Jaan Pärn (talk) 17:04, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Hmm. It's notable enough to have its own Wiki article. Seems okay to me.. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 17:05, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Alright then. -- Jaan Pärn (talk) 17:08, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

References

Dubious source?

Jaan, could you maybe explain why you deleted a reference to http://naviny.by/rubrics/bomond/2008/08/07/ic_news_121_295153/ and instead put in a dubious tag? Why is that link not acceptable? I ran it through Google's translate service and it seems to say what the text did. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 13:00, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Could anybody explain why are we discussing the material from the List of highest paid musicians in 2008 again? The source does not refer to any original research neither comments it critically, therefore most probably its source is probably to be the oral statement made by Deputy Chairman of the State Tax Administration Serhii Lekar. The summary statement, as communicated by the Ukrainian News Agency can be found here: http://www.ukranews.com/eng/article/137362.html . An encyclopedia like Wikipedia cannot base such a contentious claim (Rotaru being the highest earning artist in the world beating Madonna by 2.5 times and earning 15 times more than the the highest paid Russian artist) on an oral statement (mis?)interpreted by newspapers before it discussed critically or included in a comprehensive report like the one by Forbes.--Jaan Pärn (talk) 14:03, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

(ec) Okay, fair enough. It would certainly be synthesis to say she made more than any other musical artist in the world, as we saw on the list of highest paid celebrities. Would it be okay if we used the reference you gave above to support a sentence like "In 2007, Rotaru reported the highest income of all celebrities in the Ukraine."? And as a side note, 500 million hryvnia is around $65 million. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 14:22, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

"In 2007, Rotaru reported the highest income of the celebrities in the Ukraine." would be fair enough. The sum should not be mentioned. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 14:30, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I cannot agree with Jaan Pärn. The information about revenues of Sofia Rotaru is not a claim, nor is it contentious. Numerous most respectful sources (Russian, Ukrainian, Bielorussian - these are just the ones that I found) have reported this information, including citing the numbers. All of these sources were discussed on the talk page of List of highest paid musicians in 2008. Moreover, none of the sources questions the validity of such information. The only "source" on internet that I found who would call it a claim and question it is User talk:Erikupoeg. Like I said on User:HelloAnnyong's talk page, the reasons why that List of highest paid musicians in 2008 was deleted have nothing to do with sources regarding revenues of Sofia Rotaru per se. However, all of the "would be" concerns of User talk:Erikupoeg, including his attempts to give a false translation were all rebutted on that talk page. That's why it would be useful to have access to it back again. However, it remains unclear to me why User talk:Erikupoeg wants to discuss the same issue again and again? --Rubikonchik (talk) 14:58, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

(copied from this edit): The issue with the revenues of Sofia Rotaru is a quite simple one and should not be confused with the article List of highest paid musicians in 2008 per se. I undertstand and agree with the decision to delete List of highest paid musicians in 2008 as none of the sources cited Sofia Rotaru as second in the list and that Forbes' list itself was not cited by any other secondary source. The only reason why I was looking to restore its talk page, is that on it I have provided numerous links to the articles of most respectful sources citing clear unambiguous information about the revenues of Sofia Rotaru in 2008. All of this is just to spare the time (my time). If User:Erikupoeg keeps inserting the tag "dubious-discuss", by deleting my sources which clearly state the amount declared, I'll have to add ten or twenty references if necessary.--Rubikonchik (talk) 14:43, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

If nothing else, I think you're trying to use this as a way of glorifying Rotaru. This isn't a fan page; this is supposed to be a neutral article. And adding all sorts of text about how she made more money than any other performer on the planet might be adding a bit too much WP:WEIGHT. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 14:54, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Exactly. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 14:59, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

You are wrong, as you can see from my edit, I am not glorifying, nor comparing her revenues to anybody else at all. All I do is merely stating them.--Rubikonchik (talk) 15:02, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

That, um, isn't your edit. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 15:04, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it's mine, see the left column.--Rubikonchik (talk) 15:06, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Anyway, Rubikonchik's fanaticism in "Rotaru $ 100 mln"-pushing tells the complete story. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 15:07, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Again, User talk:Erikupoeg is bordering Ad hominem. There is nothing fanatical to merely state someone's revenues, cited by clear unambiguous respectful different sources.--Rubikonchik (talk) 15:11, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

First, the red indicates the changes made from the previous version to the one on the right. That diff is Jaan's edit. Did you mean these three edits? — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 15:10, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Even if the sources for the claim were unambiguous (which they are not as I have explained above), the way you are not letting go of the claim is fanatic. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 15:15, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Anyhow, to get Sofia Rotaru's revenues included, you would need a second hand source which relies on first hand written evidence. So far I have not seen one. Please point the source out if I have missed it. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 15:18, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I meant this (by the way, why does the caption text does not appear in the infobox?) and this (note how user Jaan Pärn explicitely misinterpretes the consensus which had nothing to do with sources on Rotaru's revenues per se) and this, and finally this All of the second, third, fourth and so on sources were presented. Again, as of today, YOU are the only "source" that describes the information as ambiguous. You have never described how ambiguous it is, except a fallen attempt to present a false translation.--Rubikonchik (talk) 15:22, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Once again, none of your sources rely on first hand written evidence. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 15:28, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

All of the sources rely on the written evdence - which is the written tax declaration, or the written article/research by journalists.--Rubikonchik (talk) 15:53, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Both are false assertions. The articles interpret the tax official's words. The reporters have not laid hands on Rotaru's tax declaration (which could be prohibited by law). A report without sources or methods is fiction. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 15:59, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

This is your personal assertion where did the reporters lay down their hands. What is clear and official is that in her tax declaration, Sofia Rotaru declared significantly more than 100,000,000 USD pursuant to the official statement of the Ukrainian tax authorities' speaker and pursuant to the official respected press articles. It is useless to try to give it some other subjective personal interpretation of yours. You have tried it with translation and it didn't work already once. Remember, for Forbes, you, surprisingly did not care where had the journalists lay their hands... Would that be because Sofia Rotaru was not on the list?--Rubikonchik (talk) 16:05, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Here is the official statement: http://www.ukranews.com/eng/article/137362.html . Show me exactly where does the official state Sofia Rotaru's revenues. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 16:09, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Please, refer to all of the previously given sources.--Rubikonchik (talk) 16:15, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

The source that you cite: http://www.dengi.ua/news/39082.html does not quote the official on stating 100mln as Rotaru's revenues but merely synthesises his two statements made in entirely different contexts. Your other sources are just as synthetic, provided they even bother to cite their sources. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 16:17, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I recall you, please stop bad faith editing. You clearly intentionally misinterpret the offical citations and sources trying to make them say what they don't, nor have you provided any citation or source whatsoverer for you POV assertions.--Rubikonchik (talk) 16:36, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Break

There are plenty of other sources, remember, Kommersant, Argumenty i Fakty, Komsomolskaya Pravda, Belorusskie novosti, etc, etc, etc... What methods are they using? Again, I repeat, please avoid giving your own personal interpretation based exclusively on your subjective feelings.--Rubikonchik (talk) 16:20, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

(ec) We can take this to WP:RSN if you both really want to argue about the source. But really, Rubikonchik, why is it such a huge deal that the article says "500 million hryvnia"? Why isn't it enough to say that she made more than anyone else? — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 16:21, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Because we'll be comparing, which is not the scope of the cited by me sources.--Rubikonchik (talk) 16:23, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

The only thing that Lekar has stated on Rotaru, is: "Sofia Rotaru, for example, reported the highest income of all celebrities." as reported in http://www.dengi.ua/news/39082.html . You are welcome to present more direct quotes. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 16:26, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

To HelloAnnYong: Stating Rotaru earning 500mln hryvnia makes a world of difference ~because to a person who can calculate and compare numbers, it is the same as stating: "Rotaru is one of the highest earning artists in the world". Technically it would be exactly the same kind of synthesis as we were against in the List of highest paid musicians in 2008. Jaan Pärn (talk) 16:29, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

To start with, you may go ahead and check my last reference to Belorusskie Novosti... As for the "synthesis", it's your own personal interpretation again.--Rubikonchik (talk) 16:33, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Belorusskie Novosti does not refer to any sources nor methods and is under the circumstances no substance for any claim. All evidence we have yet, is: "Sofia Rotaru, for example, reported the highest income of all celebrities." as reported in http://www.dengi.ua/news/39082.html . Please provide more.--Jaan Pärn (talk) 16:39, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

The source that states that she makes more than 500 million hryvnia isn't really acceptable. If nothing else, it grossly overcalculated how much that is in US dollars by about 40%. And there are currently two people who are in agreement that we shouldn't use what the source states. We could keep going on and on like this for days without getting anywhere. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 16:47, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Why is "The source that states that she makes more than 500 million hryvnia isn't really acceptable" (by the way, there are many sources which mention excatly this amount)? Also, how did you come up with miscalculation and 40%??? Who are the people in agreement that we shouldn't use that (which exactly and why exactly?) source? --Rubikonchik (talk) 17:40, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) I came up with that miscalculation by using xe.com. Right now, 500,000,000.00 UAH = 65,316,788.69 USD. That's a $35 million difference. Maybe it's not 40%, but that's certainly a heavy overcalculation. And the people who think we shouldn't use that source are me and Jaan Parn. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 17:47, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

You are wrong and it is indeed a miscalculation. The exchange rate should be calculated at the date of declared sums, which is end of 2007. That is what all the sources refer to. For your help: http://www.exchange-rates.org/Rate/USD/UAH/1-1-2008 --Rubikonchik (talk) 22:05, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

• Once again, there may be a hundred sources that claim Rotaru $ 100 mln. As this is a highly critical matter - talking about the highest earning artist of the world - the greatest degree of scrutiny should be applied. No newsflash is evidence itself without referring to its evidence. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 17:52, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, scrutiny I agree, but personally colored imagination or intentional misinterpretation or false translation should be put aside, only sources, and there are plenty!--Rubikonchik (talk) 22:05, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

There may be plenty of sources but little or no evidence. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 22:10, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

"There may be plenty of sources but little or no evidence" - this is only your own personal statement based on your own personal (mis?)intepretation of clear figures and official data.--Rubikonchik (talk) 23:39, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

On this page so far, despite all the lipwork, you have provided two sources - Belorusskie Novosti and http://www.dengi.ua/news/39082.html . First of them cites no first hand sources at all, therefore is not a proper second hand source. Dengi.ua reveals its synthesis: first it claims, that Lekar has stated that Rotaru declared the highest sum in 2008 which is false, as the actual statement was: "Sofia Rotaru, for example, reported the highest income of all celebrities" as we see in http://www.ukranews.com/eng/article/137362.html . Not of all people, only the celebrities. However, DengiUA follows the assumption that Rotaru has declared the highest sum of all people and assigns the highest sum declared by an idividual to Rotaru. So before anybody provides a proper second hand source which either directly quotes Lekar on Rotaru's sum or has laid hands on Rotaru's tax declaration, all we will have in the article on her income is the fact that she is the #1 celebrity in Ukraine by income. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 08:12, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Again, it is useless to provide your personal would be "analysis" of the clear figures. You may not like them, but they are what they are and are clear and unambiguous. None of the provided sources require your personal misinterpretation. The Ukrainian tax authorities have officially reported that Sofia Rotaru declared considerably more than USD 100,000,000 http://kommersant.ru/doc.aspx?DocsID=915810 (Kommersant - http://www.kommersant.uk.com/ about the source)

Here is a rough google translation: / / Foreign POCKET
And growth in the hryvna
The singer Sofia Rotaru declared the highest incomes in the Ukraine in 2007, said deputy chairman of the State Tax Administration of Ukraine Sergiy Lekar. He did not specify the amount of declared, but noted that revenue of the People's Artist of Ukraine "is much higher than 500 million hryvnia" (about $ 100 million). He also said that as a result of last year, 360 Ukrainians declared income of more than 10 million hryvnia (about $ 2 million). Such a declaration for the year 2006 brought 200 citizens of Ukraine. More than 1 billion hryvnia income during the past year in Ukraine was not officially received. Deputy Chairman of the State Tax Administration noted that the high income declare football players, boxers, actors.--Rubikonchik (talk) 09:06, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Same story, same numbers and another most respectful source: http://rian.com.ua/economy/20080718/77966106.html (source: RIA Novosti http://en.rian.ru/docs/about/novosti.html about the source)--Rubikonchik (talk) 09:21, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

The fact that several publications repeat the error does not verify it. These sources are contradicted by the only direct quote we have. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 09:50, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Who are you to personally decide what the direct quote is and on what criteria? The sources refer to the official statement quoting it properly. Please, do not invent things which do not exist or esle it is a clear lie from your part: "These sources are contradicted by the only direct quote we have" - This is a completely unfounded made up statement. No source contradicts whatsoever and they do refer to the direct quote. I am afraid you are getting lost in all of your imagined interpretations... Also, having repeatdely recourse to Ad hominem against me does not give your arguments more credit, especially as it is in our case, I provide the links and references and all you do is interpret them as it comes to your mind...--Rubikonchik (talk) 10:09, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

There is a difference between referring to a direct quote without providing it and a direct quote itself. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 10:21, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

You haven't proven anything. Please cite exact paragraphs to which you refer. Oterwise it all sounds as your personal imagination.--Rubikonchik (talk) 10:22, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Per WP:BURDEN, I do not need to prove anything. Currently, there is an editor who keeps asserting something while the rest of the involved editors challenge his claim. The procedure per WP:V is that the editor who wishes to add material must provide the evidence that will convince his fellow editors. If that will not happen in sufficient time (a week should be enough), the claim will be removed from the article. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 10:34, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I am afraid you got the rules wrong in this case. First of all you are the one who asserts something different from what the official sources say, so the burden of proof is on you. Secondly, so far you have failed to prove and no one else has followed your path of intentional misinterpretation of official sources without being able to cite any source in your support.--Rubikonchik (talk) 14:37, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

That is because I and nobody else but you has a claim to back with evidence. You see, I and most likely HelloAnnyong are not convinced in what you are saying because there are errors and controversies in your sources. The most serious of them is that they mix up what Lekar said about Rotaru as the highest earning celebrity and his statements about the highest earning individual. Being a matter contested by two editors and likely to be contested in the future, only the statement from the direct quote should be used in the article. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 15:04, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

First I think User:HelloAnnyong can very well answer for himself and I have not seen him contesting the earnings of Sofia Rotaru per se. Second, you have never proved any of your claims "they mix up what Lekar said about Rotaru as the highest earning celebrity and his statements about the highest earning individual" - you didn't bother to provide an exact citation, nor any other source which supports your subjective interpretation based on imaginary reading of clear text. Plenty of quotes of the direct statement were provided from most respectful sources, inluding major world news agencies.--Rubikonchik (talk) 15:36, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

"I agree as any reason is good for the exclusion" I think this speaks for itself - namely of the capacity of Jaan Pärn to argue and clearly indicates in whose regard "fanaticism" is appropriate as a term...--Rubikonchik (talk) 10:50, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

User:HelloAnnyong, your edit is not clear to me. I have sources and they are reliable. What's wrong, could you explain please?--Rubikonchik (talk) 10:50, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

I have reverted last edits (edit 1 and defamatory POV pushing edit by User:Erikupoegfor the following reasons: 1) you have not provided any reasons to go back to User:Erikupoeg's last edit at all, 2) User:Erikupoeg's last edit is contentious as it pushes his own POV through with no sources to support his POV, 3) all of my edits are supported by reliable sources.--Rubikonchik (talk) 10:59, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Break, again

See [1] . --Jaan Pärn (talk) 11:22, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

User:Erikupoeg, please stop pushing your unsupported by any source nor citation POV and please stop insulting me. Using defamation does not add any weigth to your would be "argument". You have clearly shown, to me at least, bad faith in the foregoing debate regarding Sofia Rotaru's revenues. First you provided unexisting interpretation of clear sources, including providing a false translation. Second you have clearly said what was your goal here: "any reason is good for the exclusion". So I guess any further debate regarding this matter should take in the appropriate place on Wikipedia with you, but also other users who will appreciate your "good faith". Third, the quote of User:HelloAnnyongn you have provided does not mean anything as 1) the reason why the provided sources are considered as unreliable was not provided, 2) no comparison with other artists is made, as a matter of fact. So, as you can see, these assertions are false.--Rubikonchik (talk) 13:03, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

You know, I put a second break in this section so we wouldn't have to keep scrolling all the way down to the bottom. Jaan, it's a little incorrect to call Rubikonchik's edits vandalism. Having said that, I still agree with the removal of those edits. I just went to http://aif.ru/culture/article/23952 and kept getting hit with popups. I'm pretty sure that invalidates any sort of reliability the site has. And I'll reiterate what I said, even though Jaan gave you a link to it: in my opinion, your addition to how much money she earned is pushing entirely too much weight. Rubikonchik, Jaan and I have previously agreed that a sentence stating "Sofia Rotaru, for example, reported the highest income of all celebrities." would be acceptable. (At least, I thought that would be okay?) We're trying to resolve this issue, but you just keep pushing. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 13:28, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

You are contradicting to what you have said earlier. You didn't want to make any comparisons, didn't you? Now, Erikupoeg simply and plainly deletes all references, whereas you suggest something else. There comes his bad faith editing again.--Rubikonchik (talk) 08:30, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

No, HelloAnnyong is suggesting exactly the same thing for you to stop pushing your ideas which have reached no agreement from any other editors. Instead of pushing new ideas to the articles, you could be citing sources for the old ones. The article, mostly written by you, virtually lacks citations which has been pointed out since April while your effort has been elsewhere and has produced few results. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 12:39, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

User HelloAnnyong is not suggesting what you edited. Please stop inetntional bad faithed editing and personal attacks, how many times should one ask you this?--Rubikonchik (talk) 14:06, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Here are quotes of HelloAnnyong that say otherwise: "Jaan and I have previously agreed that a sentence stating "Sofia Rotaru, for example, reported the highest income of all celebrities." would be acceptable." and "We're trying to resolve this issue, but you just keep pushing." --Jaan Pärn (talk) 14:46, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Stating what the government guy said, and only that, is sufficient for me. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 15:02, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I repeat, even here, User Erikupoeg keeps bad faith editing. It results clearly from the posts of user HelloAnnyong and from the last one in particular that he wants to keep the reference and namely to quote the statement of the official, which I have already done (in Russian only though, but translation is not a problem). User Erikupoeg, keeps on blindly deleting the whole thing again and again for invented unexisting reasons. --Rubikonchik (talk) 16:39, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Break 2

I can't believe this conversation is still going on. This entire thing is about adding "more than 500 million hryvnia." Seriously? That's really worth days and days of fighting? — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 15:30, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

It is a simple in or out question and has to get settled somehow, hasn't it? --Jaan Pärn (talk) 15:38, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Let's say, for argument's sake, that I accept that the source is reliable. Even if that were true, I still wouldn't want the text included on the page, as I believe it's adding way too much WP:WEIGHT to the topic. Yes, we know that she made more money than everyone else on the entire planet. But it's dipping too much into resembling a fan site and starts us down a slippery slope of comparing her to other recording artists, which we should not do. If you look at the featured-class articles for performing artists, by and large they don't ever mention how much income someone made. That is why I oppose the inclusion of her income. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 15:44, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree as any reason is good for the exclusion. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 15:59, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Romanian vs Moldavian

So Olahus made this change from Moldavian to Romanian. According to Moldovan language, "the language spoken in Moldova is identical to Romanian... but for political reasons both names Moldovan and Romanian are used inside the country." We can argue about how to describe the language, but changing "Moldavian heritage" to "Romanian heritage" is a pretty heavy change, it seems. I guess the question is what the sources say. Olahus didn't provide any references when he or she made that change, but there's a quote from her in the article that says "that the Moldavian family name". That seems as good as anything to me to show that she is of Moldavian heritage. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 13:16, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

We do not neet to argue about that. We have already plenty of useless arguing here. If you find a source where she is referred to as Romanian, then go ahead and cite it in the article.--Rubikonchik (talk) 10:27, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Olahus (talk · contribs) made this change again today, but it seems like all three of us - that is, Rubikonchik, Erikupoeg (presumably) and I - are all in agreement on the fact that it should say Moldavian. Again, no sources were given, so I don't really see why the change is needed. And the fact that the three of us are in agreement on something is pretty incredible in itself, I'd say. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 17:28, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Speaking of Romania, the things related, as far as I know, to it are : 1) sister of Sofia - Aurica Rotaru told in her interview that the village they were born belonged before to the territory of Romania, 2) Sofia Rotaru toured Romania in 70's with Chervona Ruta, for more info on that issue please check Billboard 27 January 1979 (146 pages, page 88 section "INTERNATIONAL" by Octavian Ursulescu from Bucharest)) ISSN 0006-2510, published by Nielsen Business Media, Inc. quote: "...ARIA [the Romanian Artistic Management Agency] has also arranged for visits to Romania of leading foreign performers. Included are: Sofia Rotaru and her group Chervona Ruta from Russia, ..." , 3) the language of performance of some of Sofia Rotaru's songs was indicated as Romanian on some of her albums (which exactly, I don't remember, good luck checking more than 40 albums' covers...)--Rubikonchik (talk) 22:17, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

@ HelloAnnyong: When speaking about the "Moldavian" family name, Sofia Rotaru only cited what the Soviet authorities said about her family name. Not what she believes about it. Moreover, she changed her name back from "Rotari" to "Rotaru". --Olahus (talk) 11:00, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Olahus, I gave you exact reference for the Romanian tour to insert into the article, instead you suggest to insert what? "User Omahus thinks that "Sofia Rotaru only cited what the Soviet authorities said about her family name. Not what she believes about it"?--Rubikonchik (talk) 20:42, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Fine, I hope the issue is closed now. --Olahus (talk) 09:07, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

The issue isn't closed. You still haven't cited any sources or anything. It's your original research that she said only what the authorities said and not what she believes. There is nothing on the page that suggests that she changed her name from Rotari to Rotaru - or that Rotari is a Romanian name. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 14:07, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

It would take solid reference to change it either way. Before such material is presented, it should rest in the original form which was probably Moldavian. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 14:18, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Can you explain why it should be readed "Moldavian" instead of "Romanian". Which point of view it actually? Sofia Rotaru's ? I doubt it. There is also no consensus to use the designation "Moldavian". --Olahus (talk) 14:16, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Can you provide a source on it called 'Romanian' instead of 'Moldavian'? Before you don't, it will rest as is. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 14:24, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

We use http://www.senat.org/integ4/txt11.htm as a reference right now, and on there, it says "Sofia Rotaru: I was born and raised in Ukraine, the Moldovan family here - my home and I - a citizen of Ukraine." At least, that's how Google Translate translates it. I'm pretty sure that means that she's Moldavian. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 14:37, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

• User:Olahus, this discussion is pointless, just like was the debate initiated by User:Erikupoeg regarding the revenues of Sofia Rotaru. In both cases we are dealing with clear information, which does not require any interpretation whatsoever. None of the available links designates Sofia Rotaru as Romanian, nor does any information/document even claims that she wouldn't be of Moldavian origin or there would have been a mistake somewhere. Nor did she herself, at least to my knowledge, ever declare she was Romanian for any reason. She did change her name, and I think it is explained in the article why. The name change has again, nothing to do with Romania. Also, I have provided you with a citation (http://books.google.com/books?id=JSUEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PT123&dq=sofia+rotaru&hl=en ) you can insert into the article, with an exact proven and verifiable source Billboard, speaking about Sofia Rotaru touring Romania in 1979. Why don't you want to include this information?--Rubikonchik (talk) 21:44, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Rubikonchik, you have right. And HelloAnnyong, thank you for the clarification. --Olahus (talk) 12:56, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

There is no such thing as a Moldovan language. They speak Romanian in Moldova and I don't see why the political Soviet propaganda to make up another identity for the people of Moldova and to distance them from their Romanian origins, should be used on Wikipedia. Porcina (talk) 08:22, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Moldovan language is the official name of the language spoken in Moldova. Sources, including her album sleeves, overwhelmingly state the language as Moldovan. This is not the place to WP:RGW. Jaan Pärn (talk) 11:13, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Sigh

Following Rubikonchik's edit here, I think I should state this plainly, in case it wasn't already obvious: what I said in this edit - "Stating what the government guy said, and only that, is sufficient for me." - does not mean "In 2008, she declared revenue significantly higher than 500 million hryvnia (about $100 million)." — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 14:18, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, that's what said the official.--Rubikonchik (talk) 20:32, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

No, that is not. Here are the direct quotes again as reported by Ukranews: "Lekar noted that Sofia Rotaru, for example, reported the highest income of all celebrities." and "the State Tax Administration registered three persons with income exceeding UAH 1 billion in 2005." --Jaan Pärn (talk) 20:42, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Please stop deliberately bad faith editing. This has been already discussed and exact citation was given numerous times from one of the world's largest news agency, respectful press sources as well. The number was given. It is useless to try to give it personal interpretation, otherwise this remains a mere lie.--Rubikonchik (talk) 20:49, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I would not go as far as using the word 'lie' here but surely enough, RIA Novosti quotes Lekar saying that Rotaru declared the biggest incomes while Ukranews reports Lekar saying: "Sofia Rotaru, for example, reported the highest income of all celebrities". One of the news agencies is citing a false quote. What makes you so sure it is Ukranews? --Jaan Pärn (talk) 20:58, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

So are we allowing this text in now? Or perhaps you'd like to explain why the text approved by me and Jaan - "In 2008, Rotaru reported the highest income of all celebrities in the Ukraine." - is unacceptable. You've avoided answering that for quite a long time now. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 21:20, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

User:Erikupoeg is exactly lying. http://kommersant.ru/doc.aspx?DocsID=915810 and http://rian.com.ua/economy/20080718/77966106.html clearly give quotes of Sofia Rotaru's revenues indicating the number. No source says that anyhtong is wrong with these citations, except certainly personal "analysis" of User:Erikupoeg, moreover, the source he quotes cites only half of the quote cited by the first two mentioned sources.--Rubikonchik (talk) 21:48, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I translated the first link and got this: "Sofia Rotaru declared the highest incomes in the Ukraine in 2007, said deputy chairman of the State Tax Administration of Ukraine Sergiy healer. He did not specify the amount of declared, but noted that revenue People's Artist of Ukraine "is much higher than 500 million hryvnia (about $ 100 million)." And the second link says the exact same thing. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 21:55, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

RIA Novosti reports two quotes. First of them: "Sofia Rotaru declared the highest incomes in the Ukraine in 2007," and second: "The largest income significantly exceeds 500 million (hryvnia) (about $ 100 million)". Kommersant reports the identical first quote while it modifies the second, saying:"that revenue People's Artist of Ukraine "is much higher than 500 million hryvnia (about $ 100 million)."" (note the double quotes). The first quote by Ukranews is not half of anything but matches exactly what RIA Novosti and Kommersant report as their first quote. The only reasonable thing to do is to include the first quote reported by each of the news agencies, and leave the rest of the shambles out. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 22:07, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Again, you lie. Here is the simple rough translation by http://translate.google.com of

1) http://rian.com.ua/economy/20080718/77966106.html "...People's Artist of Ukraine Sofia Rotaru declared the highest revenue for the year 2008, said deputy chairman of the State Tax Administration of Ukraine Sergiy healer at a press briefing on Friday.

In doing so, he did not specify the amount of declared, but added that "the most revenue significantly exceeds 500 million (hryvnia) (about 100 million dollars)...."

2) http://kommersant.ru/doc.aspx?DocsID=915810

"...The singer Sofia Rotaru declared the highest incomes in the Ukraine in 2007, said deputy chairman of the State Tax Administration of Ukraine Sergiy healer. He did not specify the amount of declared, but noted that revenue People's Artist of Ukraine "is much higher than 500 million hryvnia (about $ 100 million)...."--Rubikonchik (talk) 22:23, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

User: Erikupoeg, the matter is simple, all you have to do is to prove the contrary of what the sources say. So far you did not and your mere personal assertions, deliberately bad faithed, cannot certainly account for anything.--Rubikonchik (talk) 22:26, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Here we go with the outrageous claim of Sofia Rotaru being the highest earning entertainer on the planet getting added again and again. We did not agree to allow this in the article. Why is it there? --Jaan Pärn (talk) 14:34, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

The only truly "outrageous claim" here is your fake translation and all the "hard work" you perform to push it through... Also, regarding your last edits where you specify who exactly calls Sofia Rotaru Queen of Pop or Queen of Russian Pop, you may add this http://www.radioportal.ru/news/5173/pyatiletie-festivalya-legendy-retro-fm-otmetili-bolee-20-000-zritelei and this http://legendyretrofm.ru/press/2009/89. But honestly, I think the article looks silly when you add to Sofia Rotaru called Queen of Russian / International Pop "by Mr. X, Mrs. Y; Mr. W; Mrs A;" and so on and so forth...--Rubikonchik (talk) 15:27, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Edit warring, full protection, C and C

Hi. I protected the article page today for 3 months due to the edit war that is going on. This is a very long period of time; I chose it because this has been a longstanding battle on the talk page and article, and I don't want any of you to simply wait for the protection to end.

Okay, my advice boils down to C and C.

The first C is civility. The reverts, edit summaries, and talk page have been less than civil. Remain civil. Step away from the keyboard if necessary.

Secondly, consensus. Please reach a consensus on what text should be included and what isn't important. This should be done BEFORE any editing happens. Even if someone was to post to the article page, this is when you could (and should) use dispute resolution, NOT engage in an edit war.

Hopefully this only takes a few days and begins after this post in a civil, adult, manner.

I won't be watching this page- too much drama for me. If obvious incivility or personal attacks take place, let me know. If you reach consensus, also let me know and I'll happily unprotect the page. If I happen to be off Wiki when you are done, just go to WP:RFPP and point them at this message. However, they'll want to see that you asked me first, since I'm the one who has stepped in.

Okay? Good. Now, apologize, stay cool, stay civil, and drop the stick and back slowly away from the horse carcass. tedder (talk) 23:35, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Wow. I step out for the day and look what happens. I'm inclined to just step away from this article altogether and let another party get involved. Three months is way too long for me to stay active here. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 01:11, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Actually, this gives everyone a chance to calm down. It's a good thing. Perhaps we should start a clean discussion, with everyone assuming good faith and checking out the rules on WP:NOR and WP:RS? There's no need to get so angry over this article. Irbisgreif (talk) 06:01, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Peer archive

I archive the peer review - the article is fully protected and cannot be edited by most editors, plus it is full of major cleanup tags (references needed). These make it inelegible for PR. When is unprotected and has more refs, please feel free to nominate it for PR again, thanks and sorry, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 13:53, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Transcription

Please, change transcription to [sɔˈfʲijɑ mɪˈxajlʲivnɑ rɔˈtɑru]

BTW, I also suggest adding a Russian variant of her name, "София Михайловна Ротару" [sɐˈfʲɪjə mʲiˈxajləvnə rɐˈtaru] somewhere in the article, because she is also well-known in Russia as well.

Dmitry 93.84.164.245 (talk) 19:40, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Why stop in the middle?

As nobody seems to give a hoot of what is going on with the article, I hereby permit Rubikonchik to decisively turn the article into the definitive fan site of Sofia Rotaru for English readers. This includes clearance to remove all the maintainance tags, add more weasel words (why are we still missing: "Sofia Rotaru has been considered the greatest pop singer ever"?), and more unencyclopaedic content (the article could use some more info on her impersonators and friends). The fan site would also need more synthesis of hearsay information by Russian news reporters (we need more stuff like "Rotaru is the first ever rapper in history" and "she is the biggest earning artist in the universe"). The permission is valid until somebody disagrees with what is going on here. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 22:02, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

no comment--Rubikonchik (talk) 10:56, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

The issues revisited

As two editors have recently expressed their opinion that the issues I am trying to raise have not been discussed enough, I will post a Best of of them once again. Most of this has been up since 20 April 2009 (see Talk:Sofia Rotaru#Change of content).

• 90% of the material has no citation, violating WP:VERIFIABILITY, which says: "Any material lacking a reliable source may be removed," and: "It should be removed, aggressively, unless it can be sourced."

- this is a mere lie. How do you count the percentage? Really, such false statements sound again like a good old bad faith editing.--Rubikonchik (talk) 14:36, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

- I calculate the percentage by counting the unsourced sentences and dividing them with the count of the total number of sentences. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 08:51, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

• The Sofia Rotaru#Phenomenon section is unencyclopedic and misses significance. I mean, If I wanted to read a whole section about her stalker or her impersonator, I'd go to Russian gossip sites. A list of her fan clubs, websites and the people who established them are irrelevant in an encyclopedia. It's obviously sourced, but its topic is not the singer herself nor even her reception, but the leading fans and the webpages they've created.

- you are welcome to suggest a new wording for an appropriate discussion here. Moreover, please quote the alleged list here. At least we will be able to read and clearly see it here if we (I) are (am) unable to see the aforesaid list in the article itself. And again, this was already discussed.--Rubikonchik (talk) 14:36, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I and User:HelloAnnyong have posted versions of the section on numerous occasions like this, this and this. You have blindly reverted all of them. I and HelloAnnyong have raised issues with the section on several times, for instance Talk:Sofia Rotaru#Fan scene" section is missing notability and Talk:Sofia Rotaru#Fan scene cleanup. You have reverted every effort we have made to improve the article accordingly. A fortiori, you have poured even more goshing tabloid material into the section. The only reason why this can be possible on Wikipedia in year 2010 is most likely that no editor cares to make an effort to improve a messed up article on a C-category Eastern European artist. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 08:51, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

• The source for the claim of Rotaru's income of $100,000,000 appears to be the oral statement made by Deputy Chairman of the State Tax Administration Serhii Lekar. The summary statement, as communicated by the Ukrainian News Agency can be found here: http://www.ukranews.com/eng/article/137362.html . According to it, Rotaru did declare the highest income of the Ukrainian celebrities, but does not give anything on the sum. Even if he did, an encyclopedia like Wiki cannot base such a contentious claim (Rotaru earning more than any other entertainer in the world besides The Police) on an oral statement (mis?)interpreted by newspapers before it is included in a comprehensive report like the one by Forbes.

- this has been already discussed, user on a Russia Wiki Project has confirmed that either you do not understand Russian/ English or it is a mere bad faith. I fully share this point of view.--Rubikonchik (talk) 14:36, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

The source is in English so you are talking nonsense. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 08:51, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

• The lead section includes disturbing use of passive voice. Some of the claims go beyond what the cited sources say, constituting OR. For example, the lead claims "She has been named the Ukrainian Show Queen and the Queen of Pop Music in Russia and countries of the former USSR." attributing the opinion of two journalists (respectively, the Russian edition of Postimees and a Ukrainian newspaper) to the whole ex-Soviet countries. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 12:01, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

- this has been already discussed, many other references with same citations were provided from press of different countries and different journalists.--Rubikonchik (talk) 14:36, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, and so have I already pointed out that attributing the words of the Russian edition of Postimees and a Ukrainian journalist to the whole "Russia and countries of the former USSR" constitutes wp:weasel and wp:synth. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 08:51, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

I like Rubikonchik's comment on Jaan Pärn's bad faith about Rotaru making $100,000,000 annually. Hilarious! FYI Rubikonchik, wikipedia is not based on press of different countries and different journalists but on WP:RS. Hope that it helps!--Termer (talk) 04:55, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Termer is already the third editor on this page (after HelloAnnyong in Talk:Sofia Rotaru#Break 2, Talk:Sofia Rotaru#Sigh, here, here and here) who objects the statement of the exact sum, while Rubikonchik is the only one still favouring it. Reads like a consensus to me. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 13:30, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

• User:Erikupoeg, the matter is simple and you are constantly trying to deviate from your initial intentional fake translation and consequent bad faith editing including a mere personal lie. This is what is being discussed. Other users have already pointed out that either you do not speak Russian, have problems understanding English or it's amere bad faith from your side.
• Termer, As far as "press of different countries" comment is concerned, I would like to draw your attention to the fact that your comment is indeed ridiculous and does not make any sens at all - what are you talking about and what is your input by copying separate quotations of my arguments????--Rubikonchik (talk) 11:45, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, the matter truly is simple. The world is set against Sofia Rotaru becoming the greatest person that ever lived. And Wikipedia is in it with the world, not with Rubikonchik. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 11:10, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Pop queen

I suggest leave it without specifying who and when named her this way, otherwise the introduction will be too long. Besides, the given references clearly provide this information.Rubikonchik (talk) 11:32, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

These are rather sorry excuses for keeping the wp:or, wp:syn, wp:pov and wp:weasel. Postimees has even nothing to do with Russia. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 11:47, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

The sources are not really strong enough to make a general statement about how she is referred to in the wider public - especially as the word appears to be in the headline only for one and briefly in the other. I advise attributing it ("she has been called the Queen of pop by... and ...") I am unconvinced the usage is notable enough to mention in the lead - maybe in the article somewhere(maybe) --Errant Tmorton166^(Talk) 11:48, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Agree with User Errent and User Jaan, claim clearly needs atributing to who said it and should not be presented as if fact. Also the article is a bit of a mess, the citations need tidying and the uncited content either needs citing or removing. Off2riorob (talk) 11:56, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

I have been voicing these concerns for over a year now. It is impossible to me as an editor with no access to a Ukrainian, Moldavian or Russian library to find reliable sources on the artist. My requests for reliable sources have given zero results, with only more dubious material getting pushed instead. My proposal is to get this article into a provisory shape by deleting the unsourced and dubious statements, to make it possible for a capable editor to enter the process. It is always harder to edit a mess than a decent stub. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 12:06, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

I suggest the following: Jaan Pärn retrieves from the archives of this very talk page, were I have presented a good number of references with exact citation "Pop queen", from a variety of sources, including many Russian sources. We may also very well include all these references after the "Pop queen", why not? If Jaan Pärn has any difficulty doing this, I may always help and even provide new references. As for the given reference, in the very beginning, if I'm not mistaking, the wording I have proposed initially was "called on the territory fo the former USSR", as indeed Postimees is an Estonian source, as there are sources from other countries. Now, as for the provided this time additional source: Channel One (Russia) - it is one of the, if not the most, viewed TV Channel on the territory of the former USSR, today a Russian TV channel. I wonder how and based on what do you consider this source as not strong enough? As far as allegations of violation of wp:or, wp:syn, wp:pov and wp:weasel are concerned, a mere list of numerous rules without explaining exactly how and where they were violated seems rather an abuse of right to appeal to Wikipedia rules, some type of wikilegal harassment. As you know, when one suggests that a rule was violated, the burden of proof lies on that same person, namely the proof of how and where exactly each rule was violated. This was not done. So, to sum up, I'm ready to hear your constructive suggestions.Rubikonchik (talk) 12:31, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately we need a source that says "people/media refer to her as pop queen" and not lots of sources calling her pop queen (per WP:SYNTH. --Errant Tmorton166^(Talk) 12:34, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Here you go: http://openbiz.com.ua/summary/biography/show/Sofiya_Rotaru , http://www.vmdaily.ru/article/8436.html . Feel free to use http://translate.google.com in case you have a doubt.Rubikonchik (talk) 12:51, 4 August 2010 (UTC) also just as an additional source for separate name is one from Saudi Arabia http://www.thenational.ae/article/20081211/FOREIGN/488167158/1002 Rubikonchik (talk) 08:26, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

These are still based on no research and hence too general and brief in their expression. The openbiz.com.ua newsflash does not specify, the press of which country is in question. The vmdaily.ru does not even attribute the POV to any specific group, using only passive voice ("is called a pop queen"). This is insufficient for such an audacious claim. It goes without mentioning that this kind of praise is hardly suitable style for an encyclopedia. If such gushing were really necessary, which I do not think is the case here, it should be attributed to the group/person who actually thinks that. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 14:01, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Again, the only person who has recourse to POV and subjective interpretation of sources here is Jaan Pärn. As requested, the aforementioned sources clearly and unambiguously litterally cite "the press calls Sofia Rotaru the Pop Queen" and "she (people) is called (by) the Pop Queen". Again, as requested, these sources 1) Ukrainian "Openbiz" - a serious source of business analytical and statistics information and 2) Russian "Вечерняя Москва" (Vechernyaya Mosckva / Moscow at Night) - one of the oldest Russian dailies (since 1923). Agagin, and to sum up, whatever the personal opinion and personal interpretation of Jaan Pärn may be, in no way do they constitue a source or a reference, nor is such reasoning accepted by Wikipedia rules.Rubikonchik (talk) 14:17, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Marşinţi

Local name of Sofia's village is Marşinţi. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.112.19.52 (talk) 07:13, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Marşinţi is in Noua Suliţă district (local name) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.112.19.52 (talk) 07:18, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Please settle that at the talk pages of the locations first. This is not the place to settle geography. The villages have their own talk pages. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 07:28, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Sofia Rotaru. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091002224201/http://www.rynok.biz:80/a/2009/09/25/Rejting_samih_uspeshnih_uk to http://www.rynok.biz/a/2009/09/25/Rejting_samih_uspeshnih_uk
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100413185345/http://music.itop.net:80/Articles/1444 to http://music.itop.net/Articles/1444

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:54, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Sofia Rotaru. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120802085951/http://www.trumptaj.com/photos/index.cfm to http://www.trumptaj.com/photos/index.cfm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090201183342/http://rotarusofia.ru/ to http://www.rotarusofia.ru/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071223200031/http://megalyrics.ru/main.php?mod=src to http://megalyrics.ru/main.php?mod=src&find=%D0%EE%F2%E0%F0%F3+&B1=Search

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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:18, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Sofia Rotaru Pesnya Goda 2014.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:36, 1 June 2022 (UTC)