Hello,
I cannot say much about the specific case, but in general: in small
countries it is not unusual that there is only one national
encyclopedia, and that it is directly or indirectly published or
supported by the government or an institution close to the government.
A good example is the Store Norske from Norway.
So it is not necessary to think immediately and exclusively about the
Soviet Union.
Kind regards
Ziko
2016-03-02 21:11 GMT+01:00 Yaroslav M. Blanter <putevod(a)mccme.ru>ru>:
On 2016-03-02 20:58, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
Now, why are we bestowing Wikipedian of the Year honours on government
employees of repressive regimes? If we had the US Secretary of Defense
writing Wikipedia articles about the US Army, or had employees of the
German government running Wikimedia Deutschland, I'm sure there'd be an
outcry, even though those are countries with quite favourable records on
human rights, press freedom and so on. The idea of an award would not even
arise.
Susanna is (or was) a researcher, and every researcher in Armenia is a state
employee. There are just no non-governmental organizations who employ
researchers.
I do think there is a problem with a potential Armenian board member (that
is, Turkish and Azeri Wikimedians would basically consider board as not
legitimate), but I do not think the fact that she is or was employed by the
Academy of Sciences is in any way problematic.
Cheers
Yaroslav
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>