Talk:Capital punishment in Belarus

Criticism section

If you can, it would be preferable to incorporate the criticism into the article. Aaron Bowen 09:52, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, the whole criticism section is pretty much the movement to abolish the death penalty, so I could change the section header. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 09:56, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok, merged and section renamed. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 10:06, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Good article

With all due respect. This article is not yet a good article. Not very structured and at times factually incorrect, for instance with regards to the international conventions (which I am about to correct). Moreover, some good information was removed in previous edits.--Domberlic 02:00, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

The problem was is that the information that I put in there, it came from sources from Amnesty International and the UN, which some objected too. I have re-confirmed with the Belarusian MVD on some statements and others, still working on. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 02:15, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I still want to make the article an GA. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 03:55, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Another thing lacking for it to become a good article is the language. There are quite a few grammatical errors and the prose is not always clear. Might want a native speaker to read over this.--Domberlic 11:21, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I am a native speaker. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 23:06, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Anyways, I am going to enlist the use of the League of Copyeditors; they helped me in the past. While English is my native language (born and raised in the United States), yall seem to hate my grammar. I have no idea why. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 02:54, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

• I've copy-edited the article. I too don't understand the perception as non-native. In this copy-editor's experience, the prose and grammar were comparable to most articles written by native speakers. The copy-edits were mostly for commas here and there, which is a *very* common (and confusing) issue -- trust me! -- and for minor changes in wording that I thought might help the article read more smoothly and clearly, the kind of changes made by copy-edit geeks. Hope this helps the article's status. Regards, Unimaginative Username (talk) 08:38, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

I've failed it due to this tag. Better luck next time. Alientraveller 17:45, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

GA assessment

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

1:

• You have a tricky page title to work with, but I think you could find a wording to have the title in bold in the first sentence, per WP:LEAD. Perhaps “The provision for Capital punishment in Belarus has been…” could start things off. Lead also does not summarize all major sections of the article.
• Number agreement issues, e.g. “a doctor…certify that”, etc.
• Inconsistent tense, e.g. present and past tense in “Crimes” section.
• Numerous one sentence paragraphs and a two sentence section (International Conventions). These need to be expanded or integrated into existing prose.
• “Crimes” section is not appropriately titled. A more appropriate title would be “legislation”. This section should also be converted to prose (see WP:EMBED). It would also be better to organize it into “state-level” crimes (e.g. genocide, aggressive war, etc.) and “individual-level” crimes (e.g. treason, murder, etc.)
• “Most of the death penalty convictions” is a weasel word. “Most” needs to be quantified.
• Article reads very oddly. I’m stunned that it was copyedited. There are minor grammar errors, but phrasing like as “such circumstances” with no preceding circumstance(s) does not read properly.

2:

• The first sentence and “Earlier, the longest prison term available was 15 years” need citations (I know they appear elsewhere in the article, but the first instances should be cited).
• Instances of WP:NOR violations, e.g. “The Belarusian government has given hints suggesting that this punishment may be abolished” and “this can be seen as a violation”.

3:

• These criteria are the biggest issues with this article. Information is incomplete, contradictory and nonexistent.
• Article mentions removal of “economic offenses” and that the “new Criminal Code in 1999” removed offenses – what were these removed offenses?
• Article twice states “Belarus is the only country in Europe where capital punishment is still carried out”, but then states “Belarus is not the only European nation that allows the death penalty during times of war; it is also allowed in Latvia”.
• Article states execution statistics are not know because “no official statistics have been released by the government” but then gives statistics and says “the last documents released by the Belarusian Government were in 2006”.
• Article does not discuss several important areas of the topic, including, among others, any notable executions and the history of executions before (or even really during) CCCP.
• Article mentions, but does not adequately cover, the opinions of the public and the international community.

4:

• Article seems to be written from an anti-capital punishment point of view. Are there members of the public, government and/or international community who support the system?

6:

• Article should have a photo. A photo of the Minsk Detention Center, Col. Oleg Alkayev or anything else relevant would be welcome.

General:

• Significant content addition appears to be needed. I would also recommend a second copy edit once that is completed. Please let me know if elaboration or assistance is needed. Ɛƚƈơƅƅơƚɑ _talk 02:05, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, people hate my grammar, so I got help. Now it feels like their work has come into question. I am not sure what I can do next. Anyways, i'm going to try and do what I can do the article. I don't have a picture of anything I could use that would comply with our policy. I am not trying to be anti-death penalty, but a lot of the sources I have found on the topic are either Belarusians trying to carry out the sentence or anti-capital punishment. I did cover public opinion; I gave a referendum statistic and how they voted. The International community, which I had in the article for a while, stated that Belarus should get rid of it before joining organizations, such as the Council of Europe. I do not know of any notable executions, but since this is about Belarus, not the Soviet Union, I believe the article on Capital punishment in the Soviet Union would be the best bet to include information on Soviet methods and stats. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 03:18, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

claim that non-violent crimes are death eligible is incorrect

The claim that non-violent crimes are death eligible in Belarus is incorrect. You need to reference Article 59(1) of the Criminal Code of Belarus and Article 24 of the Constitution of Belarus, which restrict the death penalty as an exceptional measure applicable only for especially grave criminal acts and only when those acts result in death. The ranges of penalties given in each article are governed by those provisions. You will find, if you research the topic, that in Belarus people are currently executed only for aggravated murder.

It is nice that in 1994 the legislature struck down execution for certain economic crimes, but the Constitution should already have eliminated the death penalty for such crimes.

Additionally, the article does not name any offenses which are likely to be non-violent in nature.

I just thought that I would drop this note since I am researching the topic and noticed the article's incorrect information in a google hit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bmiscoski (talk • contribs) 22:35, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Capital punishment in Belarus. 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/20060401104144/http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGEUR490171997?open&of=ENG-2EU to http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGEUR490171997?open&of=ENG-2EU

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} 19:38, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Capital punishment in Belarus. 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/20101104000951/http://law.by/work/EnglPortal.nsf/6e1a652fbefce34ac2256d910056d559/d93bc51590cf7f49c2256dc0004601db?OpenDocument to http://law.by/work/EnglPortal.nsf/6e1a652fbefce34ac2256d910056d559/d93bc51590cf7f49c2256dc0004601db?OpenDocument
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050525235703/http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGEUR040092004?open&of=ENG-BLR to http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGEUR040092004?open&of=ENG-BLR
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071019005232/http://rec.gov.by/refer/ref1996resdoc.html to http://www.rec.gov.by/refer/ref1996resdoc.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930185342/http://www.charter97.org/eng/news/2005/10/27/uk to http://www.charter97.org/eng/news/2005/10/27/uk
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080813023114/http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=42789 to http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=42789

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) 13:03, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Capital punishment in Belarus. 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/20070927182742/http://www.legislationline.org/?jid=7&less=false&tid=144 to http://www.legislationline.org/?jid=7&less=false&tid=144
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070926223320/http://www.ohchr.org/english/countries/ratification/11.htm to http://www.ohchr.org/english/countries/ratification/4.htm

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) 01:39, 17 September 2017 (UTC)