A fact from Oksana Shvets appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 15 April 2022 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ukraine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ukraine on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.UkraineWikipedia:WikiProject UkraineTemplate:WikiProject UkraineUkraine articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles
This article was created or improved as part of the Women in Red project. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in RedWikipedia:WikiProject Women in RedTemplate:WikiProject Women in RedWomen in Red articles
Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
@Stephen and Gerda Arendt: Gerda and I added a fair use image of Oksana Shvets to the article. The justification is two fold - first, she is deceased. Second, her country is at war right now, so it is a rather ridiculous requirement that we ask someone she knows for an image. She has no notability mentioned in the article that is outside of Ukraine, so it's highly unlikely there is anyone with an image not currently inside it. Which means they are right now being bombed. Stephen writes: " the normal wait is 6 months, and no one has tried". The part of that before the comma is not strictly true, it is, in fact, under an extensive amount of discussion as we speak here: Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content#RfC:_Using_non-free_biographical_images_of_persons_immediately_after_death. The second part after the comma is ... how do you recommend we try? Write people currently being bombed? In the ongoing discussion I link, there is general outrage at the suggestion that we write a dead person's heirs, friends, and loved ones immediately after death, since they are, after all, suffering. How much more outrage do you think there would be if you request that we not only write people that are suffering, but also at immediate threat to their own lives? Gerda asks that Stephen have mercy. Please. At least. --GRuban (talk) 20:05, 21 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
A ref mentions as her last credit Get Missed! in 2016. This is not supported by the list of her credits by the theatre, [1]. Sadly, this list is just a glimpse, having nothing before 2013, the first entry being a play by Nikolai Erdman translated by Deepl as Gogol-Mogol (meaning mish-mash, sometimes given as Eggnogg. Comparing her entries with a better (perhaps even complete) list on uk:Київський національний академічний Молодий театр#Репертуар театру. Searching further. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:28, 22 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
