Talk:Gopnik
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
 Archives |
|
|
|
What a horrible mess it was
Photos of alleged gopniks
Anyone wanting to add an image illustrating this topic needs to first get consensus with an WP:RFC per my explanation at User talk:Dark4tune#Warning (permalink). Johnuniq (talk) 05:30, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
- @Altenmann, the man in that image certainly looked like a gopnik to me. Would you care to elaborate why you removed it? Dark4tune (talk) 16:57, 12 September 2025 (UTC)
- It does not matter how it looks like for you. Not all people sitting on stairs and drinking beer are gopniks. --Altenmann >talk 17:14, 12 September 2025 (UTC)
- I feel like you're just trying to spite me for removing the date of that photo earlier. If I do something that bothers you, just tell me about it and I will apologize and undo it, rather than being petty about it. Dark4tune (talk) 17:27, 12 September 2025 (UTC)
- Please DO NOT add information to Wikipedia not coming from reliable sources. Please do not involve arguments involving Wikipeidans' personalities. Both issues are strict Wikipedia policies. --Altenmann >talk 18:04, 12 September 2025 (UTC)
- P.S. Heck, it looks like you already know] our policy about uncited. --Altenmann >talk 18:07, 12 September 2025 (UTC)
- "Wikipeidans". Nice one. Dark4tune (talk) 20:51, 12 September 2025 (UTC)
- Hello, grammer Nazi :-). --Altenmann >talk 21:59, 12 September 2025 (UTC)
- "Wikipeidans". Nice one. Dark4tune (talk) 20:51, 12 September 2025 (UTC)
- Adding my comment from ANI here and expanding it a little bit:
- As a native Russian, I wouldn't say that it is an insult anymore at this point in history (or ever?). It's more like a meme and running gag. (I mean, I have a T-shirt with Cheburashka in Gopnik pose and Adidas clothes...) It's like calling a teenager "edgy". And the photo, even if not explicitly labeled as Gopnik, is clearly playing with the Gopnik stereotype pose (and other stereotypes like Russians wearing Ushankas). It's clearly a posed image, not some secret shot. And the person's face isn't even entirely visible. That this is an intentional play on stereotypes is also supported by the fact that the image was taken in Germany instead of Eastern Europe. So, I'd say it's fine to use this visual play on stereotypes to illustrate a stereotype.
- Ruwiki describes the stereotype as "Имидж и поведение типичного гопника представляют собой пародию на представителей криминального мира 1990-х годов в России и иных странах СНГ." (Google translate: The image and behavior of a typical gopnik are a parody of the representatives of the criminal world of the 1990s in Russia and other CIS countries.) . Nakonana (talk) 12:28, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
- Sorry, in English wikipedia personal opinions and references to wikis do not count as vaalid references. Not to say that your taken out of context quite continues: "Gopniks were involved in petty theft, extortion of money, robberies and beatings of random passers-by, especially at night". A "play on stereotypes" and "running gag", sure thing, my friend. --Altenmann >talk 16:28, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
- The crucial part is the word "were". Criminal Gopniks "were" a phenomenon of the 1990s and earlier. English-language academia and RS appear to be behind the trend regarding the current state of the sub-culture and how it is perceived. It's a meme these days: . Komsomolskaya Pravda-articleNote: "Если вы следите за русской блогосферой, то вам покажется, что в России гопники настолько вездесущи, что вот-вот расплодятся сверх всякого предела, хлынут через границы и захватят Китай. Куда ни ткни, на сайтах издеваются над русскими гопниками или осмеивают их так рьяно, что это уже переходит в славословие. Нам следовало бы заранее знать, исходя из нашего западного опыта, что происходит всякий раз, как продвинутые люди открывают для себя какую-нибудь "аутентичную" субкультуру низшего класса. Считай, что субкультура мертва, сдохла, пошла прахом. Собственно, в этом и смысл нашей статьи: мы хотим не только познакомить мир с Гопником, но заодно и известить о его, Гопника, трагической смерти." And more stuff: "Once symbols of street crime, gopniks have turned into artistic icons. Once feared, now glamorized or satirized, they populate contemporary exhibitions across post-Soviet states. [...] For many artists, the almost extinct gopnik has become a legendary, comic-like figure." Nakonana (talk) 01:58, 14 September 2025 (UTC)
- Criminal subculture, meme subculture, it doesn't matter. We're still making up an identity for a (probably living) person. Even something like "this guy's an orphan but he still donates half his paycheck to the less fortunate" should be reliably sourced. We should also strive to find good photos, which these aren't. Woodroar (talk) 02:20, 14 September 2025 (UTC)
- My personal opinion there was no special subculture. Just alway everywhere existing plain lowbrow stratum of hooligans, hoodlums, thugs, microdistrict microbands, of no particular unifying cultural category and all allegedly common traits are invented to belong to them. Any criminal fresh from colony looked just like described in the article. In my youth any thug was called gopnik. Therefore I wrote that this article is a mess basen on "discoveries" of sensationalist intellectuals, both russian and western. I dont care about this article. The only I care is that a random person is labelled "hoodlum" worldwide without evidence. Of course he may be proud of himself, "look at me, I am drinkingh beer righht on the stairsteps of Wikipedia!" But there is no evidence that he is a hoodlum, only just trolling us. --Altenmann >talk 02:46, 14 September 2025 (UTC)
- Criminal subculture, meme subculture, it doesn't matter. We're still making up an identity for a (probably living) person. Even something like "this guy's an orphan but he still donates half his paycheck to the less fortunate" should be reliably sourced. We should also strive to find good photos, which these aren't. Woodroar (talk) 02:20, 14 September 2025 (UTC)
- The crucial part is the word "were". Criminal Gopniks "were" a phenomenon of the 1990s and earlier. English-language academia and RS appear to be behind the trend regarding the current state of the sub-culture and how it is perceived. It's a meme these days: . Komsomolskaya Pravda-articleNote: "Если вы следите за русской блогосферой, то вам покажется, что в России гопники настолько вездесущи, что вот-вот расплодятся сверх всякого предела, хлынут через границы и захватят Китай. Куда ни ткни, на сайтах издеваются над русскими гопниками или осмеивают их так рьяно, что это уже переходит в славословие. Нам следовало бы заранее знать, исходя из нашего западного опыта, что происходит всякий раз, как продвинутые люди открывают для себя какую-нибудь "аутентичную" субкультуру низшего класса. Считай, что субкультура мертва, сдохла, пошла прахом. Собственно, в этом и смысл нашей статьи: мы хотим не только познакомить мир с Гопником, но заодно и известить о его, Гопника, трагической смерти." And more stuff: "Once symbols of street crime, gopniks have turned into artistic icons. Once feared, now glamorized or satirized, they populate contemporary exhibitions across post-Soviet states. [...] For many artists, the almost extinct gopnik has become a legendary, comic-like figure." Nakonana (talk) 01:58, 14 September 2025 (UTC)
- Sorry, in English wikipedia personal opinions and references to wikis do not count as vaalid references. Not to say that your taken out of context quite continues: "Gopniks were involved in petty theft, extortion of money, robberies and beatings of random passers-by, especially at night". A "play on stereotypes" and "running gag", sure thing, my friend. --Altenmann >talk 16:28, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
- I feel like you're just trying to spite me for removing the date of that photo earlier. If I do something that bothers you, just tell me about it and I will apologize and undo it, rather than being petty about it. Dark4tune (talk) 17:27, 12 September 2025 (UTC)
- It does not matter how it looks like for you. Not all people sitting on stairs and drinking beer are gopniks. --Altenmann >talk 17:14, 12 September 2025 (UTC)
You really have to learn to respect Wikipedia rules and stop inventing captions under photos. --Altenmann >talk 01:33, 13 September 2025 (UTC) YOu cannot insult an unknown innocent person by calling him "gopnik" at a highly visible website without serious evidence. Imagine someone uploads your mom in Commons with a caption "The slut that cheated on me", and then someone else uses this upload to illustrate "Slut". --Altenmann >talk 02:36, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
- I saw the post about this issue at ANI. There are a variety of reasons not to say that the person in File:Slav Bewley.jpg is a Gopnik: it may be of an editor (a living person), the image's metadata places it in western Germany, and, most importantly, nothing says the person in the image is a Gopnik. File:Гопник.jpg is at least named "Гопник" ("Gopnik"), but the more I think about it, the more I think there could be BLP issues as well. My preference would be to find an image in a reliable, secondary source, where the subject is specifically and unambiguously labelled as a Gopnik. Woodroar (talk) 02:50, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
- I am not questioning this person looks like gopnik:[1] any old lady will think of him thusly, passing by. I am contesting this he is gopnik. And one really need a RS to claim that he looks like gopnik no matter what I or any other wikipedian think about it. I am thoroughly baffled that after all these years of Wikipedia there are cases of ignoring WP:RS with arguments of like "oh, but this is evident". --Altenmann >talk 03:10, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
References
- Here is the quiz:
- "Name 5 things why this guy looks like gopnik"
- "Name 5 things to prove he is not gopnik":-)
User:Dark4tune again re-added an image with a completely false caption. --Altenmann >talk 23:03, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
User:Dark4tune again re-added an image, this time with a fake reference that (a) a humorous article and (b) does not show an image in question. I reverted it. --Altenmann >talk 03:47, 14 September 2025 (UTC)
- Just in case you are not trolling me, but genuinely do not understand the problem. YOur caption says: "A stereotypical image of a gopnik" - this is your personal opinion that this guy looks like alleged gopniks in the humorous article you cited as a ref. Sitting on stairs smoking and drinking beer does not make you gopnik. --Altenmann >talk 04:03, 14 September 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, he looks like a gopnik because he is a gopnik. Any old lady could tell you that herself. No one adds references to a photo, that's ridiculous. Even you with your misspelled and grammatically incorrect words should know that. I'm starting to think you might be trolling me, my friend. Just bring the goddamn pictures back. Dark4tune (talk) 03:42, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.