CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Disability in Belarus

Open-knowledge reference entry

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionFeb 6, 2026
Entity authorityQ122908798 ↗
Source-derived summary

Disability in Belarus refers to the people with disability in Belarus.

History

In 2016, Belarus ratified the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. In 2017, the Government of Belarus drew up and adopted the appropriate national plan until 2025.

Statistics

Currently there are around 570,000 people with disabilities in Belarus, which counts about 6% of the population.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Disability in Belarus” is open-knowledge reference entry. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Disability, Belarus and Open-knowledge, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA concise reference frame for defining the subject, testing terminology and identifying the institution closest to the evidence. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2016, 2017, 2025—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, Disability, Belarus and Open-knowledge is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “open-knowledge reference entry” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Feb 6, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q122908798. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2016, 2017 and 2025.

Critical limits

A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Disability in Belarus”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Disability in Belarus primary sources, Disability in Belarus archive and Disability research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Disability in Belarus”?
  2. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
  3. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Disability in Belarus” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.