Talk:Vladimir Pribylovsky

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Vladimir Pribylovsky. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20120225041103/http://www.encounterbooks.com/books/thecorporation/ to http://www.encounterbooks.com/books/thecorporation/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 17:31, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Translation question

Please compare here and here. Same thing, "политолог". I assume that you know Russian. Do you? My very best wishes (talk) 17:37, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

English language sources [1], [2] also call him "political scientist". My very best wishes (talk) 17:50, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't see this before reverting.

Every last dog in in Russia is a политолог. The fact that the Russian lexicon does not separate "political scientists" from "political analysts" tells us exactly nothing. In english, there in fact multiple terms for people who "say things" about politics: pundits, political analysts, political commentators, and political scientists. The last one is generally reserved for academics with some credentials in the field, otherwise everyone you see on TV could be labelled a "political scientist". The sources you posted prove exactly nothing: are they some kind of authority on the Russian and English languages? Do they even care about the precise language that they use? To show you just how silly this is, consider the hits for political analyst]. This leads us absolutely nowhere. For all we know they just used google translate and called it a day—they don't really care. This reminds me of the argument over at Grigory Petrovsky, where completely non-notable Ukrainian newspapers copying each other's crappy text suddenly became the ultimate authorities on the lexicon to be used in the lead. You think they have teams of experienced copy-editors hammering hammering every last letter in the stories for maximum accuracy? This is r-i-d-c-u-l-o-u-s. Guccisamsclubs (talk) 18:19, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Yes, sure, English language sources describe him as a "political scientist" and a "political analyst". Same person can be a scientist and an analyst. This is nothing ridiculous. Now, since you tell you know Russian (right?), let me remind that there is "политический аналитик" ("political analyst") in Russian that has different meaning (see usage here), just as in English. My very best wishes (talk) 18:28, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Also this source tells that he is a historian by education, and nearly all sources tell he was a researcher, which is essentially the same as scientist. My very best wishes (talk) 18:36, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Come off it. I've never heard anyone being introduced as a "политический аналитик" in Russia, ever. And the vast majority those introduced as "politologists" are people with no credentials in the field. The argument about him being a "researcher" is even more ridiculous. Journalists and pundits do research all the time. That's how it works there, but it is not how it works in the Anglosphere. Of course if you google just about anything, you will get results. Guccisamsclubs (talk) 18:41, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

(a) According to quoted sources (see also page on ruwiki), he has significant credentials/reputation in the field. In fact, he graduated from Moscow State University, N1 in Russia. This is not a matter of someone graduating from University X, but a matter of how someone was described in RS. (b) I gave you a link showing that expression "политический аналитик" ("political analyst") exists and has a different meaning than "political scientist" ("политолог") in Russian. After that your denial looks strange. My very best wishes (talk) 18:52, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

By credentials, I mean formal academic credentials. That's usually how the term is used in English. Of course there may be other credentials, but they cannot be determined from the lexicon of culture that calls everyone a "политолог". So far that's been your only argument, plus googling "политический аналитик" as if that proves something. What credentials are you talking about? A degree in history, followed by journalism and political activism? What RS are you talking about? I already gave you dozens of results from google books describing him as a "political analyst". Let's wrap this up. Guccisamsclubs (talk) 19:07, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

More in the same vein: he's now, presumably, notable for being a professional historian of the Byzantine Empire. But he's almost never described as such in books, and the work for which he has been notable for (in the last three decades) has nothing to do with Byzantine history. He is described as such by VOA, but VOA is a lightweight biased source that will ascribe to Russian dissident thinkers all kinds of credentials. And despite the VOA describing him as a "historian", it does not discuss his academic work on Medieval history at all. So how serious can this possibly be? Perhaps they meant "historian of modern Russia", which is better, but more of an opinion. I very much like the guy, but this is not a fan page.Guccisamsclub (talk) 22:34, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

WP:NOR please. These sources (not only VOA) do not tell anything about Byzantine Empire. They call him a "historian" and a "political scientist" (links above). So should we. My very best wishes (talk) 16:59, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

WP:UNDUE, as I've explained over and over. WP:NOR applies only to articles, I can say whatever I want on the talk page. Guccisamsclub (talk) 00:29, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

i.e. we can't have "Pribylovsky was a political scientist, political analyst, historian, human rights activist, political activist, database founder, prolific author, dissident, journalist, translator, and factory worker" in the LEAD. Guccisamsclub (talk) 01:13, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

"whatever I want"? Yes, that summarizes pretty well what you are doing here. No, it's fine to tell in lede that he was a political analyst and historian because that is what sources tell was his main occupation. My very best wishes (talk) 01:25, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure what's so hard to understand: WP:NOR does not apply to talk pages. Guccisamsclub (talk) 01:33, 17 October 2016 (UTC)