Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Russia/Russia-related Wikipedia notice board/Archive01

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Russia‎ | Russia-related Wikipedia notice board

Eric Radloff

Can anybody confirm this person's notability? Should we list the article for deletion? --Ghirlandajo 15:08, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

  • Tried searching for Эрик Радлофф (and Радлов, as well) in Google, nada. The guy is unknown in Russia. I'd vote for its deletion. KNewman 15:47, August 23, 2005 (UTC)
    • I agree. But we should be careful. For instance, today someone deleted Vladimir Spivakov citing his lack of notability. I had to start the article anew. --Ghirlandajo
  • Posted for VfD. Hoax. BTW, Spivakov was deleted for a good reason: better have no article than what he had. I am wondering, how did you find this Eric in the first place? mikka (t) 17:19, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Template for cities

Would not it be usefull to create a universal template for an infobox related to a Russian city, something like Template:US City infobox? It might contain English name, Russian Name, Population, Lattitude/Longitude, Post code, Phone code, Foundation year, Architectorial landmarks, Famous people connected. If you think it is worth doing, I could start it. abakharev 10:14, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

  • Alex, I don't think it is a good idea. We have a number of city templates already, but actually they are not very informative and don't prettify atricles too. Also, most of the Russian city articles are stubbish, which result in the tiny article being overloaded with images, tables, and templates. --Ghirlandajo

History of the Soviet Union (1927-1953)

If anyone's interested, please check the recent entries at the article's talk page Talk:History of the Soviet Union (1927-1953) as well as the recent edit history. Some editors feel the article reflects a Soviet POV too much and are trying to delete the material, or otherwise "neutralize" it. I already spent more time than I could afford trying to call for a more measured editing at talk. I also edited the article to account for some of the newly brought suggestions. But since the pressure will likely to persist and I really have other things to do, anyone is encouraged to take a balanced look there. Thanks! --Irpen 03:13, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

Battle of Polonka

This article is full of Polonophile nonsense. The article's author seemed to think: "Let's say that there were twice as much Russians as the Poles and that we killed half of them". The figures need to be checked. The Swedish-biased article on Battle of Oravais also needs attention. --Ghirlandajo 10:39, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Before diving into this, please think twice whether correcting errors in battle articles is high enough on your priority list because the battles about the battles will take much more of your time than you expect. Especially with our Polish friends, you will often enounter a very strong and motivated resistanse of committed and little compromising editors. These, although mostly civil, but protracted battles for article content will be rather frustrating if you dive into this. Most of the Polish editors will be acting in good faith but under the strong effect of Polish historical scholarship which, like any national scholarship, is POV written. To see what I mean, check talk:Kiev Offensive (1920) and, especially talk:Battle of Wołodarka. I regretted many times already about getting myself involved into this. --Irpen 17:24, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
Irpen, your efforts are appreciated. I recall that the Battle of Orsha, after many an edit war, was purged from the most absurd statements, although not definitively. What you describe as a "Polish historical scholarship" is actually just a Russophobic hysteria. I'm amazed how you can take it seriously. --Ghirlandajo 17:28, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliments. What I take seriously is good faith of some of the editors, that's all. Speaking of the RU-PL battles (real, not WP) we have the Siege of Smolensk (1609-1611) embarrassingly missing. There is a ready Image:Chorikov The Siege of Smolensk by the Poles.jpg for the article. As well as there is an image of voivod Mikhail Shein here. Any takers for Shein and Siege? Too bad I have no education in humanities :(. Cheers, --Irpen 03:08, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Irpen, the Siege of Pskov (1581-82), Siege of Smolensk (1609-1611), Siege of Troitse-Sergiyeva Lavra have been listed by me among requested articles on the portal's main page for several months now. --Ghirlandajo 06:32, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Copyright issues

Two tags were just created for images/objects exempt from copyright protections by RU and UA laws. Besides, an EN version of the RU copyright law is added to Wikisource and is linked from inside the tag. The tags are {{PD-RU-exempt}} and {{PD-UA-exempt}}. The tags can be used from within enwiki and from commons. For more details and on what else could be done, please see the Ukrainian sister board. Perhaps, someone would like to post any comments there too. The tags display like this:

Please note the both UA and RU copyright laws in English are now in Wikisource and are linked from within the tags above. Regards, --Irpen 18:00, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

Rus' articles' confusion

I would like to have an Etymology of Rus and derivatives article moved to Rus. Then to place {{otheruses}} on the top of it, which would link to Rus (disambiguation) for articles on Rus' (people) and Kievan Rus'. The reason is that if one wants to link the word Rus within the body of the article, the Etimology article is the most likely place one would want it linked to. This would just make things easier. It can't be moved right now, because [[Rus]] is the article with an established history. So, it has to go through a "proposed move" page, I would like to get some feedback, whether the idea seems feasible to the editors who most likely care. Thanks! -Irpen 00:13, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)

That makes sense, but I would go just a bit further. The list of East Slavic Rus'-related links could also go at the top of the etymology article, so one only has to refer to the disambiguation page if looking for the Danish and Yiddish words.
You may not have to go through the requested moves procedure for technical reasons. Rus doesn't have a history, although Rus' does—which do we want the article at? Lately I've been favouring titles in the simplified transliteration, without apostrophes. But Rus’ with the apostrophe is so commonly used that I think it's more instantly recognizable and unambiguous.
Incidentally, Rus' and Rus (disambiguation) have always been disambig pages without any real content, so there's no worry about losing their history. —Michael Z. 2005-06-17 04:29 Z

List of most common surnames

Check it out. The Russia entry is based on Krasnoyarsk stats only. mikka (t) 23:48, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Well, it is a large enough city, so statistically it should be representantive. Besides, I think it is kind of elegant way to use the info from that site. -Irpen 18:41, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)
I revised the section nevertheless. A section on Ukrainian surnames would be helpful. --Ghirlandajo 22:33, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Russophobia

Let's think whether such an article is necessary (currently it is a redirect to -phobia) and discuss it at talk:Russophobia. --Irpen 18:41, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)

Thief in law (vor v zakone)

Please take a look. A number of statements look pretty suspicious to me. mikka (t) 21:23, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Muscovy Company

note below cross posted from older Russian Wikipedians' notice board which now seems defunct.

Russian name is missing at Muscovy Company. Could you also check for Russian interwiki link and perhaps add some more info from Russian language pages, if they exist? I find this company quite fascinating. Also, if you have access to Russian sources, could you check if the company had any dealings with Holy Roman Empire, Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and other non-UK/Muscovy countries? I found a source stating it had some dealings in Silesia in 17th century and would like to know more about it. Tnx. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 11:19, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

More info in Russian is available from google or yandex string ("Московская компания" +Ченслер). -Irpen 05:04, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
Great. Could somebody familiar with Russian language translate it? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 17:14, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

Update needed

Please take a look at red links in Russia-related part of Masterpieces of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity. mikka (t) 17:53, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Are there reasons not to move Khersones to Chersonesos?

Please voice your opinion at Talk:Khersones. Thanks! -Irpen July 1, 2005 00:10 (UTC)

Moved as per consensus. Issue closed. --Irpen

Eastern-European cooperation proposal

Crossposted to: Wikipedia talk:Polish Wikipedians' notice board, Wikipedia:Wikiportal/Russia/Russia-related Wikipedia notice board, Wikipedia talk:Wikiportal/Belarus, Wikipedia:Wikiportal/Ukraine/Ukraine-related Wikipedia notice board

I'd like to propose that Polish, Russian, Ukrainian, Belarussian (and anybody else who wants to join, you will excuse me if I won't list everyone here, I tried to reach everybody on the Wikipedia:Regional notice boards) Wikipedians join forces and try together to promote some articles to FA, instead of (what seems to be more common, unfortunately) fighting over which name should go first and similar petty issues :>

In this spirit I invite you all to comment on Polish-Muscovy War (1605-1618), an article I (mostly, wiki being wiki) have written over the past few months. It can definetly benefit from introducing Russian/English spelling of some names/people that I added knowing only Polish spelling, adjusting my Polish POV and adding more info from Russian/other sources I have no access to. I believe this article is fairly comprehensive, and we can make it reach FA. In few days I will submit it to Peer Review, and if there are no disputes on PR/article's talk page I will submit it to FA in over a week.

Once again, I invite your comments and edits, and hope this will be the first of many similar projects that proves we can work on together, to show our Eastern European history and culture to English-speaking world, most of whom unfortunately seem never to heard about Muscovy of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. If you like this initative. For now, I invite everybody to copy their replies to my talk page; if there is enough interest, perhaps we can create a serparate page to discuss it (Wikiproject:Eastern Europe or sth like this). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 17:35, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

Maybe we could create a Wikipedia:Eastern European Wikipedians' notice board for announcements on topics of the general interest for all Eastern Europeans. --Irpen 00:09, July 31, 2005 (UTC)
Yes, that would be a good idea. And a list of active EE national boards, it was a bit difficult to find some of them. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 10:41, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

A new project proposal: Russian nobility

Hi there, my fellow Russian wikipedians! I would like to propose a new project within the Russian portal of the English Wikipedia. I wanna call it the Keep It In The Family Project or All In The Family Project (your ideas are most welcome, as well). Basically, it's a project on all of the Russian noble families throughout Russian history. This project should help other wikipedians and ordinary users to get a clearer idea of who was who in Muscovite Russia and Imperial Russia, since many Russian politicians and statesmen often had the same names, and it's sometimes difficult for non-Russians (and Russians, too!) to distinguish between certain historical figures. I imagine articles on each and every boyar or dvoryanskaya family that would look something like the Galitzine article. I know that some of these articles will be extremely difficult to write (Tolstoy Family comes to mind :)). But I've seen great many articles in Wiki with red links for Dolgorukovs, Beklemishevs, Miloslavskys etc. I think we're gonna need a computer-friendly person to create a nice template, where we could insert the red links (or the blue ones, if an article already exists) for all the Russian noble families we can find (I just wonder whether we have to distinguish between княжеский род, дворянский род, and боярский род). Once the template is ready, we can start doing the articles one by one at our own pace. If you have any suggestions, comments, or objections, please post them here. KNewman 15:00, July 30, 2005 (UTC)

A nice idea. It looks similar to something I started some time ago regarding Polish szlachta - ie. the list of szlachta. Perhaps we can work some common nobility bio templates and set some standards for categories, organisation, etc. I'd be happy to share with you my experience on this project - just ask me on my talk page, I may not check this notice board very often. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 17:14, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Mintimer Shaeymiev

Just stumbled into this article accidentally. Quote: "The multinational people of Tatarstan highly appreciated the efforts of the first President aimed at strengthening peace and unity in the republic and solving complicated socio-economic problems." Funny, huh? I know little on the subject, so I just NPOVed the article. Maybe someone is willing to clean it up. --Irpen 00:09, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

Just a note, I do agree with NPOV but can't really take the cleanup on for the same reason. I didn't exactly compare word by word but the article looks as a copy from the president's site [2], with somewhat different transliteration. To say, the factual side of the bio should be, presumably, accurate but might not be complete. Regards - Introvert talk 07:20, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

Polish-Muscovy War (1605-1618)

Regarding this article: User:Halibutt is working on the map (you can see the current version at Image:Rzeczpospolita_1600.png - but we can't find out the exact location of some places mentioned in the article (like Tsarovo). Any help with that would be appreciated. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 10:44, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Minusa River, Minusinsk, Minusinsky

I will be shortly be writing an brief article on the Afanasevo culture, an archaeological culture 3500--2500 BC located in the "Minusinsk basin" of the Yenisei catchment.

There is a stub on the town of Minusinsk, in the Krasnoyarsk Krai region, apparently of the red-linked Minusinky district, but nothing on the Minusa River or Minusa/Minusinsk basin. There is vanishingly little on Google. The town is apparently at the confluence of the Minusa and Yenisei Rivers. I see an unnamed river on my big National Geographic Atlas in the vicinity of Minusinsk, tributary to the Yenesei from the east.

I would not mind a few sentences on the Minusa River and the geography it travels through, and a bit more on the town of Minusinsk itself.--FourthAve 09:40, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

I'm getting greedy. In the interest of clearing out all the remaining red links in the important article, Kurgan, something on the Ponura River (Krasnodar region) and the Bukhtarma River of Kazakhstan would be appreciated. And in looking up the Bukhtarma, I noticed that Altay needs some work on red links, and perhaps some consistency in spelling (is to be Altay or Altai). The other reference to the Bukhtarma is Lake Zaysan which might benefit from a look-see. --FourthAve 12:10, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Is this map accurately labelled as the Minusa River?


"Russian culture" and "Culture of Russia"

Please join the discussion at Talk:Culture of Russia. mikka (t) 16:38, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Proposal on maintenance of this board

To keep such boards more focused, I archived outdated, settled/closed issues at a similar board in Ukrainian sister portal with the TOC of archived topics posted at the top of the current version. Please check the link above. We can do that here too if there are no objections. Actually, everyone is welcome to do that himself, but in any case if anyone objects, please respond asap. Thanks! --Irpen 23:26, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

Raskol → Schism of Old Believers move idea

Please check Talk:Raskol and express your opinion. --Irpen 09:26, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

  • I made a Redirect Schism of Old Believers → Raskol. Vald 21:33, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Old Style concern

Hi, I've just noted an disturbing problem on cosmic scale - in Russia the Gregorian Calendar was accepted after the revolution, but the Russian articles tend to link to both Old Style and New Style, so we have - Decembrist revolt happened on December 14 Julian calendar: 

December 14 is the 348th day of the year (349th in leap years) in the Gregorian Calendar.  There are 17 days remaining.
*1825 - Several Imperial Russia army officers lead circa 3000 soldiers on the Senate Square in the failed Decembrist uprising

and it is December 26 New Style. 

December 26 is the 360th day of the year in the Gregorian Calendar, 361st in leap years. There are 5 days remaining.
 (looks like no such thing happened on December 26)

am I overreacted or it is, really that bad –Gnomz007(?) 02:26, August 24, 2005 (UTC) The real problem is that a whole lot of articles has this sort of problem and wikipedia timeline may be distorted–Gnomz007(?) 12:59, August 24, 2005 (UTC)


Please notice that there are O.S. and N.S. redirects to Old Style and New Style dates article, created as a convenience to use in these double-calendar dates. mikka (t) 22:16, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

But the actual event is mismatched in Gregorian calendar, I've fixed this one, but this is a likely thing to be repeated –Gnomz007(?)
I think I saw the rule somewhere about linking back into the calendar by the New Style Calendar only, leaving the Old Style date unlinked. Just checked October Revolution (what else could come to mind, eh): it does have links to both 25 Oct and 7 Nov, but only for the 7th of November it is listed as the event, with an additional note about correct dating NS vs OS. I take it, what's important is when the event is listed in the calendar, is that right? So hopefully it's not as bad but I'll keep an eye on it, thanks for noting - Introvert talk 05:51, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Red Square parades

I Suggest we make this a real masterpiece, especially the ones on the November the 7th 1941 and June the 24th 1945.

Russian counterculture

Please take a look at this section in the Counterculture. mikka (t) 00:50, 26 August 2005 (UTC)


Kiev Offensive (1920)

An anon draws an atteltion to a Polish bias in the article. mikka (t) 19:19, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Renamed cities

I noticed this list is not complete yet. List of city name changes in Russia and Soviet Union. mikka (t) 19:36, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Lev Gumilyov

The Anna Akhmatova article says:

Their son, born in 1912, was named Lyov to rhyme with the surname Gumilyov;

What the heck this rhiming thingy could mean? AFAIK, he is known as Lev Gumilyov (Гумилёв). Could it be a fantasy of an engliesh speaker based on a variant of transscription Lev Gumilev (Гумилев), later "fixed" into "Lyov Gumilyov"? mikka (t) 21:10, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

No, this is taken from Akhatova's biography. Gumilev was known as lev/lion of St Petersburg society, Akhmatova as its lioness/svetskaya l'vitsa, so they thought fit to name their son Lev. Just like Tolstoy's case, his name was pronounced by friends and relatives as Lyov so there was a real rhyme there. --Ghirlandajo 06:14, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
Not to mention that Лёва (Lyova), Лёвка (Lyovka) and Лёвушка (Lyovushka) are usual diminutives/nicknames of Лев (Lev). --Barbatus 15:18, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

Please start from the top of my notice. Was he really officially named Lyov? The standard Russian name is "Lev". What exactly did the biography say and what was its original language? mikka (t) 06:16, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Historical towns in Russia

I started writing Novozybkov in a non-suspecting attempt to clarify the birthplace of Pavel Dybenko, but suddenly stumbled upon a real big job for you Russians to do:

I quickly created the two, just to round up the edit. But here is the action list:

in terms of main article and convenience redirects
  • Finish Novozybkov; it is a historical town, indeed (I included the russian website reference there)

Za rabotu, tovarishchi! mikka (t) 23:21, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

[3] - the link to list from ru article :)–Gnomz007(?) 23:39, September 5, 2005 (UTC)

Well we can at least you can use this to get some ideas for new articles, maybe make a list of historical cities, who knew Uryupinsk is historical, while popular culture holds it as synonym "backwater town" or transform it into a list article instead of a category –Gnomz007(?) 23:39, September 11, 2005 (UTC)

What are the criteria in this list? Why Shushenskoye is historic and Moscow is not?
It is! see end of the list(it was automatic transliteration with some manual corrections(read typos)) see original list(it is sorted by region), I can only guarantee the Russian names now –Gnomz007(?) 03:23, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

Icon Problem

Dear friends! There's a problem with the Icon article. Some strong and powerful anonymus, who is really a great Protestant believer, is constantly torturing and spoiling the Icon article with different denunciations against icons, Eastern Orthodoxy and Russians as well. Look the history of his changings. From the current Icon article it is clear that all Russians are stupid, that they lack any taste in visual art completely, and that all that guys all around the world that buy, and love, and (what's the most dangerous) worship icons are just dirty fools. When I read the current article I feel as if I read a translation of some Soviet book, published in 1960s. The only guy that opposes this terrible anonymus is an US citizen User:Wesley, but he is obviously too weak to fight with such a fury. Can anybody help? I tried to make an edition towards neutrality, but it was violently deleted. And, what's the most sad, I don't know how they generally handle such cases in this Wikipedia. Thanks. Arseni 20:33, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Kondia

I have been trying to create links to the different provinces mentioned in the Full Imperial Title of the Tsars of Russia (please see pages Tsar and Nicholas II of Russia). However, I have no idea where or what Kondia is. Given the surrounding names, I guess it is somewhere either in the Northern part of European Russia, or somewhere in Belarus. But I'm not sure. Can any of you help? If you can, please correct the link on both pages.

The context is ... Государь и Великій Князь Новагорода низовскія земли, Черниговскій, Рязанскій, Полотскій, Ростовскій, Ярославскій, Белозерскій, Удорскій, Обдорскій, Кондійскій, Витебскій, Мстиславскій и всея Сѣверныя страны Повелитель ...

Thanks a lot. --Valentinian 22:33, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

  • From rgo.newmail.ru/history/khr_tit.htm Кондийский означает область реки Конды, впадающей в Иртыш, в Тобольской же губернии. Kondia is the region of river Konda flowing into Irtysh in Tobolsk gubernia. abakharev 22:57, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Valentinian, I see you (or someone else) added redirects or even direct pipes (like in [[Kartli | Kartalinia]] ) from these archaic names. While you are at this, please make sure that the corresponding articles mention these names, otherwise the redirects may look a bit surprising. mikka (t) 22:57, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Patronymics

Hi, I thought there is an unwritten rule in English WP regarding Russian-related biographies: to omit patronymics in the title. IMHO, it is logical because Russian otchestvo is typically hard to pronounce/spell for English speakers. I know it is not the case in Ru. WP; if there is a consensus to include it here as well, I won't have a problem. Let's try to be consistent either way. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 05:27, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

  • Obviously, if there are two equally notable people with different patronimics, e.g Alexei Nikolavich Tolstoy and Alexei Konstantinovich Tolstoy then the patronimic should be in the title. For all the other cases, I would not use the patronimic. Every Russian knows who Shishkin is, much less know that he is Ivan, who, the hell, knows his patronimic? I would also suggest redirects or disambigs with just surnames. 06:24, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

RCOTW

Howdy, fellars! I've been thinking about the Russian Collaboration of the Week for quite some time now. I believe we should revive it. But I wouldn't want it to be like regular COTWs in Wikipedia. I mean, I don't want people to vote for them, just let someone pick an article on some Russian dude or event and post it in our portal, and we'll try and fill in the gaps. I can't guarantee, however, that all of us will be able to contribute. This will depend on the topic at hand. What do you guys think? KNewman 14:58, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

LevKamensky is back

Please see to his persistent restoration of glorification of his father Aleksander Kamensky while refusing to discuss anything in the talk page. See also Abram Kamensky. mikka (t) 19:39, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

  • In my IMHO, let him be. This is open-source pedia, isn't it? Vald 21:40, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Lubeh

I created the article on this band (I love their tunes), but I am missing some key information. Could anyone help? Zach (Sound Off) 23:47, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Hero of the Russian Federation

I want to make this article into a Featured Article. If yall wish to help, just come right over :). Zach (Sound Off) 06:17, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

User:Zhopa

Zhopa (talk · contribs)

This was just created a few minutes ago. Does this contravene "inappropriate usernames" as per Wikipedia:Username policy? -- Curps 20:58, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

I guess it would depend on this user's future behavior and the reasons for chosing such username. After all, if a Chinese guy named "Huy" created an account under his username, that would probably not considered inappropriate, even if he was to edit Russia-related topics. On Russian WP such name would probably spell trouble, but this is English WP; hardly anyone would know what a zhopa is. If the user starts misbehaving, I'd say it's a different story though.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) 21:47, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
I'd just like to remind everyone that Nossik has a username of dolboeb on lj. :-) MureninC 16:34, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Turkish affairs

User:Tommiks flooded the article on Russo-Turkish Wars (which he calls Russo-Ottoman, as if Turks had little to do with them) with material pillaged from articles on separate wars, as if the Chigirin campaigns and the Turkish front of the WWI had something in common. --Ghirlandajo 07:06, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Grand Duke Aleksei Petrovich?

Despite my admonitions to the contrary, User:Morhange moved the article about Tsarevich Alexis to Grand Duke Alexei Petrovich of Russia without citing any evidence that Peter the Great's only son and heir was ever known as "grand duke". A third opinion is needed. --Ghirlandajo 10:29, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

  • I posted a message on his user page, let's wait & see. If he doesn't respond or do it today, we'll move the article to its previous location. KNewman 11:16, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Battle for Moscow

User:Nixer introduced drastical changes to the layout of Moscow without discussing them on the talk page. Currently, there are edit wars as to which version to be kept. Please comment. --Ghirlandajo 07:06, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Russian Orthodox Church

Anon user substantially revised the article Russian Orthodox Church, removing many anti-ROC POV-comments and adding new pro-ROC POV. IMHO, such phrases as "Avvakum Petrovich and many other dissidents commited violence and crimes against the state and for these crimes were persecuted accordingly" are inacceptable. What do you guys think? --Ghirlandajo 19:23, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

People's Artist

Something is screwed up with the terms "People's Artist", in particular, "People's Artist of the USSR". I suspect I screwed this up even more. Please take a look. mikka (t) 23:26, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Timeline of Russian history

Are there any particular reasons that Russian history starts by the Crimean War and end by Khruschev? Should we produce the timeline say from 5th century up to 2005?

  • Good point. It should be complete and probably broken into sections (like centuries or something). KNewman 11:04, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Added centuries and expanded the article, starting from "1147: The first reference to Moscow". Vald 21:44, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
      • Added 1993 Events, Beslan (2004) and Nalchik (2005).
    • Proposal for the article. Could somebody start the article Nicholas Mikhailovsky, narodnik. He is referenced in the Timeline of Russian history. Vald 11:09, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Russian architects

  • For curious enough, here is a sample of this comparison on 4 November 2005.
    • Category:Russian architects - There are 18 articles in this section of this category
      • On 10 November 2005 - 26 articles. Meaning that Russia:Portal is growing faster than Russian Wikipedia.
    • Статьи в категории «Архитекторы России» - В этой категории 9 статей Vald 11:23, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

List of Russians

Eugenia Volodina

A low-level edit war between me and an anonim. The anon is trying to push an advertisment-style article filled with supermodel with an infinite amount of enviable campaigns and editorial work to her credit. A flawless beauty with refined features, her grace and delicacy has earned her much popularity in the fashion industry indefinitely congealing her name on top fashion houses and designers lists.... I am trying to make an NPOV article out of it. The girl seems to be a notable, every porno-site in existance has a few images of her. The only contributions of the anonim is the article on her, she seems to be quite dear to the anonim

It is kind of stupid to go to a war about an article, that nobody would read anyway, should I abandon the attempts to keep NPOV or continue the edit war? abakharev 05:37, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Sergei Kovalev vs. Sergey Kovalyov

I welcome proper spelling & grammar and do not necessarily oppose the move, but according to the Google test the former name produces 13,500 results, while the latter 1,340. Is an order of magnitude enough of a difference? Is this covered in Transliteration of Russian into English or someplace else? What about Gorbachyov? ←Humus sapiens←ну? 23:53, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Since he is reasonably notable in the English-speaking word, so the traditional English spelling has the precedence over our transliteration rules. Otherwise we will change Leo Tolstoy to Lev Tolstoy and Moscow to Moskva. Thus, he should be Sergei Kovalev. abakharev 02:31, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
Second that. I mistakenly moved the article to a third name now but I returned to Sergey Kovalev. We should probably move it back to Sergei Kovalev, --Irpen 04:29, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Prometheism

  • Need your help on Międzymorze. I tried to English it as Polish imperialism, but was stymied by Polish editors. In the wikireality, the Russian colonization of Siberia is dubbed imperialism, but the Polish ambitions to extend their territory from one sea to another are not. What do you guys think? --Ghirlandajo 18:38, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
  • I think that you must come prepared. What did you think when tried "shashki nagolo"? You have to start from a really solid source. mikka (t) 19:54, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
:) In fact any source would do as a starter... Halibutt 23:14, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Russian cities

Theren shold be some major work done to expand articles about major Russian cities. There are only pathetic stubs about such historically, politically and economically vital cities, administrative centers of oblasts with a population of over 500 000 people such as Perm (actually over 1 million people!) Krasnodar, Penza, Lipetsk, Stavropol, Belgorod, Orenburg, Ulyanovsk and Tyumen. As well as capitals of autonomus republics such as Petrozavodsk, Syktyvkar and Makhachkala More information and at least one picture per article should be added. Fisenko 09:17, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

That's why I proposed the creation of the Russian COTW, but people didn't seem to be interested at all. KNewman 23:35, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Polish invasion of Russia

For RCOTW to be more than just an announcement that most people ignore, we need to pick topics that would be interesting enough for more people so that they contribute. Rather difficult, IMO, but possible. And could be done as RCOTM(onth). As of now, I suggest that everyone looks atPolish-Muscovite War (1605-1618). It is now at WP:FAC nomination and it is well written and complete enough to soon be a WP:FA. On the other hand, it hadn't received enough attention from Russian-Ukrainian editors and it would be a good time now to start reviewing this article to make sure it is objective. My any means I do not imply bad faith of the quality editors who wrote it by calling for more community attention to it. --Irpen 23:47, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Shouldn't it be Polish-Russian War (1605-1618) or Polish invasion of Russia, on the par with the Mongol invasion of Russia and Napoleon's invasion of Russia? Why do the Poles always engraft upon English their own Polish idioms, e.g., Muscovy instead of Russia, Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth instead of Poland, the Dymitriads instead of Time of Troubles, Lisowczycy instead of Lisowski gang, szlachta instead of nobility, and unpronouncable Rokosz of Zebrzydowski instead of Polish Civil War (1606-1608)? Do they think all the foreign words improve the article? Or perhaps English is too poor to translate their idioms properly? --Ghirlandajo 09:03, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
Dymitriads does not refer to the Time of Troubles, but only to the 1604-1609 part of it. Correct me if I am wrong, but the Time of Troubles encompasses more then just the Polish intervention, right? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 16:44, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

I think we should check (if we can) what name is used in English L historic literature. If they have Muscovy there too, be it even because the name reached the West in such form due to Poles, there is nothing we can do about it now. If, OTOH, it is indeed called differently, I am sure, we will be able to move it then. --Irpen 09:17, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

The term Muscovy was never that popular in English. Shakespeare speaks of Russia, Chaucer speaks of Russia, Sir John Mandeville speaks of Russia, Roger of Hoveden and other ancient Anglo-Norman chroniclers speak about Russia. Only Poles and their sovereigns speak about Muscovy, because they reserved the title of "rex Russiae" for themselves. Prince Wladyslaw used it, for instance, in 1612. --Ghirlandajo 11:35, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
This is simply not true. Many recently published books use the term Muscovy extensively. Check out this search result on Google Print. It returns 271 books that use the term. And this just from the newly established Google Print database which is very far from complete. Balcer 07:32, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
What's wrong with "Muscovy" ? Does it have any derogative flavour ? Isn't it that Muscovy evolved into Russia later in 17th century ? --Lysy (talk) 09:52, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
Isn't it that Vistula guberniya evolved into Poland early in the 20th century? The same logic here. --Ghirlandajo 11:22, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
Frankly, I fail to see any similarity. Could you explain what do you see similar in these names ? --Lysy (talk) 11:45, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
Only Poles and their sovereigns speak about Muscovy,

Doesn't seem to be true: http://countrystudies.us/russia/3.htm Subsequently, Muscovy entered a period of continuous chaos. The Time of Troubles included a civil war in which a struggle over the throne was complicated by the machinations of rival boyar factions, the intervention of regional powers Poland and Sweden, and intense popular discontent. The first False Dmitriy and his Polish garrison were overthrown, and a boyar, Vasiliy Shuyskiy, was proclaimed tsar in 1606. In his attempt to retain the throne, Shuyskiy allied himself with the Swedes. A second False Dmitriy, allied with the Poles, appeared. In 1610 that heir apparent was proclaimed tsar, and the Poles occupied Moscow. The Polish presence led to a patriotic revival among the Russians, and a new army, financed by northern merchants and blessed by the Orthodox Church, drove the Poles out. In 1613 a new zemskiy sobor proclaimed the boyar Mikhail Romanov as tsar, beginning the 300-year reign of the Romanov family. http://www.waytorussia.net/WhatIsRussia/History.html Subsequently, Muscovy entered a period of continuous chaos. The Time of Troubles included a civil war in which a struggle over the throne was complicated by the machinations of rival boyar factions, the intervention of regional powers Poland and Sweden, and intense popular discontent. The first False Dmitriy and his Polish garrison were overthrown, and a boyar, Vasiliy Shuyskiy, was proclaimed tsar in 1606. In his attempt to retain the throne, Shuyskiy allied himself with the Swedes. A second False Dmitriy, allied with the Poles, appeared. In 1610 that heir apparent was proclaimed tsar, and the Poles occupied Moscow. The Polish presence led to a patriotic revival among the Russians, and a new army, financed by northern merchants and blessed by the Orthodox Church, drove the Poles out. In 1613 a new zemskiy sobor proclaimed the boyar Mikhail Romanov as tsar, beginning the 300-year reign of the Romanov family. http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9053889 Grand Principality of Moscow also called Muscovy, Russian Moskovskoye Velikoye Knazhestvo, medieval principality that, under the leadership of a branch of the Rurik dynasty, was transformed from a small settlement in the Rostov-Suzdal principality into the dominant political unit in northeastern Russia. Molobo 12:20, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

The Polish-Russian War article is not yet ready for FA. A lot has to be changed in it, like names, for example. I can't understand either why there's a Polish name next to every Russian name or last name. Is it necessary or was this article copied from a textbook? E.g., Battle of Klushino sounds like Battle of Klyushkin (Russian speakers will understand the pun). And why Polish names are given in Polish spelling with all the stresses and apostrophies and whatever-those-things-are-called on top of the letters. Some people are not even sure how to pronounce it, let alone how to write it. And some of them don't have Polish language support, so all they see is little cubes instead of certain letters. This had to be changed. KNewman 12:29, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
I moved you comment to Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Polish-Muscovite War (1605-1618). Hopefully you don't mind. I will start the article on Klushino and move the article on the battle. --Ghirlandajo 13:32, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
Polish names are there because the Polish names for some of those battles are used in English instead of Russian ([4] vs [5], for instance). Also, all the dashes/apostrophes and so on are there because they are there in Polish language. Like it or not, Polish language has'em. So, the alternative is to have names spelt incorrectly, which is not what an encyclopedia should promote. If you really have a problem with that - you can always upgrade your browser to either Firefox or Opera or some other modern browser that has support for non-standard latin fonts. If you have a problem with pronunciation - there's always an article on Polish language with IPA keys and ogg files for each and every sound the Polish language uses. :) Halibutt 12:42, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
I don't think Russian names need their Polish versions unless these particular names are known only from Polish sources. As for the Polish names, I absolutely agree that those should be given in their original spelling (except where a traditional English variation exists). Do we have to follow American TV "talking heads" who can't pronounce a foreign name? Ignorance may be a bliss, but it is not an excuse. --Barbatus 18:12, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
Sorry to annoy you, guys, but this is what I meant by changing Polish spelling. E.g., Polish wikipedians spell the following names like this - Stanisław, Wiśniowiecki, Różyński, Władysław, Bartołomiej. My question is: will it change anything if we write them as Stanislaw, Wisniowiecki, Rozynski, Wladyslaw, and Bartolomiej? Doesn't it look more English? Will these names still remain Polish with this spelling? It's not like I'm asking to change Warsaw for Varshava or anything :). That's all I ask. Thank you! KNewman 02:32, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
Does it have to be "more English"? Again, if it's a comparatively well-known name with traditional non-Polish spelling, it should take preference (with an original given in parentheses), but for the rest Polish spelling (it's nor Cyrillic, for Zeus' sake! so there's no excuse) must be used. It is not that hard to learn stuff like that, and might even encourage to get 'em names right, eventually. One can hope, at least. ... Just remember those poor CNNians struggling with Serbian or Bosnian names! --Barbatus 02:42, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

OK, what we really need is to find out how this war is called by academia in English L literature now and not how Russia was called (Muscovy, Russia or whatever) by Shakespere or Wladyslaw. We have one ref where it is called Russo-Polish war. A good start. Any other ones? --Irpen 07:45, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

You may want to check the Britannica entry on the Time of Troubles, which uses both Russia and Muscovy, with the former being a preferred form. I still don't see much rationale for the Polish-Muscovite War article which duplicates stuff from the Time of Troubles. Anyway, if such an article exists, I vote for the Polish invasion of Russia. In Russia, these events are viewed as quite analogous to the Mongol invasion of Russia, Napoleon's invasion of Russia, and Teutonic invasions of Russia in the 13th century. We should stick to similar titles if only for the sake of standartization. --Ghirlandajo 08:26, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
Found the first one: The Rise of the Fiscal State in Europe 1200-1815, Oxford University Press. The quote is (from page 470):
The Muscovite War (1609-1619) added a second military commitment to the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. [...] After campaigns in Muscovite territory, [...] Until the Truce of Deulino ended the war with Moscow (1618) ... etc. Found via Google Print.
Anyway, I will gladly admit that one can find many other books that refer to this conflict as one between Russia and Poland, so clearly both terms are more or less acceptable. The question is: which one do we think is more accurate? Balcer 07:59, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Let's just see what is most used first. Found another one: The Encyclopedia of World History. 2001 .[6] uses "1609–18 Polish intervention in Russia". --Irpen 08:15, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

It's the most apposite title I can imagine: Polish intervention in Russia (1609-1618). --Ghirlandajo 08:40, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
Interesting idea. But doesn't this actually downplay the severity of the conflict? It was a large scale war after all. Still, I could live with this title. Then again, there must have at least a dozen of wars during this period where one state tried to interfere in the affairs of another, by putting a friendly monarch on the throne. Should we rename all those wars "interventions"? Thus Nine Years War should become French intervention in Britain (true the French did not manage to march into London, but they tried to install a different ruler), War of the Spanish Succession should be French Intervention in Spain. I am sure more examples could be found. Balcer 09:00, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

As I wrote on FAC discussion and on article's own talk page, I favour Muscovy over Russia in this case because Russia is a broader and less correct term in this case. This is by no means denying that Muscovy was Russia, but it was not the modern Russia, just as the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is often reffered to as Poland, but it should never be equated with the modern Poland (or Lithuania, for that matter). And remember that our goal here at Wiki is to educate people about history, and using terms that are too broad will mean that most of the Western readers will see no difference between Muscovy and Russia, Ottomans and Turkey, Prussia/Holy Roman Empire and Germany, etc. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 16:44, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, yeah, double standard. You didn't call it PLC-Muscovy War, do you? Polish invasion of Russia it is. If you try to apply this logic of scrupulously drawing historical distinctions everywhere, you are in a deep trouble, my friend. BTW, what's the harm not to distinguish Ottomans and Turkey? There is a definite continuity. mikka (t) 01:28, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Ivan the Terrible

This is undoubtedly the most frequenly vandalized article on Russian history. I don't know why vandals chose it as their favourite target, hopefully someone will solve the mystery. For the time being, please consider adding the article to your watchlist. --Ghirlandajo 16:30, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

While you are at it, add Grigory Rasputin as well. Same story.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) 16:59, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
Another article the vandals target is Ivan III of Russia. Was blanked twice today. --Ghirlandajo 13:49, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Siberia Khanate

The article is poorly written and probably misnamed. Please take care of it. --Ghirlandajo 13:49, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Russian expression template

IMHO it would be good to come up with a template to fit the following:

  • expression/abbreviation in Russian (Государственный комитет по планированию/Госплан)
  • expression/abbreviation transliterated (Gosudarstvenny Komitet po Planirovaniyu/Gosplan)
  • English translation (State Committee for Planning).

If interested, pls. take a look at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Soviet Union#Naming conventions. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 01:00, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Please use/improve Template:Russianterm. See example in Gosstandart. I listed abbreviated and full terms on the same line separated by parentheses. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 03:16, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Kronstadt rebellion

What are the Anarchy logo and info box doing in the Kronstadt rebellion article? I don't think it is relevant. Can someone explain, or maybe we should remove it? KNewman 15:46, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

  • Well, most of the organizer of the rebellion were anarchists , AFAIK. Since the rebellion is a rare case of an anarchist involvement into the Russian Civil War, that is not entirely negative, thae like to adopt it. On the other case the word anarchist is used only twice in the whole article (once in the list of demands (freedom of speech to anarchists) and once among the sources (anarchist FAQ), i do not think it deserves the whole infobox. abakharev 22:32, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Copyright status of the historical maps?

Do you know what is the copyright status of the Historical Maps printed in the Soviet Union in 1989? I got an Atlas on History of the Soviet Union that has a lot of historical maps with the English labels. The maps could be quite useful for many articles. I have a scanner at home so, I could scan the maps, but I am not sure about the copyright. I am sure the maps were taken from some earlier publications, but I am not sure.

Could anybody enlight me on the Copyright protection for the historical maps. abakharev 04:37, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

AFAIK, everything pre-1973 is Template:SovietPD. If in doubt, I suggest to ask in ru:wp. I remember seeing some discussions there regarding wikifying БСЭ, etc. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 10:11, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Aleksey Yermolov and Pyotr Bagration

These articles have long contained lengthy bios tagged as being contributed by Mr Mikaberidze. So there are two bios in the same article. Please verify the copyright status of Mikaberidze's data and wikify it, if possible. --Ghirlandajo 14:52, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

The Bagration text is definitely not from Mikaberidze's book available online so it is quite possible that the contributor is mikaberidze himself. I (or you) will try and find this person, but there is no immediate reason to assume it is a copyvio. I suspect the same is valid for Yermolov and Kamensky you reverted; but the latter case gives rise to some suspicions, Ghirla, you know who I am talking about, don't you? mikka (t) 21:59, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Actually I don't. --Ghirlandajo 22:10, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Moscow

Please someone pay attention to Moscow. There used to be a nice article with historical images, but it was butchered by some bullies who keep removing material on history and adding allegations of racism, corruption, and violence flourishing in Moscow. I haven't had enough time to look into the matter, but hope there's someone from Moscow interested in the topic.--Ghirlandajo 07:35, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

The beggar photo

Pls. see Talk:History of the Soviet Union (1985-1991)#The beggar photo. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 10:13, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Surnames

User:Sheynhertz-Unbayg from Japan asks for help with List of Eastern European surnames and Onomastics on Judaism and Jewish history. Any takers? abakharev 05:22, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

The former should be listed for deletion. Another example of Wikilistomania. There are tens or hundreds thousands Eastern European surnames. What's the point? --Ghirlandajo 07:27, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
I wouldn't hurry. If done properly, this has a potential to become a useful encyclopedic resource, e.g. for genealogy. There are typical roots, rules, suffuxes, etc. WP:NOR of course. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 08:48, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
An encyclopedic resource is www.vgd.ru. Although it does possess a huge database, I don't find it useful. I own two volumes of Unbegaun's Russian Surnames - should we post it online? We may scan a 2000-page Moscow Telephone book as well. What's the use of it? Besides, there is no such thing as "Eastern European surnames" - there are Lithuanian surnames, there are Russian surnames, there are Romanian surnames, and they are all subject to different linguistic laws. --Ghirlandajo 09:15, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
I understand that you are saying. This is a separate Wikiproject not an article. Still there something possible to be done to help a rootless American with a surname of Rezanoff to find that he is probably Russian and Reznikoff is probably a Jewish and Rezanovic is probably a Serb or Croat. Vgd.ru is a Russian language site of a little usage to an average American of third generation. abakharev 11:40, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
Then there should be not a list but separate articles on Czech surname formation, Russian name morphology and formation, Lithuanian name formation. Actually, what's in common between Romanian and Lithuanian surnames to put them in the same list? --Ghirlandajo 12:06, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
Well, in the ideal world there should be an article how to determine the origin of a European surname (if it ends on -ov or -off it must be Russian or Bolgarian, on -escu must be a Romanian and on -shvili it should be Georgian). It might be a list of suffixes in surnames. Then there should be an article on the morphology and fomation for each language, list of say 100 most common surnames and for the each surname some ethimolgy and disambig. Sounds like quite a large project for me. abakharev 12:49, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
We may start by expanding Surname#Russia --Ghirlandajo 12:59, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure if it was an expansion, but see if you like it (or not) better now. --Barbatus 02:16, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Occupied territories of Baltic States

Can anybody review POV-phrasing in Occupied territories of Baltic States? A sample: "For historical and ethnical reasons, East Prussia (or at least its eastern part, without the city of Kaliningrad/Koenigsberg/Karaliaučius) can be considered lost part of Lithuania too." What right do they have to call 1200-year-old Russian Izborsk an occupied territory, especially in this international project? I suggest waiting for a couple of days before moving the page to Territorial claims of Baltic States. --Ghirlandajo 15:40, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Need expertise in 20th-century history

There are also Polish areas annexed by the Soviet Union, Kresy, Recovered Territories, Revision of borders of Poland (1945), Curzon Line, Western betrayal - all written without contributions by East Slavic editors and thoroughly permeated with POV. For instance they always talk about Soviet invasion of Poland but the Polish invasion of Russia is termed Polish-Soviet War.

They are silent about Polish plans to invade the USSR and true causes of their ignominuous defeat from Hitler in 1939, when 3,500,000-strong Polish army, one of the largest in the world, was deployed on Eastern borders, preparing to invade the USSR. On the other hand, these articles carefully cover Polish agression against Russia with phrases like the following: "The Bolshevik regime in Russia wanted to invade Poland in order to carry the socialist revolution into the heart of Europe, and particularly into Germany. In this circumstances war was inevitable, and broke out in late 1919".

Hopefully someone more knowledgable in 20th-century history will bring these articles to normalcy. If noone does, then I will have to start unifying the nomenclature by regularly replacing "Polish Liberation War", "Polish-Soviet War", etc with Polish invasion of Soviet Russia. --Ghirlandajo 15:40, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Sergei Yesenin

It is widely believed in today's Russia that Yesenin was murdered by the NKVD. The article, however, doesn't even mention this fact. How come? KNewman 20:53, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

  • I believe that the allegations are complete conspirological crap but if somebody would bring it here, we would of course have to present both versions. abakharev 22:23, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Nationality in biographies

I have moved the proposal to Wikipedia:Ethno-cultural labels in biographies, please discuss it there' abakharev 12:50, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

We need to have a well-defined policy on how to assign a nationality (Russian, Ukrainian, Belarusian, etc.) to the biographies for the cases of people of Russian Empire and Soviet Union that have some sort of attachment to the Newly Independent States. See e.g. initiated by User:AndriyK controversy over ethnicity of Ilya Yefimovich Repin. There are actually two questions Categories - do we want Repin to belong to Category:Russian painters or Category:Ukrainian painters or both; and the question of the first line is Repin a Russian painter or a Russian and Ukrainian painter or an Ukrainian-born Russian painter or simply a Ukrainian painter. A similar question can arrive for hundreds of biographies of people of Russian Empire. I am not aware of any wikipolicies for this matter and propose, so I am proposing mine version, please edit/comment it here, then we should discuss it wider with all other interested people.

Writers, Actors and other people of the language

Here the question is simple, whatever language they used for their notable works it is their nationality. Mikhail Bulgakov - is a Russian writer, Ivan Franko is Ukrainian, Sholom Aleichem is a Yiddish writer, Vladimir Nabokov is a Russian and American writer etc.

Rulers, Government Officials and Generals

Whatever state they ruled or served that is their nationality. Catherine II was a Russian Empress, Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim is a Finnish politician and Russian general, Ivan Skoropadsky is a Ukrainian Hetman,etc.

Painters, Musicians, Scientists

This is the most complicated case

I can think of the following criteria:

  1. Citizenship, if was not involved into the independence movement - Russian
  2. Place of birth
  3. Place of the professional education
  4. Places where notable works were produces
  5. Support or the opposition to independence/annexation
  6. Language used at home/for publications/memoirs/essays

I propose that if at least one of criteria is met, than the correspondent Category may appear if an editor requests it, for the place on the first line at least two criteria should be met.

Examples:

Repin:

  1. Russian
  2. Ukrainian
  3. Russian
  4. Russia, Finland(?)
  5. none
  6. Russian
Resume: First line - Russian (maybe Ukrainian-born Russian painter), Category: Russian painter, Ukrainian painter and, arguebly Finnish painter

Euler

  1. German
  2. German
  3. German
  4. Russia (most), Germany (some), France (some)
  5. none
  6. German,
Resume First line German mathematician working in Russia, France and Saxony. Category; German mathematicians, Russian mathematicians

David Burliuk

  1. Russian, Ukrainian
  2. Ukrainian
  3. Russian
  4. Ukrainian, Russian
  5. Ukrainian
  6. Ukrainian,Russian
Resume First line - Ukrainian and Russian (arguably) painter. Into category both categories.

Comments and suggestions

Any comments, suggestions? abakharev 12:56, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

I heartily agree with Alex's proposal. Nice job, thanks. --Ghirlandajo 13:11, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
A couple of the commonsense amendments:
  • If a person was persecuted by Russian government for participation in the independence movement. Then the Russians disqualified from claiming him (or her) as a part of their culture. Taras Shevchenko is not a Russian and Ukrainian poet. He is just a Ukrainian poet. For symmetry, if somebody was persecuted by his native government for participation in the Unionist or assimilation movement, then he is not a part of their culture (can not think of an example).
  • We are using historical locations not the present ones. So Kant is not a Russian philosopher - he is a German philosopher as Koenigsberg was not a part of Russia in Kant's lifetime. Aivazovsky is not a Ukrainian painter as the Theodosia was not a part of the historical Ukraine at his lifetime abakharev 23:48, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
It is probably not as simple as it seems to be. For example, a Ukrainian poet, writer and painter Taras Shevchenko penned several novelettes in Russian, and even kept his personal diary in that language. Does it make him a Russian writer? And, last time I checked, Yiddish was neither nationality nor ethnicity. --Barbatus 00:05, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Yiddish writer is still a perfectly valid Category Category:Yiddish writers as well as the beginning of the first line (actually there is no Category:Jewish writers). Taras Shevchenko is obviously strongly connected to Russian culture and if he had not been persecuted for the Ukrainian half (or three quarters) of the art, then I would think it would be perfectly valid to list him as Category:Russian writers (he still would not qualify for the Russian writer in the first line IMHO). abakharev 00:26, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
My point exactly: language used by a writer does [can't spell today!] not necessarily signify his nationality and/or ethnicity. --Barbatus 00:41, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
Here I am looking for an answer not for a complicated question of the ethnical identity but for a simple test what to put into the first line/category of bios. If you do not like nationality/ethincity, please by all means use the term you like abakharev 03:27, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
This is precisely what I would prefer (and recommend) to avoid. There's no simple test, or, in other words, where you need such a test, it is not simple. Do you understand what I mean? Sorry I don't have time to give a detailed answer right now. --Barbatus 04:52, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
If we do not have an established test, than in all questionable cases we would have an edit war of attritions. A couple of weeks some IP number added a number of painters who usually considered Russian as Ukrainians and resist an idea to even add a Category:Russian painters. I really do not want to follow the bad example of our opponents and start a large scale (twenty something articles) revert war with the author of the articles, but if there were an established policy we could negotiate. So far we have problems mostly with the Ukrainian nationalists. But we could soon expect Jewish nationalist (or Russian ultranationalists) demanding to separate all Jews from the Russians; Tatar nationalists demanding to label Zhukovsky and Tugenev as Tatars, etc. etc. It is hundreds revert wars just waiting to happen - do we really need it? abakharev 07:19, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
And Pushkin of course was a Russian African :) Actually, Turgenev was as Tatar as Lermontov was Scottish: his ancestors had been living in Russia for more than three centuries. It reminds me about Sergey Rachmaninoff: the article about him used to state that Rachmaninov was a Tatar composer. --Ghirlandajo 13:05, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
Exactly. I don't think any simple test is possible (based on what? name? birth place? citizenship? family ethnic affiliation going back twelve generations? language? personal consideration? passport? friendly opinion? unfriendly?), and would recommend to avoid the issue, or be ready for innumerable conflicts. --Barbatus 07:50, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
Agreed in general, but complicated bios should be dealt with on case-by-case basis. Let's not forget that many such attributes may coexist. For example, Isaac Levitan may be described as a classical Russian painter of Jewish origin. Sometimes it is convenient to mention that a person was born into a Tatar/Moldovan/whatever family. Sometimes ethno-religious roots are an important detail of a bio. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 00:43, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
Completly agree that in almost any case of Non-Russian ancestory, we should put the ancestory either in in the first line (say of Jewish origin) or in the first line of the biography (usually the second line of a bio-article) was born to a Jewish family, o to a Russian-German family or to a Russian noble family of a Tatar origin. Exemptions - avoid the ethnic references if they a controversial and was not recognized by the subject of the bio - Shafarevich and Primakov are not Jews, whatever evidence we have to support the thesis. abakharev 03:47, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
Or should we? Probably the only clear-cut cases would be when a person firmly confirmed his ethnic affiliation (in Alexander Suvorov's manner, 'I'm proud to be Russian!'). As for your example with controversial Jews, again, what evidence "supports the thesis"? Soviet passport? anti-Semits? or Halacha? ... "Avoid the ethnic references," indeedy. What difference does it make, anyway, whether, say, Aivazovsky was of Armenian extraction? (Funny ... I mentioned Aivazovsky just because his name popped up in my head, and then looked up the article on him at Wiki. Sure enough, in its first edition the article proclaimed him an Armenian painter. Are there any Armenian nationalists lurking in the dark as well?) --Barbatus 07:20, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
I don't think they are lurking in the dark. Please take a look at Bagrationi, where a war between Armenian and Georgian editors is raging. Also, Aivazovsky's name has been repeatedly changed from Ivan to Hovhannes in the List of painters --Ghirlandajo 08:42, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

I think these rules are very sensible. For a related discussion, please take a look Talk:Nikolai Gogol. --Irpen 01:15, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Two lessons from the Talk:Nikolai Gogol:
  1. If the art of a Russian-language writer is strongly and undeniably inspired by his ethnic herritage e.g Nikolai Gogol, Fazil Iskander then it is mandatory to mention it somewhere close to the first line. It is also appropriate to include the ethnic roots in the category.
  2. In disputable cases avoid linking e.g. Russian writer to the disambig Russian or Russia, instead link to Russian language, Russian literature, Russian art, etc. Maybe just create redirects Russian writer, Russian painter, etc. abakharev 03:47, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
Yes, and this is exactly how it was amiably solved in Gogol's article. That was before the crusaders entered these discussions and all disagreements could be resolved peacefully and productively at those times of peace. Another way to link is [[List of Russian authors|Russian writer]]. --Irpen 06:13, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

This is a very important question and a great proposal. I am not sure about having writers based just on their language, maybe in difficult cases we could say, on culture they belong to or contribute to? or is it too vague? anyway, it must become really helpful to have something in place what the majority would support, even if not perfect in every detail. Incidentally... noticed a recent discussion on this topic at village pump/policy, where they used articles about 'Russians' as an example too (and came pretty close :). So I just thought perhaps seeing how other folk view this issue now might help get a better feel of how best to gain broader support? - Introvert talk 08:58, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Though the talk at the Village Pump has not been finished yet, I think its main trend is clear: it is inappropriate to state person's ethnicity unless it's important for that person's notability. And because (in our case) there is a confusion about 'nationality,' probably it's better to avoid it completely: When in doubt, don't mention it. --Barbatus 18:13, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
Let's keep in mind, there is a good reason why serious biographies begin with description of a person's roots. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 07:53, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
In the so called "perfect world," it would be just natural ... let's keep in mind what all this conversation is about: nationalists' claims on some famous person's ethnic affiliation (or lack thereof), and all those pesky little wars resulting from such claims. --Barbatus 20:58, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Does Walter Scott was english writer?

No original research, please

This is not our job here to develop criteria and decide wich was the nationality of writers, painters, etc. We have to base the WP articles on creadible sources. So we have to look into the articles published by experts in the field. If there are creadible sources stating that painter X contributed to Russian culture, then s/he is Russian painter, if other (or the same) sources state his/her contribution to Ukrainian cultute, then s/he both Russian and Ukrainian painter.

Ethnisity is a separate question. One can be a Russian painter without being ethnic Russian and vice versa.

Place of birth is the next separate question as well as the place of education and the place of work. Musicians that got their education in Italia are not necessary Italian musicians. Painters who contributed to Russian culture working in emigration are Russian painters.

Please do not invent the wheel. Just look into the sources.--AndriyK 12:18, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Dimitri Egorov or Dmitry Yegorov?

Ghirlandajo, I noticed you moved Dimitri Egorov to Dmitry Yegorov. I debated with myself for a while as to how exactly I should name the article, given that there are alternate spellings. Actually I was only considering the difference between Dimitri and Dmitri, but clearly his family name can be spelled differently too. In the end, I chose Dimitri Egorov because that's the spelling given on The Mathematics Genealogy Project. Since you're living in Russia, I obviously bow to your knowledge on this subject, but I'm wondering if there is a standard way of spelling Russian names such as this? Forgive my Canadian ignorance on the subject - I'm hoping to maybe add some more stubs of Russian mathematicians in the future, and it would be great if I knew how to do it properly to begin with. Cheers! --PeruvianLlama(spit) 20:24, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

I want to thank you for the article you created. We already have Boris Yegorov, Aleksandr Yegorov, and now Dmitry Yegorov. I just thought it helpful to standartize the spelling of this surname. By the way, a disambiguation page would be helpful too. --Ghirlandajo 21:35, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
I actually had the same question. The spelling Egorov seems to be much more common. I think I understand where you're coming from: the surname seems to be written Егоров in the Cyrillic alphabet, and the Cyrillic Е at the start is typically transliterated with "Ye". However, I think the fact that Egorov is the common spelling (if that's true) takes priority. What do you think about this? -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 22:35, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
The spelling used should be the one under which his English-language papers (or translations to English) are most commonly published. Da? linas 00:38, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
With "Da" meaning yes, in Russian (Egorov would approve :) Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 02:53, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
Just a comment, Boris Eltsin is a redirect to Boris Yeltsin. Both Dmitriy and Dmitry are acceptable, I met people who spelled their names both ways, I am not so sure about Dimitri.(Igny 03:37, 1 December 2005 (UTC))
According to MathSciNet, 72 papers have "Egorov" in the title (including a Math. Intelligencer article Dimitriĭ Egorov: Mathematics and religion in Moscow, where the last letter of the given name is i-breve), 30 "Egoroff", and none "Yegorov" (Egorov/Yegorov himself died in 1931, so his papers are not in MathSciNet). Given this, I intend to move the page back. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 13:49, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
Obviously the Special:Whatlinkshere/Dmitry_Yegorov will pick this up too, but I thought I'd explicitly point out that that disambig page Yegorov will need to be changed. In fact, generalizing this conversation to the surname in general (and not just that of Dimitri/Dmitri/Dmitry Yegorov/Egorov), perhaps the disambig page could use some working over. --PeruvianLlama(spit) 14:40, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Category:Russian avant-garde

IMHO a very important and influential movement still barely known in the West. Would anyone object to creating such a cat? ←Humus sapiens←ну? 01:22, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

It is good that I asked. Yeah, the "The" must go, it is against WP:NC. BTW, this page is too long, time to archive old content. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 01:33, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

History of Belarus

Input from other editors is needed to stop what increasingly looks like a revert war.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 16:52, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Kremlin walls and towers

I propose that the articles Kremlin Wall and Kremlin towers be merged into one. -- Kuban kazak 18:40, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Second that. Merge them into Moscow Kremlin, too.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) 19:18, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
No, no, no --Ghirlandajo 19:19, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
Care to elaborate as to why? :)—Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) 19:27, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
They are much longer than the article on Kremlin itself and deserve separate articles. --Ghirlandajo 19:50, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
Ah, OK. Still, Kremlin Wall does not seem to be very long. Lumping the articles on the wall and the towers would probably overwhelm the Moscow Kremlin article, I agree with that, but merging the articles on the wall and the towers into one (separate from Moscow Kremlin) does not seem like it would have any ill effects. Anyway, just a thought. Seemed like a good organizational idea at first.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) 19:54, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
Well towers and the walls are linked in both historical and physical terms that I see no point having separate articles repeating 80% of each others content (have a look at the wall specification paragraph alone). Let's make an article on Kremlin fortification or walls and towers (with all the redirects). --Kuban kazak 15:10, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
And definetely make a separate category on the Kremlin, and clean up the main page. -- Kuban kazak 15:11, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Russia/Russia-related_Wikipedia_notice_board/Archive01&oldid=1142556925"