Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Russia/Archive 1

Advertising the Project

I am sure there are quite a lot of Russians and non-Russians out there who could join the Project and help to get things going. If people want, I can start going around asking people if they want to join (for example, by finding Russian users by Userboxes etc.). Is this something that is worth doing? --AVIosad 23:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello! I am new to wikipedia, but love to help. I putted my name to the list :). Ilyushka88 19:43, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Featured Article Vote on Indian Standard Time

Hi in Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Indian Standard Time, I've accidentally noted similarity in names of different users participating in the vote & so I guessed that they might be from the same nationality -India. And 6/7 at the time were Indians.

I think that this is an "internal" systemic bias, since Indian articles are written mostly and only by Indian users & they're mostly likely to be the only voters on featured article nominations on India-related articles & in result, making Indian articles attaining featured article status inevitable.

(I want to note that Indians are a special exception from other nationalities in Wikipedia because most of them can speak and write fluent English & thus can participate more in English Wikipedia while other foreigners can't & thus limit their participation in fields related to their nationality/culture & making participation of other third parties more likely.)

I think that there is need for third party, especially across different nationalities. And I would like members of this project to come participate in the vote & read what I've written & what they've replied with & see the article & voice your opinions. Thanks a lot! (Wikimachine 17:04, 23 November 2006 (UTC))

Atomnaya Energiya article from 1974?

In Levinskii, Y.V. (1974) "p-versus-T Phase Diagram of the Uranium-Oxygen System" Atomic Energy 37(4):1075-6, as translated by Springer, there is a question about whether "UO₃G" should actually be "UO₃,G":

File:PvTdUOs.png

Please see this discussion for more information.

Does anyone have access to the original Russian journal Atomnaya Energiya[1][2]? Here is its editorial board if that helps any. Do any of your local libraries have volume 37 from 1974? If so, please post on Talk:Uranium trioxide whether the original Russian version has a comma on that top-left label or not. Thank you. LossIsNotMore 22:43, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Vernacular scripts

vote on the use of scripts--D-Boy 01:58, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

What a complete mess! Are they really trying to completely do away with vernacular scripts? What a useless proposal! The original-language names are very usefull for cases where you have to search for information but don't have access to a keyboard which would give you those letters, or if you don't know the language. We must fight against options 4 and 5 at all costs. And in any case, this seems to be mainly an Indian issue. Esn 10:28, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Russian History Project

Hi Folks:

I'm one of a group of Russian historians who are considering setting up a WP Russian history project. Most of the members of this group are history professors, and their primary interest is to see that WP entries on Russian history are accurate and well categorized, primarily because their students use them all the time. WP has really become the source of first resort for many students, so we need to make sure it's trustworthy. The idea itself was generated on two professional listserv, H-Russia and H-EarlySlavic. The logs of the on-going discussion are there if you would like to review them.

We'd like your help (as a WP expert) and cooperation. The division between historical and contemporary articles is a natural one. We would concentrate on the former and you could cover the latter, though a certain amount of overlap is to be expected (and, I think, encouraged--I've signed up for the Russia Project).

If you are interested in knowing more about me, see Marshall Poe. You can email me at marshallpoe at gmail dt com. MarshallPoe 15:27, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Greetings from WPMILHIST/Russia!

I am currently rewritting Red Army and a FAC is ongoing for Russian Ground Forces which I extensively revised. If there are any material not easily available on those topics which people in this project have access to (I'm in New Zealand), please let me know. Paka Buckshot06 00:05, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Importance ranking very odd

I belive that some articles are oddly ranked. E. g. such an important article as Nizhny Novgorod is only ranked mid-important, while less important Komsomol and Trans-Siberian Railway is ranked high-important, and minor articles such as AK-47 or Gulag are even of top-importance!

Could you imagine a France-related article ranking such that Lyon were ranked lower than guillotine, or a US-related article ranking such as San Francisco were ranked lower than Indian reservation?--Achp ru 22:59, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

As the one who has done all the importance ratings, I did this with a philosophy in mind:

• I aimed at 100 Top-important, 200 high-important, 400 mid-important and the rest of low-importance
• This importance rating is not about how important the place is, but with what probability someone not familiar with Russia would try to search for that article.
• I also aimed at including different topics in the several ranks, so not only biographies and cities are included but also other subjects like songs, ballets, books, wars, guns, daily life etc. Each category should at least contain some articles that appeal to a reader, and not all readers are interested in cities.
• the importance rating should be viewed not from a Russian point of view, but from the point of view from someone with only a limited knowledge of Russia and its predecessors.
• Now you may consider AK-47 to be a minor article, but everybody outside Russia knows the Kalashnikov gun. Certainly not everybody knows about Nizhny Novgorod. In fact, many would confuse it with Veliky Novgorod. I do understand that for Russians Nizhny Novgorod is a very importance place, but outside Russia it is barely known (sorry, just stating how I see things, no offense meant).
• Likewise, almost everybody has heard of Gulags and the Trans-Siberian Railway is a legend for every train-loving individual. I admit that Komsomol might not be that well-known, but I included it to have some political articles as well.
• In the same train of thought, I would indeed rank guillotine higher than Lyon (which by the way is not so important as Paris or Marseille), because everyone outside France knows about the guillotine, but not necessarily about Lyon.
• The US-related example is not very good, I think. I would rate Indian reservation as Mid-importance (perhaps even low), but Native Americans in the United States would be rated Top. Furthermore, I think San Francisco would also be rated top (together with Los Angeles, New York and Washington D.C.) That makes 4 US cities versus 4 Russian cities (Moscow, Saint Petersburg, Kazan and Veliky Novgorod). Note that e.g Chicago would not be in this list, but only of high importance.
• The difference between San Francisco and Nizhny Novgorod is that many people outside the US know SF because of the major earthquake in 1906 or because many movies or television series are located there.

Perhaps you've already noticed, but I'm not Russian. But I think I have an above-average knowledge of Russia and that gives me a unique perspective, which makes me better suited than the average editor to evaluate the "importance" of an article. BTW, I think importance is a really awful word to describe the idea behind it, priority would be much better.

I'm very sorry if I've hurt your feelings, but if you have some good suggestions, please don't hesitate to offer them. Errabee 18:20, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I disagree that importance should be based on familiarity among non-Russians. On that logic, "communism," "vodka," and possibly "snow" would be of maximum importance, while "Vladimir Vysotsky," "Rurik," "Yuri Andropov," "Andrey Tarkovsky," and "Vladimir Menshov" wouldn't even deserve articles. The point of Wikipedia is to educate, not pander to existing stereotypes. Wouldn't it be wonderful for someone not so knowledgeable about Russia to come across a page on Pushkin that didn't have a "help expand this page" banner across the top? Madler 04:50, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

You are mixing two goals here. The goal of Wikipedia in itself is to educate, and articles on all subjects are very welcome. The goal of WikiProjects is to select and enhance articles for the CD-version, which can only contain so many articles. This CD-version is not country targeted, so Russians are not the primary goal, rather the entire English-speaking community is. And I can also quote from the project page:

The criteria used for rating article importance are not meant to be an absolute or canonical view of how significant the topic is. Rather, they attempt to gauge the probability of the average reader of Wikipedia needing to look up the topic (and thus the immediate need to have a suitably well-written article on it). Thus, subjects with greater popular notability may be rated higher than topics which are arguably more "important" but which are of interest primarily to students of Russia.

So I absolutely agree with you that it would be wonderful if more Pushkin-related pages got expanded up to GA or maybe even FA grade material, but I'm inclined to say that the existing stereotypes are exactly what we're looking for in this project. Therefore, vodka is indeed top-important, communism is doubtful whether it is in scope of this project (but Communist Party of the Soviet Union is high-important); snow is definitely not in scope (what a reductio ad absurdum) but should be in scope of a Weather Project. And yes, I've allowed myself some liberties in promoting certain articles; Andrei Tarkovsky is high important because he should be well enough known for movie lovers. But indeed, articles like Rurik, Vladimir Vysotsky and Vladimir Menshov (never heard of him btw; should say enough) are not likely to be selected for the cd-version of Wikipedia, as their target readers constitute a too small community. Errabee 06:56, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Russia/Assessment page, it says: "The criteria used for rating article importance are not meant to be an absolute or canonical view of how significant the topic is. Rather, they attempt to gauge the probability of the average reader of Wikipedia needing to look up the topic (and thus the immediate need to have a suitably well-written article on it). Thus, subjects with greater popular notability may be rated higher than topics which are arguably more "important" but which are of interest primarily to students of Russia."

So our job is to provide high-quality pages of things readers are likely to already know something about? If that's the case, then we're wasting our time, because if it's something that's already widely known, our bright-eyed searcher can probably find it somewhere else on the internet, which would seem to defeat the purpose. Compare AK-47 and AK-47. Strip the Wikifluff from the Wiki article, and what do you have? A much less detailed description than someone can find elsewhere on the internet. I'm not arguing that the Wiki article shouldn't be made better. Of course it should. What I'm arguing is that these rankings (which aren't specifically about the CD - "While much of the work is done in conjunction with the WP:1.0 program, the article ratings are also used within the project itself to aid in recognizing excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work") should focus on what's really important, not cultural flotsam some 14-year-old in California can tell his friends about to sound cool. ("The flag of Mozambique has an AK-47 on it!" "That's so cool! Man, our flag sucks!") Madler 13:02, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, to use another reductio ad absurdum: you might as well suggest AK-47 doesn't deserve an article, since it is so well described on the internet. Instead, the goal is to create an entry with so much (verifiable) information that all other internet sites pale in comparison. Who would even bother to look up an entry in an encyclopedia with only subjects he has never even heard of? Those are the real die-hards, and they would be hard to find. The top-important entries are there to lure people into reading further, and have by default to be subjects the potential readers are already aware of. Errabee 15:21, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

No, all articles should be good. I just don't think that those topics which happen to lie in the overlapping section of the Venn diagram for "Russia" and "stuff non-Russians know" should be given maximum importance. I say let's give people who know something about the language and the culture more say in the rankings. Madler 22:34, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I think the way Errabee interprets and applies the rankings is perfectly fine. Just because people are familiar with vodka, sputnik, glastnost, and Dostoyevsky does not at all mean they know much about them beyond the stereotypes. We should definitely make sure that the most developed articles are those which have the best chance of being looked at first. An average American who suddenly developed an interest in Russia isn't suddenly going to read an article about Pushkin; it's safe to assume that such an American wouldn't even know who the hell Pushkin (let alone Menshov) was. Instead, he would probably start with an article on a subject he already knows (or thinks he knows) something about. The fact that such an article is very much likely to be about vodka is unfortunate, but quite real. If we snobbily decide that an article about vodka is not important at all, because there are many more worthy subjects, and delay working on it till later, then we risk losing the person with potential interest in Russia because the very first article in Wikipedia he happened to read turns out to be crap. In my view, the whole purpose of the importance ratings is to tag the articles proportionally to their potential to attract and retain readers, and the importance rating system as it exists copes with this task quite efficiently.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 02:33, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

It's my understanding that importance rankings are designed to encourage work on certain articles. If an article is already high on the American pop-culture radar, then by definition no further encouragement will be needed to ensure its English-language Wikipedia article is worked on. We need to promote those articles which are important, but fall outside the average American's ken. Therefore, what I'm proposing isn't snobbism, but practical and realistic. Vodka will take care of itself without further encouragement. Lomonosov won't. Madler 05:21, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Not just on certain articles, but on articles which are the most likely to be looked at. Which returns us to the starting point of this discussion—just because a topic is popular (known in American pop-culture, if you wish), it does not mean the article will automatically write itself.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:27, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I posted my thoughts about this topic at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Russia/Assessment. I too think that the way importance ratings are assigned right now is completely innappropriate. Some of you are putting too much stake in what the project page says. Yes, it indeed says that the point is to asses which articles will be most needed by an average user - but I think that's those words are there largely to avoid arguments between editors about objective importance rankings. I do not believe that it should be taken as an instruction to appeal to the lowest common denominator. The goal of wikipedia is and should always be to inform, not to pander to those who don't even know what they're looking for in the first place by leaving out or not focusing on the articles that they should have read first. Esn 02:09, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Your argument is centered around the thought that (the editors of) Wikipedia should decide what should be the content of the encyclopedia. That is a false premise, because ultimately Wikipedia's success can only be measured by the readers, not by the editors. You should therefore consider what you would expect from an encyclopedia as a reader, not as an expert on several subjects. This is a painstakingly difficult process, as every person has his or hers own POV, and tends to argue in favor of more subjects included as being more important than they are rated now. I have been brainstorming for quite some time, trying to put aside my own personal preferences and prejudices. I still feel the list is not perfect but grosso modo I think the list is rather consistent and broad in the range of topics. Errabee 03:22, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

The premise which you advocate has a flaw as well, which is that people generally go to wikipedia to find information about things they do not know - indeed, the very purpose and structure of wikipedia (the interlinks, as just one example), are meant to expand the breadth of knowledge of its readers, to correct the misconceptions that many of them have, to sweep away the cobwebs of ignorance. If the only thing most people know about Russians is that they drink lots of vodka, do we want to make a huge article about "Vodka in Russian culture" to cater to those people or do we want to focus our energies on the (likely fewer) amount of people who are actually seriously interested in finding out about Russia? The idea that we should focus on what people are going to look for has a certain merit of course, but we must decide which group we owe a greater obligation to - the serious readers, or those looking for fluff and entertainment. As far as I can tell, this is "WikiProject Russia", not "WikiProject Perceptions of Russia in Western Culture", but from looking at the importance ratings you wouldn't know it. "Vodka" is currently ranked top-importance, while "History of the Soviet Union" is ranked mid-importance. This is disrespectful and unfair to more serious readers - those would be most appreciative of the effort if the job were done well. Of course an article about vodka is necessary, but top importance? That would be roughly equivalent to having Maple syrup top importance for Canada, for crying out loud - that's almost all a lot of Americans know about the country, after all.

To conclude this section of my post, I would like to point out that Wikipedia policy clearly states that the last thing we should be doing is deliberately promoting systematic bias.

One more comment - I find questionable your limit on the number of articles which can be in the top 4 categories ("100 Top-important, 200 high-important, 400 mid-important and the rest of low-importance"). I believe that this approach is clumsy, as it is based on artificial limits rather than an article's actual importance. If you're going to assign aritrary limits to how many articles can be in a category, you might as well delete the descriptions of the various levels of "importance", since obviously they cannot actually describe the articles in the categories. I imagine that eventually, as things fill up, even high-level pages (based on the description of high-level) will end up in the low-level section due to the numerical constraints. Esn 04:48, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

My premise is that people go to Wikipedia to find out more about subjects they have already heard about, and want to know about in more detail. I think the most hits are due to Google searches. And you are mixing two things with countering systemic bias. The bias WikiProject Countering systemic bias is fighting, is the bias amongst the editors, not bias amongst the readers. This means that very specialized subjects can be described in great detail (well done, I would say), while something as a biography of Alexander Pushkin is in a really shocking state. However, the very specialized subject is only of importance to a very select group of readers, while Pushkin would be of interest to many more readers. Therefore countering systemic bias means that the article on Pushkin should be expanded.

The issue of the number of articles can always be adjusted. But I think 100 articles for top-importance is more than enough for now. Ideally, the number of top-important articles should be less than high-important articles, and so on. So 100 top-important, 200 high-important, 400 mid-important and 800 low-important would amount to 1,500 articles. When we reach that number, it will be time to evaluate again how many subjects should be in each category.

And again, I believe History of Russia contains more than enough information on the history of the Soviet Union to satisfy the initial demand of the reader. Any further information is therefore automatically lower-rated. This is certainly not disrespectful, not having an article on vodka is inexcusable from the reader's pov, as well as it would mean a missed opportunity to correct some prejudices in the world. Errabee 10:58, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 20:57, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Films?

I'm just wondering if I should start adding the template to any Russian film articles that I find - are they within the scope, or would it be better to only add the template to articles about Russian films in general? (eg. History of Russian animation)

Also, just a note... I think that a link to Portal:Russia should be somewhere on the main page, and perhaps even a link to the new article announcements page. Esn 22:24, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Films are definitely in scope. Errabee 02:13, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

{{Russia-struct-stub}}

Hi, I've added {{Russia-struct-stub}} to your list of stubs. It would be cool, if you could help WP:WSS by helping add that template to any stubs about buildings or structures in Russia, because there is still a large number of such stubs without it.--Carabinieri 19:49, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Igor Stravinsky

This article has been selected for Feature Article Review. Please see the talk page and discussion at FAR for improvements you can make to retain its FA status. Jeffpw 10:13, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Igor Stravinsky has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:45, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Military history of the Soviet Union FAR

Military history of the Soviet Union has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:45, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Biography collaboration of the fortnight

Mikhail Baryshnikov is the Wikiproject:Biography collaboration of the fortnight through February 28. Please stop by and help move the article towards featured status. Mocko13 14:31, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Anton Chekhov

Anton Chekhov is up for WP:FAC, not many people have commented so far, could use some feedback.--Konstable 23:17, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Moscow

Nominated, but far from ready, and the nominator is not being very constructive. Please comment (and hopefully improve the article, although lots of work is needed before it can be a FA). Also, please consider reviewing it for its current 'A' status - the GA step has been skipped by somebody :( -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  06:00, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Archiving Talk:Joseph Stalin

This talk page is over 300 kbs long. It desperately needs someone to archive it, and I don't want to take the risk of screwing it up myself. John Carter 23:41, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Rostislav Alexeev - a remarkable engineer

Hi Guys

I have just created a long overdue article about the genius that was Rostislav Evgenievich Alexeev. He was the inventor and designer of the famous ekranoplans.

Like a lot of you, I am often extremely amazed by such a well known and admired russian vehicle design. Yet for so long its designer has been ignored. Ironically, same thing happened to him in real life, where despite creating a remarkable craft, his work was abandoned and his legacy was ignored.

I have taken the first step. But as you may know, here in the west, not much is known about details of Alexeev's life. So, this is my open plea to anyone out there who can improve this article. I have s far found some info on him. But do you know more? Like has he got honours, etc. during his lifetime? Please help.

Thanks -- Ash sul 00:18, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

The Bronze Horseman

For so remarkable a feat of Russian achievement, the article is sorely lacking. I've done a wee bit, but surely you Russophiles can do it justice. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Oreo Priest (talk • contribs) 03:11, 16 March 2007 (UTC).

Internet brigades

Some help is needed in making a potential article over here - about the alleged flooding of the internet with information by secret police used by a few governments (currently the Russians and the Chinese have been alleged of doing this). Some notable sources are available in the references section.

The original article (which was very problematic and was deleted) was purely based on the FSB allegations, and an attempt is being made to make the future potential article more international. It is currently up for deletion review over here, where there is a tie of votes (9 to 9) between those who endorse its deletion and those who want it overturned and relisted.

This is a very controversial topic, but in my view there seem to be enough notable sources to make a decent article out of it, so I hope that someone here may be able to help.

I'm posting this message on several different wikiprojects, in the hope that enough people look at the article that it undergoes the thorough review which it needs. Esn 01:27, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Kosovo

How serious is Russia regarding the Veto? I cannot decipher its political stance really... --PaxEquilibrium 00:17, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Bilateral relations discussion

I would like to invite you all to participate in a discussion at this thread regarding bilateral relations between two countries. All articles related to foreign relations between countries are now under the scope of WikiProject Foreign relations, a newly created project. We hope that the discussion will result in a more clean and organized way of explaining such relationships. Thank you. Ed ^{¿Cómo estás?} 18:04, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Zavoico

A while ago I started Zavoico. I'm certain that it's a fairly common Russian surname, but there seem to be few (if any) notable persons by the name of Zavoico. If any of you guys are familiar with it, perhaps you'd like to work on it. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 21:14, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Moved to Zavoyko per WP:RUS, formatted, added one entry, and removed Basil, because I can't find anything about that person. Feel free to restore that entry if you have more information. Best,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 22:07, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

1993 Russian constitutional crisis

1993 Russian constitutional crisis has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. LuciferMorgan 19:58, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Mojibake move

I am proposing to have Mojibake, the current article for "кракозя́бры", moved to another name (preferably a purely English name). Based on the article, the problem is pretty common in Russia. If anyone is interested in this topic, feel free to comment on its talk page. --Voidvector 10:15, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alexander Nevzorov

I've made this deletion listing of a Duma member because the article itself is short of reliable sources, and a near orphan. We don't have that much coverage of the Russian Federation in English Wikipedia so obviously I'd just love it if someone could somehow procure sources, preferably in English but Russian is acceptable if it's from a reliable source well known at national level in Russia. --Tony Sidaway 02:11, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Question

Where should the new articles related to Russia be announced? Alæxis_¿question? 08:34, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Here.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:44, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Пасиба. А почему с портала туда нет ссылки? или я не заметил? Alæxis_¿question? 16:24, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Хм, и правда нет. Сейчас добавлю.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:52, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Notability of Fratria

Hello,

in order to decide whether the article Fratria is notable, I need someone who speaks Russian (I personally don't). See the details on the article's talk page. Is somebody here who could help me?

Thanks! --B. Wolterding 14:13, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Grigori Rasputin current ACID nomination

The article above is currently being considered for imporvement as a part of the Wikipedia:Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive. Any help in pinpointing work required on the article, and if you are so inclined working on the article in the improvement drive, would be greatly appreciated. John Carter 17:24, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

GlavUpDK

As part of the Notability wikiproject, I am trying to sort out whether GlavUpDK is notable enough to have its own article. I would appreciate an expert opinion. If you can spare some time, please add your comments to the article's talk page. Thanks! --B. Wolterding 22:30, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Are you aware of this AfD[3]? --Malcolmxl5 01:44, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Russian wine

Greetings! I just recently created the Russian wine as part of the Wine Project's effort to detail wines from around the world. I see immense potential in the subject matter and I was curious if members of the Russia project would be interested in contributing to the article. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks! Agne^Cheese/^Wine 21:42, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Requested Article: Federation of Scouts of Russia

I have started the construction of the requested article Federation of Scouts of Russia, but I need help. If you would like to add information to it, please click here. Also I need images for the page and if you see any rules being broken, please let me know.

Here is a link to the page I am using to construct the article before I put it up as an actual article:

• (Link to Page)

Thanks,

Skunkmaster 18:21, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

History of the Soviet Union

After a few months, I have looked at History of the Soviet Union again, and find that it now only covers a fraction of the topic. I have made the gall-ass move of reclassifying it as "Start class" until it at least summarizes the topic named in its title. I don't know how this happened, but it's not acceptable.

I don't think I'll become convinced that there is such a thing as "a single article consisting of four pages" on Wikipedia, and it's unbelievable that Wikipedia has no main summary article on this very important topic. —Michael Z. 2007-07-21 19:29 Z

Feel free to join the spotlight in trying to fix this article. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 18:23, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

??error on Suntar Airport stub

It says the tarmac at Suntar is 300 meters long and speculates that this length might have served heavy bombers. But of cours, 300 meters is barely enough to service a Harrier jump jet. Could it have meant to say 3000 meters? Still, that's only about two miles, which still seems kind of puny for a bomber base.

I have put this on my to check list. Unfortunately, many of the Russian airport articles are taken from sources such as Globalsecurity and the like - not exactly the most authoritative sources out there. But 3,000m would likely be correct, however, the infobox says 2,000. --Russavia 05:31, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Translation Assistance

I am tryng to put together a table on Soviet Military Spending during the Cold War, and a google search turned up a source in Russian. Unfortunately I cannot read it. Anyone care to help? Thanks.Here is the paper, and I see some tables, and I think one of them has the info I need, but like I said, its all Greek to me. Torturous Devastating Cudgel 22:16, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Which tables do you need to know about?  Madler  15:25, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Create one single WP:Russia project?

I have been editing Russian aviation articles for a while now, doing bits and pieces before I delve in and do total re-writes in an attempt to bring these articles up to par - Aeroflot will be my first big one shortly. I was having a look at some of the Russian airport articles as part of getting info together for the re-writes, and I noticed that many of these articles are hopelessly out-of-date and are basically based upon information which US/NATO obtained/released when information did not flow freely. The same goes for the Russian aircraft articles, take a look at Tupolev Tu-95 for a perfect example, it is entirely written from a NATO perspective, with no information on where these aircraft are based, what squadrons, etc. Compare to the American equivalent, the B-52. Going thru tonnes of Russian articles, I was actually very surprised to find 3 articles that one would probably expect to be featured articles are not; those being Russia, Moscow and Russian language (yes the language article lost FA status 24 hours ago). I was also surprised to find that many articles I expected to exist do not; prime example being many of the Federal government ministries. Then there are other problems such as:

• Naming conventions - very little continuity and no real guidelines for Russian names and articles in wikipedia as a whole - an example is here.
• Categorisation - naming conventions will help somewhat - following other naming conventions will help too - an example of poor categorisation throughout Russian articles - Category:Russian_people
• Article assessment - there are no guidelines for this, and it has resulted in some unusual results. Guidelines are needed.
• Article review - there are no guidelines specific to Russian articles and with more than one project, other projects won't necessarily know of review requests. Additionally, because of the number of projects with very little scope in each, wider community views can be missed. For example, Russian language was a featured article until 23 August (yesterday). It's featured article review, unfortunately it went unannounced on all Russian projects, apart from this corner
• Collaboration - there is none to very little collaboration on Russian content between the various projects and unfortunately article quality, and perhaps stability, will suffer for it.
• Recruitment/outreach - As we are members of various Russian projects, we took the time to add our name to a list, because we have an interest in a certain (or all) aspect/s of Russia. New members are needed, but how will they find the projects? There needs to be co-ordination to 'recruit' new members.
• Scope - just what is the scope for the various projects? Wikipedia:WikiProject Russian federal subjects has a very very narrow somewhat defined scope; Wikipedia:WikiProject Russian history has a hazy 'historical' scope; a question being raised here.

What I would suggest, rather what I am suggesting, is the following projects be merged into Wikipedia:WikiProject_Russia and for it to be co-ordinated much like any other all-encompassing project. The projects I am suggest to be merged are:

• Wikipedia:WikiProject_Russia - main project
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Russian federal subjects
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Russian history
• Portal:Russia

Other projects which can be used as guides on how to structure the project would be:

• Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia
• Portal:Australia - a featured portal

Of course there needs to be concensus from all projects for a merge and structures be discussed, etc, but firstly, there needs to be discussion on the pros and cons of such an idea. I have posted this on the other project talk pages, and have asked that all discussion take place on this talk page --Russavia 16:05, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. John Carter 16:37, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I would agree, but WP:MILHIST might also be a helpful model, with a number of task forces under the central project. Russian federal subjects, Russian history, (Russian rock(?)), could become task forces, and the Russian and Soviet task force of the WPMILHIST project becoming a joint venture of the Russia and WPMILHIST projects, along the lines of the Japanese and Indian projects. This would at least avoid the two Russian history and Russia project tags being on the same talk pages! Buckshot06 20:56, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Expert review: Mihail Ahmanov

As part of the Notability wikiproject, I am trying to sort out whether Mihail Ahmanov is notable enough for an own article. I would appreciate an expert opinion. For details, see the article's talk page. If you can spare some time, please add your comments there. Thanks! --B. Wolterding 17:12, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Translated Russian page on Gutseriev

Mikhail Gutseriev needs a lot of help. Thanks~  Madler  15:26, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Russian rock

I belive we need a task force or a WikiProject to improve articles on the theme.

Bi-2, Piknik, Voskreseniye need URGENT expension and references.

Smyslovye Gallyutsinatsii, Checherina, Tantsy Minus, the rock festival Krylya need creation.

Alexander Kostarev, Disen Gage, EXIT project, InProg need translation to the Russian Wikipedia.

Please, let's do this. M.V.E.i. 21:46, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

FAR of Dmitri Shostakovich

Dmitri Shostakovich has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Eusebeus 15:54, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

FAR History of post-Soviet Russia

The History of post-Soviet Russia article has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.--Miyokan 08:20, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Russian football players

Hi, I'm writing an article on a not very well-known football player (Igor Kuzmin) who plays for the PFC CSKA Moscow, and I can't find any information on the english web-sites.
Also, since my russian isn't too good, i'm looking for some russian web-sites which have an english/french or italian translation (possibly daily-weekly newspapers and gazettes).

Thanks for your help! SaintNightmare 15:26, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Boris Akunin's Ying and Yan

Hello I posted an article about Boris Akunin's "Ying and Yan" lately, complete with plots, but it lacks sources. I mean, I wrote the plot summaries completely from the book (and even the description of the play comes from the book itself, as Akunin describes the main idea) and there obviously aren't any sources, but still I would like to ask if someone could find something in English about Ying and Yan, because I would like the article to stay, as I spent hours on writing and correcting it. Thanks in advance, any help would be greatly appreciated. SaniOKh 17:06, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/VID (TV Company)

Hello. I'd appreciate it if people involved with the project can provide some insight on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/VID (TV Company) and possibly clean up the article if it's worth saving. Thanks, Pascal.Tesson 11:22, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Russian martial arts

Could you please help with the Russian martial arts thing?

I will tell you the problems:

1. Russian martial arts article needs referencing, and i couldn't find thise.

2. There are articles about martial arts in Russian that need to be translated to English. After translated to English, they also need to be referenced and expanded (the demends on the English Wikipedia are higher). Those articles are: [4], [5], [6].

If you can't do that, then please leave that messege to someone who can help here. Thank you. PocketMoon 17:25, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Request move: Mother Motherland --> The Motherland is Calling

I have created a discussion on Mother Motherland to gather concensus to move the article to The Motherland is Calling. The discussion can be found here Talk:Mother_Motherland_Is_Calling#Requested_move and urge project members to voice their opinions on this issue. --Russavia 20:20, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Kirill Formanchuk

I dashed off Kirill Formanchuk after reading an article about him in today's New York Times. He would seem to fall within your scope, so I'm dropping a line here in order that any interested parties could slap any appropriate categories/assessments/what-have-you on him. Cheers, Dppowell 00:59, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Russia FAC

Russia is currently a featured article candidate. Please feel free to leave comments here.--Miyokan 01:39, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Peter I of Russia needs cleanup and cites

Peter I of Russia needs cleanup and additional cites. -- 201.53.4.206 21:22, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Alexander Nesmeyanov

HI nice Russia article by the way. I have specific request for the good article on russian wikipedia on Alexander Nesmeyanov to be translated at present it is only a sentence and the russian article a 30kb full written article, Could one of my russian speaking amigos be so kind as to translate . Thanks ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 21:45, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

3 Russia/USSR WikiProject tags on one article

Talk:Nikolai Yezhov: WP Russia, WP Russian History, WP Soviet Union. Ridiculous. You should be sharing a project banner and assigning articles to workgroups. See e.g. {{WPBiography}}. There's just too much overlap for 3 seperate projects with 3 seperate banners. --kingboyk (talk) 12:00, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Bezhin Meadow

Hello, I found Bezhin Meadow a while back, and want to bring this article to FA status. I found it fascinating the more I read about it.

I have started to compile sources at User:Lawrence Cohen/work/Bezhin Meadow. If possible, would anyone here be able to help me drum up more and post them to my page there (feel free to edit it)? I'd be willing to do the bulk of the heavy lifting, if needed. Thanks! Lawrence Cohen 20:11, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Robert Conquest needs cleanup

Robert Conquest needs cleanup for neutrality and weasel problems. -- Writtenonsand (talk) 20:26, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD requesting comment

Could someone with a good grasp of Russian history comment at this AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vladimir Riazanov? The article seems a bit like a hoax, but this could be due to translation issues. Thanks. IronGargoyle (talk) 22:22, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Anna Loginova AFD

Someone nominated Anna Loginova for AFD. Are there more sources in Russian about Loginova explaining her notability? WhisperToMe (talk) 18:34, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Russia and the USSR

There is a dispute regarding the exact nature of the succession or continuation of the USSR to the Russian Federation (current modern Russia). Some outside voices from those familiar with the subject would be greatly appreciated. The on-going discussion can be found at: Talk:Russia#Russia is not the same country as the Soviet Union. Thanks! Vassyana (talk) 17:10, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

New maps

Hi. Just like to point out that a complete set of new Russian administration maps can be found on commons:Category:Maps of Russian federal subjects as of 2008-03 for after the merge of Chita Oblast+Agin-Buryat Autonomous Okrug to form Zabaykalsky Krai on the first of March. Due to toolserver problems the images cannot be automatically replaced so if you encounter any old maps after saturday then please update them. Thanks. /Lokal_Profil 00:19, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Also if anyone finds out the new iso code for Zabaykalsky Krai then I would be very thankfull for a message on my talk page so that I can update the master map. /Lokal_Profil 00:21, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Summit Series

Summit Series has been proposed to be renamed 1972 Summit Series. 132.205.44.5 (talk) 02:42, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Tuva subproject of Central Asia

There is currently an incubating subproject of WikiProject Central Asia relating to Tuva at Wikipedia:WikiProject Central Asia/Tuva task force. I have raised a question on the talk page there regarding whether this project would consider that one as a possible subproject, possibly joint subproject with Central Asia. Any and all comments are welcome. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 14:57, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Valeryia—"The Madonna of Russia"?

Can someone please check out the Valeriya article for veracity? It has the distinct odor of a promotional piece and I could really use some help—even with the basics (my mastery of the Russian language is nil). If she's as huge a pop star as the article claims, it shouldn't take much work. I just find it odd that I couldn't even find an article in the Russian Wikipedia. Thanks in advance. —Hello, Control ^{Hello, Tony} 16:24, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

The Madonna of Russia?? My ass, pardon my French. I haven't heard her singing live at a concert in years, all she does is lip sync. KNewman (talk) 20:31, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

UPDATE: Mikkalai has done a bunch of work on the article, even locating her ru.wikipedia article. Please have a look and see if you can add anything. Thanks. —Hello, Control ^{Hello, Tony} 20:36, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Vladimir Putin

I've noticed at that page & related pages concerning the position of Prime Minister of Russia, that Putin has been declared 'Prime Minister-designate'. That's an incorrect assumption, as Medvedev (do to not having taken office yet) has not 'yet' nominated Putin for prime minister (for the Duma to confirm or veto). Therefore, pm-designate should be removed. GoodDay (talk) 21:31, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Siberian folklore?

Hi there, we're looking for more info on Polar bear folklore from the far north..anyone who has any folklore material and references is welcome to add it to the polar bear article. much appreciated. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:48, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Russia: Articles of unclear notability

Hello,

there are currently 11 articles in the scope of this project which are tagged with notability concerns. I have listed them here. (Note: this listing is based on a database snapshot of 12 March 2008 and may be slightly outdated.)

I would encourage members of this project to have a look at these articles, and see whether independent sources can be added, whether the articles can be merged into an article of larger scope, or possibly be deleted. Any help in cleaning up this backlog is appreciated. For further information, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Notability.

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the Notability project page or on my personal talk page. (I'm not watching this page however.) Thanks! --B. Wolterding (talk) 16:46, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Request for names of two crew members of Bashkirian Airlines Flight 2937

Hi! I would like for someone on this WikiProject to look for the names of two crew members of BTC2937.

I know one is Sergei Kharlov but I do not know what his cryllic is AND I do not know his middle name.

I do not even know the name of the fifth crew member. I have the full names of Gross, Grigoriev, and Itkulov. WhisperToMe (talk) 09:39, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes! We did it. :)

No more red links about Russian cities and towns. :) Now we must make better articles, add info, photos, heraldics etc. And be need good template for Russian settlements. --Paukrus (talk) 01:01, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Tiny transliterion request

At Russian billiards there are several (at least 4) occurrences of words and phrases in Cyrillic characters that need Latinized transliterations, or they are simply visual noise to 99.9% of en.wikipedia's readership. There are possibly also some already-transliterated words/phrases in the text that need Cyrillic counterparts as well. Any help appreciated, as no one in WP:CUE knows Russian so far as I can determine. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 10:31, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Done.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 14:40, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Featured Article candidate - Bezhin Meadow

Hello, please take a look at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Bezhin Meadow, for Bezhin Meadow, a 1937 Soviet film. Any assistance you can offer to help finish the article off, or with suggestions for the FAC, would be appreciated. Thanks! Lawrence § t/e 16:16, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Russian time zones

My best guess so far.

Was wondering if anyone has any info about which uluses of the Sakha Republic fall into which time zone? I'm trying to create an svg time zone map for russia but I'm currently at a loss about the internal divisions of Sakha Republic. /Lokal_Profil 19:46, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Might be some info on http://www.sakha.gov.ru/ for someone who speaks Russian. /Lokal_Profil 19:47, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I've updated my guess based on [7] it's still just guesswork though. /Lokal_Profil 22:05, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Time zones in Russia are regulated by the Resolution #23 of 1/8/92 (amended in 1993 and 1996) "О порядке исчисления времени на территории Российской Федерации". The resolution contains detailed (although a bit dated) descriptions of the time zone borders and is available online (here's one). Hope it helps.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 14:52, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, as you mentioned I don't speak Russian. Browsed around on the net but couldn't find a translation in English. Assuming that the only federal subjects which fall into more then one time zone are Sakha Republic and Sakhalin Oblast I've pretty much got all the time zone borders sorted apart from those inside Sakha Republic. If the document contains that info (and if its still relevant) then a translation of that part would be very much appreciated. /Lokal_Profil 16:25, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll post the translation on your talk page when I complete it. Best,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:27, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Help Requested

Hey, I've been working on some Russian articles of late, and would appreciate some more eyeballs on them to get them improved. Of note Ivan the Terrible (film), Nut roll, One Night of Love (2008 TV Series), and Tea in Russia. Thanks. :) Zidel333 (talk) 17:40, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

AK-47

AK-47 has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 03:52, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Soul (film)

Hello, I am working on the article and your help would be welcome. Could someone please tell me how to add it to new articles' list on the Project:Russia and on Portal:Russia (the same for project and portal Soviet Union)? Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rubikonchik (talk • contribs) 17:15, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Film editors wanted

WikiProject Films has solicited interest in creating a Soviet/CIS cinema task force. We'd like to cordially welcome all regular editors of these articles to voice their interest in starting this task force so as to see if there is sufficient support. Many thanks! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 02:31, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Requesting more eyes for Russian American

There has been one lengthy and useless discussion in Russian American's talk page and a long-standing edit warring over whether jews are russians or not. I trying to put actual content into the page, and just attempted to contain that conflict to a subsection, since I can't end it. It would be helpful if a few more people +watched it. --Cubbi (talk) 03:21, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Television

I've been trying to do some cleanup on some of the articles on Russian television networks, but I get the sense they could all use more work (and more expert attention) than I can give them. Case in point: STS (Russia). The level of hype in the article is absurd: "STS offers the best TV shows to its audience." "Top quality series by the biggest Hollywood producers became an important part of STS’s brand. Those shows enjoy outstanding audience appreciation." This is ad copy, not an encyclopedia article. - Jmabel | Talk 07:05, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Draft Guidelines for Lists of companies by country - Feedback Requested

Within WikiProject Companies I am trying to establish guidelines for all Lists of companies by country, the implementation of which would hopefully ensure a minimum quality standard and level of consistency across all of these related but currently disparate articles. The ultimate goal is the improvement of these articles to Featured List status. As a WikiProject that currently has one of these lists within your scope, I would really appreciate your feedback! You can find the draft guidelines here. Thanks for your help as we look to build consensus and improve Wikipedia! - Richc80 (talk) 13:59, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Trans-Siberian Pipeline

In the context of the Trans-Siberian Pipeline article, there is need for more information concerning gas pipeline explosion of 1982 in Siberia. The main question is, which pipeline is meant in this article and which pipeline actually exploded. Any information about this explosion is useful. Is there any Russian source about this issue?Beagel (talk) 21:58, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Radio Dom Ostankino

Hello, There's a link on Template:European Broadcasting Union Members to 'RDO' which I think denotes Radio Dom Ostankino (although the link actually goes to a dab page with no relevant content). Does a good destination exist for this? The ebu site indicates several component broadcasters under RDO, including Mayak. TIA, --AndrewHowse (talk) 15:10, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Russian music industry

I've been unable to find information pertaining to the Russian music industry, so I was hoping someone here could help me. Is there a Russian equivalent to the Recording Industry Association of America or British Phonographic Industry? I ask because I'm working on a global music-market type article (List of music recording sales certifications) and I've been unable to find much info pertaining to the Russian music industry. Any help anyone could give would very much appreciated. Drewcifer (talk) 02:46, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Buildings in Kungur

Please have a look at User:Champion999/sandbox via its history. It contains at least six different articles about buildings in Kungur. As you can see in User talk:Champion999 they came under threat of deletion, which is why I side-lined them to the user's sandbox. Does Russia have an equivalent to the National Register of Historic Places or listed building recognition? Would these buildings qualify for listing? If so they might qualify for articles here - if the articles were properly written. It might also help if someone were to write to Champion999 in Russian. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 07:08, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

It may be a student project since user:DDDmark is creating articles about streets in Perm but strangely no-one is suggesting deleting them! — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 07:16, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Quick romanization request

Hello! I used an online tool to transliterate a Russian comic title into roman characters, and I was hoping someone here might be able to confirm that I received accurate results. The original title is ПОВЕЛИТЕЛЬ ПРИЗРАКОВ, and the tool provided POVELITEL´ PRIZRAKOV. The tool is here, and if any of you are familiar with it, do you think it'd be reliable for occasional transliterations of things like comic titles? Thanks so much for your help! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 20:14, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

This tool uses the ISO-9 transliteration, while the Wikipedia's Russian romanization guidelines are BGN/PCGN-based. However, for the title you need, the result is almost identical to the one which would be produced by WP:RUS (except you need to omit the apostrophe, resulting in povelitel prizrakov). So, to answer your question, if you need a tool to romanize article titles, this tool is not it. Sorry!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 20:39, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the romanizing and for the background info about the encoding. I'm dealing with so many languages it's become overwhelming! Luckily, I will probably never need to create article titles from Russian transliterations. I'm just including them as local Russian titles in articles about Korean comics. :) I will keep searching for useful online tools, as well. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 22:29, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

anti-Russian

It is possible that this anti-Russian might be unbanned because of lobbying of affiliated users at his completed case . It is at the Poland board. Why not here too.--195.4.112.49 (talk) 17:21, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Request move: Bolshoy Ussuriysky Island → Heixiazi

Request move: Bolshoy Ussuriysky Island → Heixiazi; discuss here: Talk:Bolshoy Ussuriysky Island --Voidvector (talk) 17:39, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

New article: List of Soviet tank factories

List of Soviet tank factories. —Michael Z. 2007-02-06 07:58 Z

FAR

Isaac Asimov has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

Rename proposal for the lists of basic topics

This project's subject has a page in the set of Lists of basic topics.

See the proposal at the Village pump to change the names of all those pages.

The Transhumanist 10:16, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

• The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
• The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
• A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 21:22, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Articles flagged for cleanup

Currently, 1119 of the articles assigned to this project, or 17.0%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 18 June 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. Subsribing is easy - just add a template to your project page. If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 17:24, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

 Done, added {{User:WolterBot/Cleanup listing subscription|wgcat=WikiProject Russia articles}} to the project page, hopefully that will work soon. Cirt (talk) 23:53, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Yay, it worked, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Russia/Cleanup listing. Cirt (talk) 19:42, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Need Russian assistance

Can an editor fluent in Russian help me by providing the cursive Cyrillic text of the two phrases with gray arrows in this image? If you could post the answer to my discussion page, it would be great. Many thanks, Badagnani (talk) 00:28, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Answered at Talk:Russian language. Badagnani (talk) 10:42, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

New Article Suggestion - Russia and Nuclear Proliferation

Hi, I'm not a part of the project, but I wanted to suggest an article: Russia and Nuclear Proliferation. I'm always hearing about how there are thousands of unaccounted for nuclear warheads in Post-Soviet Union Russia. I wonder if that is worthy of an article? Maybe it exists already, but searching for combinations of Russia, Soviet Union, nuclear, and proliferation didn't come up with anything as focused as I hoped. AzureFury (talk) 04:13, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Check Nuclear Threat Initiative website and the Russia and weapons of mass destruction, List of nuclear weapons#Soviet Union/Russia to answer your question. --Yuriy Lapitskiy ~ 09:54, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I had recently added a to Russia and weapons of mass destruction. The Nuclear Threat Initiative website does not mention unaccounted for weapons at all, and neither does List of nuclear weapons#Soviet Union/Russia. Googling this makes me think that there aren't a lot of facts involved in the matter. It is difficult to distinguish between fear mongering and legitimate concerns. I'll probably just expand Russia and weapons of mass destruction#Nuclear proliferation. Thanks though. AzureFury (talk) 10:21, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Arctic Portal and WikiProject?

Would anyone here be interested in helping me start Portal:Arctic and Wikipedia:WikiProject Arctic? Drop a note on my talk page if you are interested, or if there are any objections. Please also let me know if I've missed any existing projects. I'm notifying the WikiProjects listed at Talk:Arctic (and have also notified Wikipedia:WikiProject Antarctica). Please let me know if you know of any other WikiProjects centred on Arctic or polar areas. Carcharoth (talk) 22:29, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Diplomatic missions in and of Russia

There is now a discussion at WP:FOR on the formatting and content of "List of diplomatic missions" articles. As this discussion ostensibly could affect articles under the scope of this project, editors are encouraged to provide their opinions on the WP:FOR at this link - Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_International_relations#Formatting_of_diplomatic_missions_lists - please do not discuss on the article talk page as valid points for consideration may very well not be seen by editors at large. In essence, I have reformatted two lists and there is disagreement as to what format these articles should take. I reformatted Diplomatic missions in Russia and the format for other articles is List of diplomatic missions in India. I also reformatted Diplomatic missions of Russia and the format which editors insist on is this. Thank you, --Russavia ^{Dialogue Stalk me} 04:46, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Russian witch trials

Hi! There is a lot about witch trials here on wikipedia, but non which take place in an orthodox country! I have seen that there is a little about the Russian witch trials on Russian wikipedia, and I think it would be most interesting to read about them here! This would be a valuable asset to wikipedia, as there is very little known about the witch trials in orthodox countrys. It would be interesting to know how similar, or dissimilar, they were from the Catholic and Protestant witch trials of Western Europe! I do hope someone would be willing to do this! My best regards! --85.226.235.145 (talk) 19:57, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Guys, help needed

There are few articles needed to be created. Very important!

• Russian Oven - Very important part of Russian culture.
• Metla - Yes, the Russian broom. Belive it or not but it is unique, an article needed.

Those two articles can be translated from the Russian Wikipedia.

The third one is Artamonov, and i'm surorised there aint an article on him on the Russian Wikipedia, he is reminded in the Bisycle. He invented the bisycle and there ain't an article on him. Very important.

Please do those things! It's important things i'm surprised were missed.

Soviet and post-Soviet films task force

Just thought that the community would like to know that WikiProject Films has a established a Soviet and post-Soviet cinema task force. Interested editors are encouraged to join onboard! Thanks, Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 21:43, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice and for adding that to the WikiProject main page. Cirt (talk) 20:54, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Ah I see it has been posted. Best The Bald One ^{White cat} 10:37, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Fistfight

I was hoping someone here could check on the Fistfight article. I don't know if this is legitimate, or is revisionist history, creating a discrete and clearly delineated "martial art" out of a loose history of the same kind of historic boxing with various rules that has existed in every culture on earth. The only references the author has been able to provide are to websites in Russian, which I can't verify the reliability of. I can't even tell if the sources are primary or secondary. Any help would be appreciated. Bradford44 (talk) 15:14, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Without going into much detail or judging the state of the article as it currently exists, I can assure you that the topic itself is quite encyclopedic. Russian fistfighting, for example, is a subject of an article in Brockhaus and Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary. On the other hand, that our article could use some improvement (better referencing, formatting, etc.) is, of course, quite obvious. Hope it helps.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:38, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

"Clean-up"

This edit marked Clean-up actually removed lots of useful subsections and instead added a bunch of redlinks that are not active nor used by the project. I do not think this was constructive. Cirt (talk) 21:57, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

The clean-up was done by another in good faith, and frankly, looks much better and is something to expand on. Instead of doing a wholesale revert (which I believe was not constructive), why not include details where relevant. Additionally, not that anyone owns anything on WP, but can I ask why a non-member of the project is making these judgement calls on behalf of the project without consultation of Wikipedia:WikiProject Russia/Members? --Russavia ^{Dialogue Stalk me} 22:40, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

If you look at the two versions you will see just how much material was removed with zero discussion or consultation with Wikipedia:WikiProject Russia/Members. It is I that am bringing this here to discussion and consultation with the WikiProject - discussing the prior consensus version as opposed to making a wholesale change without any discussion. Cirt (talk) 16:30, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

I have also done a lot of work lately on Portal:Russia - which will hopefully soon become a Featured Portal as it is currently up for consideration at Featured Portal Candidates with zero opposition - so I would hope that my voice is not discounted in the matter simply because my username is not listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Russia/Members. Cirt (talk) 16:33, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Your voice isn't being discounted and I am acknowledging that content was removed, however, the design was much better than what you have reverted it to. As someone who is currently in dispute with another editor over design and formatting of articles, one thing that irks me somewhat is when a clear improvement is reverted wholesale to a worse version instead of coming up with alternative design or fixing links themselves. Not that you have to do this yourself, and I am assuming good faith on your part and on the part of the editor who made those changes, but I hope you can understand where I am coming from with these comments. --Russavia ^{Dialogue Stalk me} 17:34, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, no, I do not understand were you are coming from. Respectfully, I hope you can see that the reformatted version that was made to WP:RUSSIA with no discussion actually did remove many useful links and subsections. I also honestly did not appreciate your comment questioning my "judgement calls" on this project. As I have said, I have done a lot of work on Portal:Russia lately and so when I say that it is not helpful for whole sections of the main WikiProject page to be removed with zero discussion about it simply for the sake of "design", I am doing so with good faith. Cirt (talk) 21:08, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

I mean I suppose we could try adding back all the subsections and links and helpful pointers that were removed from the prior version into the new design, but it still wasn't too constructive to remove all those things in the first place without discussion. Cirt (talk) 21:24, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Changed again, with no discussion

• Old consensus version
• New version changed with no discussion

Here are the things removed and problems with the new version:

1. New section, Tasks - whole bunch of redlinks, not needed, could simply be replaced instead by transcluded To do list, to have one central location of updated to do items.
2. Introduction - This entire section from the old version was just removed with zero discussion.
3. Wikipedia:WikiProject Russia/Members - No need to have this entire list on the Main Project page, better to have it on a subpage.
4. Wikipedia:WikiProject Russia/Featured content - New section, not in the older version - it is just a redlink for some reason. It is also a duplicate to the Statistics box, and should be removed.
5. Project category tree - This was removed from the old version, with zero discussion about its removal.
6. Project divisions - This was removed from the old version, with zero discussion about its removal.
7. Sister projects - This was removed from the old version, with zero discussion about its removal.
8. Templates - This was removed from the old version, with zero discussion about its removal.
9. Tables of contents and indexes - This was removed from the old version, with zero discussion about its removal.
10. Did you know (DYK)s - This was removed from the old version, with zero discussion about its removal.
11. Cleanup - This was removed from the old version, with zero discussion about its removal. This needs to remain as a subsection with that specific box on the Main Project page, in order to continually get very useful updates from WolterBot (talk · contribs).
12. Requested articles - This was removed from the old version, with zero discussion about its removal.
13. Gallery - This was removed from the old version, with zero discussion about its removal.
14. Userboxes - This was removed from the old version, with zero discussion about its removal.

For all of the above reasons I think we should go back to the Old consensus version, and discuss these changes/removals/additions instead of removing whole swathes of the project's Main Page with zero discussion about it. Cirt (talk) 15:25, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Changed my mind, sorry, stylistically the new version is nicer - I just wish that so many things had not been removed from the old version with zero discussion about it. I will try to add the old features back into the new version. Hopefully the above list will help with that process. Cirt (talk) 15:37, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Cirt, sorry to leave you hanging. It would appear that you misunderstood my post, or more probable, the intent behind my post. I wasn't attacking you or your work or your intent, and I wasn't doing likewise to User:Be Black Hole Sun. I was actually recognising that User:Be Black Hole Sun's design looks good, and was also recognising that your reversion had some merit behind it. And here we are now discussing it, which is the point. Let's discuss this as a project and see what other additions or deletions we need for project management. In the past I have suggested that we steal...sorry...borrow...ideas from Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation and Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia. One of the major things we are lacking which will energise the project is Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Outreach - that being a template which we can place on user talk pages to recruit new comrades to the project. Before anymore changes are made to the front page, would you all mind holding off for the time being in making new changes, as User talk:Ezhiki and myself have discussed on his talk page, we probably firstly need to do a roll-call of current membership, have everyone here and gather input from all. Can we all agree to that if possible? And I'll crack a whip at Ezhiki ;) --Russavia ^{Dialogue Stalk me} 16:22, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Russavia (talk · contribs) - Thank you for reaching out and the apology, it is most appreciated and you didn't have to do that. I apologize as well, I realize I was way too quick to restore the consensus version of the older WikiProject Main Page, as opposed to incorporating facets of the older Main Page into the new design by Be Black Hole Sun (talk · contribs). After working with the new design it is indeed doable and workable and actually looks much nicer than the older version - and actually it wasn't too hard to incorporate portions of Portal:Russia that I had previously worked on in order to maintain uniformity and avoid duplicating work in two places. I'll take a break with it for now and see what you and Ezhiki (talk · contribs) come up with. Thanks again for your patience and kindness in this discussion. Cirt (talk) 16:33, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Correct Cyrillic transliteration?

I've been working on an article about a ship, SS Dakotan, that was transferred to the Soviet Union under Lend-Lease during World War II. The Soviet name for the ship in the Latin alphabet was Zyrianin. A google transliteration into Cyrillic gave me the spelling of Зырианин, but an IP user has changed it to Зырянин. Can someone identify which (if any) spelling is correct? Also, does anyone know what Zyrianin means, like a name, a place, or something? — Bellhalla (talk) 19:30, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

"Zyryans" are an ethnic group of the Komi peoples, and "Zyryanin" would be what a person of that group is called (along the lines of "Russian", "American", "French", etc.). As for romanization, the current Wikipedia guidelines are listed in WP:RUS (and in case with the ship, the romanization would be "Zyryanin"). This is not to say that "Zyrianin" is incorrect—it is a perfectly acceptable alternative way to romanize the word, although this is not the romanization system we standardize on. The correct Russian spelling of the word is "зырянин", while "зырианин" is simply a faulty reverse transliteration (i.e., not a real word). Hope it helps!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:05, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, very much, thank you. I think I'll stick with Zyrianin spelling since that's the way it's spelled in the cited reference. — Bellhalla (talk) 17:12, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Yup, that makes perfect sense (as WP:RUS's conventionality clause would attest). Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 17:20, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Advertisement

{{WikiProject Russia Ad}}

• I removed this from the Main Project page - might want to think about creating a banner ad like other WikiProjects and then add it back at some point, probably wouldn't be too hard to find someone skilled to create it. Cirt (talk) 15:42, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Russia

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 23:14, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Romanization

Hello... here there are some water polo player whose names have been romanized with (I think) a french style. Is it a mistake, or what? Happy editing, --Remulazz (talk) 19:58, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Please see WP:RUS for the Russian romanization guidelines. If the names need to be corrected (i.e., the variants used are not "conventional" as defined by WP:RUS), feel free to let me know if you need help correcting them. I can't say whether the spelling is conventional or not, because I know nothing about water polo. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 20:04, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

You're right, I was wrong. I didn't noticed the redirects. Sorry. --Remulazz (talk) 20:17, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I haven't noticed the redirects myself, or I would have just told you to go ahead and correct them :)—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 20:27, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I have no time for correcting... I'm doing the same job right now on itwiki (I work there). Bye, --Remulazz (talk) 20:33, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Gay culture in Russia

New article Gay culture in Russia has been created, in case anyone is interested in working on it. ElmerBront (talk) 03:06, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Update on The Russia Portal

•  – Update: Portal:Russia has recently become a Featured Portal. All of the articles at Portal:Russia in the "Selected article" and "Selected biography" sections are of Featured Quality Status, and there are some great contributors who have churned out interesting WP:DYKs. One area where we could use some more contributors is at Portal:Russia on Wikinews. Thanks to the efforts of folks from this project, for churning out such great high-quality material! Keep up the great work getting articles to Good Article and Featured Quality Status ! Cirt (talk) 21:04, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Soyuz 2 rename

Soyuz 2 rocket has been proposed to be renamed to Soyuz-2. There is currently a space mission article at Soyuz 2, so it's a non-obvious selection. This is part of a renaming of rocket articles. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rocketry/Titles/Poll 70.55.203.112 (talk) 12:46, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

El Lissitzky at WP:FAR

El Lissitzky has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:56, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Proposal for overhaul and creation of a single WP:RUSSIA project

Going thru tonnes of Russian articles, I was actually very surprised to find 3 articles that one would probably expect to be featured articles are not; those being Russia, Moscow and Russian language. I was also surprised to find that many articles I expected to exist do not; prime example being many of the Federal government ministries. Then there are other problems such as:

• Naming conventions - very little continuity and no real guidelines for Russian names and articles in wikipedia as a whole - an example is here.
• Categorisation - naming conventions will help somewhat - following other naming conventions will help too - an example of poor categorisation throughout Russian articles - Category:Russian_people
• Article assessment - there are no guidelines for this, and it has resulted in some unusual results. Guidelines are needed.
• Article review - there are no guidelines specific to Russian articles and with more than one project, other projects won't necessarily know of review requests. Additionally, because of the number of projects with very little scope in each, wider community views can be missed. For example, Russian language was a featured article until 23 August 2007. It's featured article review, unfortunately it went unannounced on all Russian projects, apart from this corner
• Collaboration - there is none to very little collaboration on Russian content between the various projects and unfortunately article quality, and perhaps stability, will suffer for it.
• Recruitment/outreach - As we are members of various Russian projects, we took the time to add our name to a list, because we have an interest in a certain (or all) aspect/s of Russia. New members are needed, but how will they find the projects? There needs to be co-ordination to 'recruit' new members; particularly from ru:wiki.
• Scope - just what is the scope for the various projects? Wikipedia:WikiProject Russian federal subjects has a very narrow yet defined scope; Wikipedia:WikiProject Russian history has a hazy 'historical' scope; a question being raised here.

What I am suggesting is the following projects be merged into Wikipedia:WikiProject_Russia and for it to be co-ordinated much like any other all-encompassing project. The projects I am suggest to be merged are:

• Wikipedia:WikiProject_Russia - main project
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Russian federal subjects
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Russian history
• Portal:Russia

Other projects which can be used as guides on how to structure the project could be:

• Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia
• Portal:Australia - a featured portal

By merging all projects into a single project, we can then create "work groups" for specific Russian topics, such as:

• History
• Politics
• Places (geography)
• Culture (language, music, literature, film, etc)
• Biographical
• Society
• Transport
• Economy
• etc

Perhaps others have other ideas.

Of course there needs to be concensus from all projects for a merge and structures be discussed, etc, but firstly, there needs to be discussion on the pros and cons of such an idea. I have posted this on the other project talk pages, and have asked that all discussion take place here so that all projects can read off the same page. --Russavia ^{Dialogue Stalk me} 04:00, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

This looks like a good idea to me, and probably doesn't require anyone to give anything up. Have a look at the well-coordinated WikiProject Military history. —Michael Z. 2008-10-02 05:36 z

I would most certainly oppose the Featured Portal, Portal:Russia itself being "merged" with anything else, as it is meant to be a standalone portal and is completely different from a WikiProject. The rest of the stuff does indeed sound interesting and good ideas. Cirt (talk) 07:03, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

The portal is not getting merge, i don't agree with that but i do agree that we should merge the other Russian related projects. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 07:31, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes I agree with that part too. Cirt (talk) 07:43, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Can we all continue discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Russia/Proposal, as other project members may not see this here. --Russavia ^{Dialogue Stalk me} 07:49, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Soviet/Russian names for Eastern Front operations

Moved from Wikipedia:WikiProject Russia/Russia-related Wikipedia notice board

I am currently exploring ideas on how to ensure that articles about Soviet Eastran frontOperations re named with their proper names, for example Dnepr-Carpathian Strategic Offensive Operation and not Battle of West Ukraine (1944). This is not the only case, and if anyone has ideas to contribute, I would appreciate them on my talk page. Eventually I will take this issue to the Village Pump because of the voting used as a "consensus" to disallow full name usage--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 09:01, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

• What are proper names (translations from the Soviet history of WWII, translations from German history, established English names - all three may be different and multi-layered)? It's not just names; the scope may be incompatible to the point where it is impossible to reconcile their battle with our operation. NVO (talk) 00:37, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Kremlin photos now available for the project

Yesterday I received official authorisation from the Kremlin to use their site materials on Wikimedia projects under CC Attribution Unported 3.0 licence. We are now able to use any materials from the Kremlin website. If used, please upload to Commons, and use Template:Kremlin.ru {{Kremlin.ru}}. This will provide the necessary authorisation on images, and will also place materials automatically in commons:Category:Kremlin.ru. Make use of this great resource. --Russavia ^{Dialogue Stalk me} 23:48, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Education in Russia

has been recently revamped (and still is...). Join the party, let's bring it to FA status! NVO (talk) 16:29, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

NVO, Russian education isn't my specialty, perhaps you can tell me what I can do, and I will help wherever I can. --Russavia ^{Dialogue Stalk me} 20:22, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

FAR

Russian–Circassian War has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Domiy (talk • contribs) 22:13, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Ilya Kormiltsev

help needed to prevent deletion of the article. Ilya Kormiltsev, poet, translator, the head of the radical publisher Ultra Kultura and a former songwriter for the Soviet rock band Nautilus Pompilius, died in London. [8]

Deprodding it (removing the prod tag as you did) was all that's necessary. If the article is listed on AfD, adding a few references should be enough to save it.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:51, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Republic of Karelia location articles

WPK (talk · contribs) has been moving a bunch of Republic of Karelia articles from their transliterated Russian names to the Finnish names for these towns. There's possible move requests on these articles, and I would ask that other project members take a look at these, and help to come to some consensus on where Karelian articles could be located at. --Russavia ^{Dialogue Stalk me} 16:58, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

New geography stub types

All stubs dealing with Russian geographical topics now have new stub types based upon individual Federal subject, rather than the previous Federal district stubs. A full list of the new stubs can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Russia/Templates. Please use the new stub templates in future. Cheers --Russavia ^{Dialogue Stalk me} 19:46, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Russian national costumes

Hi all. There's an image which I'm trying to identify the content of - it's been reported that the people in it are possibly wearing some kind of Russian traditional costume, rather than Greek ones as was claimed in the metadata. If anyone could take a look and confirm this, it'd be great - the image is now on Talk:Greek Canadians with a comment. Shimgray | talk | 11:19, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Kosmos-1

Hi, I noticed that Kosmos-1 has been tagged as under the jurisdiction of this project, and I was wondering why. It was a Soviet system which was out of service long before the dissolution of the USSR. What relevance does this have to Russia? Wouldn't it be better under the Soviet Union WikiProject? --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 08:56, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

WP:RUSSIA deals with the history of the RSFSR, to which Kosmos-1 is related. That said, there is, of course, nothing wrong with tagging the article for both WP:RUSSIA and WP:SU. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:38, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I was wondering why there are two different projects to begin with... quite an artificial division. The good point is, nobody owns the articles, and the talk page can be tagged with any relevant WP (how about Kazakhstan?).NVO (talk) 19:02, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

The projects are being created by folks who intend to work on specific areas, so no wonder there is always going to be some overlap. WP:SU members, for example, may have no interest in editing articles about modern Russia (or Kazakhstan, Ukraine, etc., for that matter), and WP:RUSSIA members may have no interest in the history of the former Soviet Republics. It's just how the projects have been set up—based on fairly arbitrary decisions based on the conveniences of the moment. Projects are most certainly not based on the concept of "owning" the articles, but more of the declarations of intent (to work on smth. together).—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 19:20, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

User:Netrat/Beshnova

Would anyone like to collaborate on User:Netrat/Beshnova before I move it to article namespace? Netrat (talk) 14:08, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Umm, not to be a party pooper or anything, but how is this a notable subject? All of the references you've collected so far are from the news sources, and Wikipedia, as we all know, is not a news site. Looks like a perfect candidate for Wikinews, but definitely not as an encyclopedic article.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:19, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

There is a strong DPNI campaign that uses the murder as a pretext to roundup the illegal immigration to Russia. There are also reponses that DPNI misrepresents the story. Because of this there is a significant media coverage. I am not sure we should we go into this mess but if we do we should care about neutrality Alex Bakharev (talk) 23:43, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Move/rename Russian Alaska -> Russian America

Please see move/rename discussion at Talk:Russian Alaska.Skookum1 (talk) 15:59, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Russian ships in the Pacific Northwest/British Columbia Coast

Please be advised that Russian ships from the fur trade era and after are part of List of ships in British Columbia; we don't know much about a lot of them other than mentions; if someone here specializes in Russian naval history please go over the list and start any articles/titles that interest you....thanks.Skookum1 (talk) 16:03, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Help request: 1028 Russia-related articles needing geographical coordinates

Based on a search of Wikipedia's articles related to Russia, I've found some articles that I believe are about places in Russia, and could usefully have geographical coordinates added.

The articles in question are listed in Category:Russia articles missing geocoordinate data. At the time of writing, some examples included:

1. Chetyrekh River
2. Dobrun
3. Elokhovo Cathedral
4. Gothic Chapel (Peterhof)
5. Greshnevo, Yaroslavl Oblast
6. Kholmogorsky District
7. Ligovka-Yamskaya Municipal Okrug

...and there are many more, as well. At the time of posting this notice, there were 1028 articles in this category needing geographical coordinates.

Why add coordinates?

By adding coordinates, a Wikipedia reader can easily view the location on a street map, nautical chart, topographic map, by satellite photo, realtime weather map, and in many other ways. Coordinate data makes an article eventually appear in various services such as Google Maps' Wikipedia overlay, Google Earth, and Wikipedia's own internal map service. Coordinate data also helps readers looking for geographically-based data, such as locations near a reference point, or related information.

How can I do it?

The articles are all marked with {{coord missing}} tags, which need to be replaced with {{coord}} tags that contain the location's latitude/longitude coordinates; or you might be able to add coordinates to an existing infobox. You can find out how to do this at the Wikipedia:Geocoding how-to for WikiProject members.

Please let me know if this is useful, or if there is any way I can help. -- The Anome (talk) 11:33, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

• Ooof! Minus hundred, what a PITA. I left another angry note at Anomebot: why did it mark articles like Golden Ring ? NVO (talk) 21:21, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Artyom Borovik

I am having problems with an editor at the Artyom Borovik article. I have edited the article so that both the fringe conspiracy theories and the investigation into his death are covered equally. You can see this version here. The other editor has created this version instead. There has been some discussion on the talk page, but I do not feel that this editor is going to see the problem. One thing I haven't mentioned at the talk page is that the article is by no means long enough to require footnotes, and what is in the other editors version is only a few words of the investigation (which was widely reported), which is then fobbed off by including speculation which we can't fact check for ourselves. All in all it is indicative of problems surrounding a lot of Russian articles, in which fringe theories are given too much prevalence, without balance to all views. Can project members please provide their opinions, and don't be afraid of calling me a dick. --Russavia ^{Dialogue Stalk me} 17:35, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Gnezdovo

The Gnezdovo article, which is currently a GA, is up for GA re-assessment. Since the person who wrote most of it no longer shows much interest in the English Wikipedia, could those of us who know the subject please comment here? Thanks!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 18:34, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

• Should Gnezdovo and Gnyozdovo coexist or redir ? NVO (talk) 19:40, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Originally the reasoning was that since these are separate topics (a village and an archeological site), they should be kept separate. There is certainly enough information about the site to substantiate having an article. However, if both articles are properly merged, I don't see much of a problem with that approach either.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 19:55, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Y'arr, I offer a bounty

Dar-Ape 01:11, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Belarusian orthography reform of 1933

I translated Belarusian orthography reform of 1933 from Russian Wikipedia, but as I don't know Russian it would benefit from someone verifying... Nikola (talk) 19:13, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Viktor Muravin

I nominated Viktor Muravin for deletion because it was a microstub that didn't assert notability, although there are concerns that he may be notable. Any suggestions? I'm not finding anything. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 03:14, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Merge-Class

Hi there! I'm a developer of {{WPBannerMeta}}, the meta-template that your project banner is based on. Following changes there we're intending to rescind default support for "Merge-Class", which your project uses in the form of Category:Merge-Class Russia articles. There is an alternative system in place which makes it easy for the project to continue using this special class if you wish to do so, but I'm curious as to whether you think it is actually helpful to your project to have articles tagged in this way. Should I go ahead and implement the workaround to maintain the "Merge-Class" through this transition, or would you prefer it to be removed? Happy‑melon 21:57, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

I was the one who did the cleanup of the assessments categories a while ago, and the only reason I retained the Merge-class was because it seemed to be of some use at the time. If it's a hassle to maintain that class as is, and especially if there's a better system available, I see no reason to continue supporting this class in its present form. If any of the project participants disagree with my assessment, please feel free to add a comment here. Happy, feel free to remove the Merge-class in about a week, if no further objections appear here. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 17:00, December 15, 2008 (UTC) 17:00, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Russian Army or Russian Army Corps (First World War)

Recently I have developed the page for the 1st Army (Russian Empire) and started the 3rd Army Corps (Russian Empire), only to discover that Editor Duck has been renamed the 3rd Army Corps (Russian Empire) as the 3rd Army (Russian Empire) respectively. I used the naming convention I was exposed to on List of Imperial Russian Army formations and units and really have no particular view favouring one naming convention over the other. However, as this issue has now been raised, I would like to know why the original convention was adopted, and feel we should only pass to the revised version if there are good reasons to do so. Having used google to review a number of relevant articles, it is apparent that both terms have been used as regards these military formations in the Imperial Russian Army.I shall be informing Editor Duck that I have been somewhat disappointed at the way he has introduced these innovations without discussing the matter with others. (talk) 20:26, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

List of Imperial Russian Army formations and units is correct, but it shows organization of the Imperial Russian army in peacetime. Basically, in peacetime chain of command is:

• military district
  • Corps (or Army Corps)
    • Division
      • Brigade
        • Regiment

In wartime, after mobilization it is:

• Stavka (GHQ) - created during mobilization
  • Front (Army group) - created during mobilization
    • Army - Army headquarters are created during mobilization by transformation of Military district headquarters
      • Corps (or Army Corps, it can be used interchangeably, but better to skip the word army)
        • Division
          • Brigade
            • Regiment

List of Imperial Russian Army formations and units don't include upper 3 levels Stavka/Front/Army, as they are created during the mobilization. Order of battle at Tannenberg (1914) shows part of the wartime structure.DonaldDuck (talk) 09:16, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Russian patronymics

I would like to ask about the general opinion of this WikiProject's participants regarding the articles in Category:Russian patronymics. A while ago, I noticed the Petrovich article, which I felt was unnecessary, so I redirected it to Peter. Yesterday, however, the article was restored, yet the content of this "article" is still very limited, and I don't really see any possibilities for expansion (anything that can be said about a patronymic should have already been covered in the article about the name it is derived from). Today I learned that we actually have a category for patronymics (which seemingly aims to list male and female patronymics separately—see, for example, Pavlovna). As I see it, the only marginal use for patronymics article is disambiguation, although I am having hard time imagining someone wanting to find all people with a certain patronymic. Are there any other opinions regarding this? I am specifically interested in any ideas explaining how and if these articles can be of use.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:14, December 31, 2008 (UTC)

• Petrovich is a cartoon character by Andrey Bilzho http://www.petrovich.ru/ NVO (talk) 15:42, 31 December 2008 (UTC) but I'd agree that aside from Petrovich and Ilyich and (name your favorite non-trivial Kuzmich here) these must be deleted unless the article is also a surname disambig (e.g. Ivanović). NVO (talk) 15:46, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Tomb of the Unknown Rapist

At Soviet_War_Memorial_(Treptower_Park) there is a dispute surrounding the insertion of

Women of the (East) German wartime generation still refer to it as the "tomb of the unknown rapist" due to the mass rapes by Red Army soldiers in the years following 1945.

Discussion is taking place at Talk:Soviet_War_Memorial_(Treptower_Park)#Tomb_of_the_unknown_rapist, and Alex Bakharev has started this Wikipedia:Ethnic_and_cultural_conflicts_noticeboard#Pejoratives_for_the_Soviet_War_Memorial_.28Treptower_Park.29.

I would ask that project members provide their opinions on the matter. --Russavia ^Dialogue 10:04, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Governors of Russian America, bios needed

There is a listing of Governors of the Russian-American Company on the company page, with half a dozen or so in need of bio articles; my intention is to write more of a paragraph on the governors and migrate the list to its own list-page, and also to create a Category:Governors of Russian America category, but it would help to have the missing bios made, if someone here would care to indulge; also some of the existing articles, like Furuhjelm's, need references; even Russian-language ones would do. Thanks.Skookum1 (talk) 15:52, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

The ' Third Revolution' page

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Russian_Revolution

2-Jan-2009 - This page would be better titled the 'Russian counter-revolution' imho, as it covers the start of that period of counter-revolution from the establishment of the CHEKA in late 1917 through to the first large use of it in April and May 1918 in Petrograd and Moscow. It puts the cart before the horse to have Left and anarchist 'rebellions' when it was the SR's who were disenfranchised and the anarchists who were being shot by Chekists ' while trying to escape'. Lets call a spade a bloody shovel here. The Leninist counter-revolution provoked rebellions. Rebellions don't just happen for the fun of it. Change the title and turn the sequence of events around. The timeline is already well established elsewhere on more settled pages.

Another thing that seems to be repeated on this page is that all these Left revolts and rebellions were not revolutionary...well if that's true then neither was the October 'revolution'. I mean if you judge someone by your yardstick then you may be judged by the same sized stick yourself, yes? I do see a need for a page on the counter-revolution and then lots of factual material thrown into this TRR page could then be placed on the proper timeline in an orderly way that should reach acceptable standards. Just my 2 kopeks. Yrs for the Wiki revolution. pro2rat@ NOSPAM yahoo.com.etc (au) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.235.207.49 (talk) 16:31, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

• This one needs attention. Is anyone aware if the term is used anywhere outside this article? Content is pretty weak, but lets start with the title. NVO (talk) 19:57, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Isn't this the Left Socialist-Revolutionary revolt? Which is at Left SR uprising. Looking at Third Russian Revolution it is essentially all about the Left Socialist-Revolutionary revolt, so I would suggest merging Left SR uprising into Third Russian Revolution and moving it to Left Socialist-Revolutionary revolt. --Russavia ^Dialogue 10:28, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

input required - russian lists

I am currently working on a few lists on Russia-related topics, and in doing so have noticed just how under-developed some sections of en:wiki really are on Russian related topics. As I see it, lists are a great way of not only showing information, such as List of Heroes of the Russian Federation, but also being able to be used as an article development tools. What I would like project members to do is to throw out different subjects which don't currently exist (most would be found in Category:Russia-related lists I would think), and I will work on them, one by one. Some of those that I can think of include:

• List of members of the State Duma
• List of members of the Federation Council of Russia
• List of banks in Russia (already exists, but needs a massive cleanup/reformatting)

Suggestions can be on any Russian-related topic, and should preferably be able to be presented so that it can be used for both information and article development. Fire away with suggestions please, and I'll work on them in coming days/weeks/months/YEARS (Arrgghh) --Russavia ^Dialogue 14:25, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Aluminum wars

Ive come across this term a couple times, and I think there should be an article. -Stevertigo 00:22, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

• That was soooo long ago :)) who could then imagine that the mills will be shut down in some fifteen years? NVO (talk) 17:34, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Category:Post-Soviet Russia

I have put the category above up for discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_February_1#Category:Post-Soviet_Russia. I am of the opinion that it should be deleted due to what to appears to be the selective choice of articles being placed in the category. However, I can also see how a category, which in the words of another editor, with a less ugly name could be useful, i.e. Category:Russian Federation. As this may affect categorisation structures of articles in this project, opinions of project editors on the discussion page would be welcome. --Russavia ^Dialogue 17:13, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Ukha, Russian fish soup

Hello! I wrote an article about this soup, because it was entangled in an other soup and I thougt it should have his own article. The problem is that I am not sure that the article is correct. I would need some real Russian :) expertise, to be sure that I didn't made any mistakes. Do you know anything about this topic? And if you do, could you please check this article for possible mistakes? Cheers! Warrington (talk) 12:51, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

I've glanced over and it seems to be a delicious little article. (0: --CopperKettle 06:15, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Phone call to Putin to move/merge into Mikheyev v. Russia

See Talk:Phone call to Putin for a discussion. (Igny (talk) 23:54, 2 February 2009 (UTC))

I would also note that Aleksei Mikheyev is also being put up for merging into the notable court case. Frankly, we should have more articles on the court cases, but the people should be dealt with as per WP:BLP1E, unless they were notable before the case for other reasons. --Russavia ^Dialogue 02:41, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Are these reliable sources?

Two website which I see pop up time and time again being used for sources are compromat.ru and anticompromat.ru. Can other editors please provide their opinion on whether these are considered to be reliable sources for information? I don't believe that they are, but input from others would be welcome. --Russavia ^Dialogue 02:35, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Sure. "Kompromat.ru" is a collection of scandals published in Russian newspapers. However this site only reprints materials from other sources, with proper references and links. So, one can check an original source (just in case) and use it. "Anticompromat.ru" is a database/site by historian Vladimir Pribylovsky [9]. It also includes links and references to original sources, a very helpful internet resource. It provides entries like that. I do not see any problems. They are secondary sources however.Biophys (talk) 03:45, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I forget to tell that "anticompromat.ru" has been closed by the FSB, so that Pribylovsky moved it to another server. I guess this only adds notability.Biophys (talk) 03:49, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Notability and being a reliable source are not related. A site may be notable, but it doesn't make it reliable. By reliable we mean it has an expectation of and a history of fact checking, etc. If it is a borderline reliable source, at the very least it would require attribution within articles. Other opinions sought too please. --Russavia ^Dialogue 04:19, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Kompromat.ru and Antikompromat.ru are black PR instruments thus, should be treated as wikis. 90% of information there is referenced to more or less reliable sources, usually paper publications with internet versions. They are usually reliable but it is better to check the original sources as they can be cited out of context. The rest is so called "exclusive materials". Everyone with a few thousand dollars to spare or an administrative favor to give can put almost everything there. There is no fact checking for such materials - it is the main revenue stream for those sites. I think the "exclusive" (unreferenced) info from those sites should not be in the wiki. In the exceptional cases it should be attributed to "according to [anti]compromat.ru". Still referenced materials by those sites may be a good start for some research and it is a majority for the info there Alex Bakharev (talk) 04:36, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Check your facts first. Compromat.ru and Anticompromat.ru are different and not related, the first one is indeed more like a black PR instrument. The second one is another matter. It is personal publication by Pribylovsky, who is a notable and reputable expert on Russian politics. Roghly speaking, a reference to Anticompromat.ru means something like "according to Pribylovsky" and is as appropriate as the latter. Colchicum (talk) 16:00, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

See WP:SPS: Self-published work is acceptable to use in some circumstances, with limitations. For example, material may sometimes be cited which is self-published by an established expert on the topic of the article, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications. Pribylovsky is certainly an established expert on the topic, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications. By the way, most of the papers were indeed published elsewhere and are even less questionable. Anticompromat.ru is just the place where they can be found online. Colchicum (talk) 16:11, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

As WP:SPS states, further to what is above, However, caution should be exercised when using such sources: if the information in question is really worth reporting, someone else is likely to have done so. For example, a reliable self-published source on a given subject is likely to have been cited on that subject as authoritative by a reliable source. For this purpose, anticompromat.ru on its own is not a reliable source, because there are likely to be other sources which cite the material. Furthermore, due to its nature of anticompromat.ru not being peer-reviewed, it would at the very least require attribution to who thinks what. So it would seem that this edit by myself in removing anticompromat is quite valid, due to them being used as sources to make claims against third parties. At the very, very, very least it requires attribution, particularly on controversial topics. I've gone thru and found quite a few sources to compromat.ru, which I have now removed, and I am thinking whether it might be worthwile asking for that to be added to a blacklist, because as the majority of WPans wouldn't know about the source, it will stop them being used as a source in the future, and for what I found to be some controversial claims. --Russavia ^Dialogue 07:08, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Photos available - if need any contact me

I have received permission from a freelance photographer who does work for ITAR-TASS, amongst others, to use some of her photos here on WP. Some of her photos include:

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

A list of her albums can be found here. She is an aviation nut (like myself), so a lot of her photos will be aviation-related, but there are other subjects in Russia, such as her flight over Moscow in a Ka-226, portrait photos of politicians and some entertainers, and a host of other Russian subjects, as well as other countries.

If there are photos of hers that people would like to use on articles, then please contact me and I will upload them if they are not on a list of photos she does not want used. As she is a professional photographer who does this for a living, and due to her being a friend of a friend, I do want to protect her works as much as possible, and only use those photos which we can in all likelihood use on the project. Russavia ^Dialogue 08:02, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Move Patriarch Kirill I of Moscow to Patriarch Cyril I of Moscow

As this article is clearly within this projects scope, editors may be interested in the discussion at Talk:Patriarch_Kirill_I_of_Moscow#Cyril. --Russavia ^Dialogue 10:40, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Uluses of Sakha Republic

Hello! I noticed that the names of uluses in English wikipedia were transliterated from names in Russian. I think transliteration should be done directly from the original Sakha names because when translated/transliterated names distort. So the names of uluses became double-distorted. The most absurd point is that the names acquired endings "-sky". For example, there is ulus named "Сунтаар", after transformation it became "Suntarsky", whereas the most correct transliteration would be "Suntaar". There is a difference with other Russia regions where the names of districts must have the "-sky" ending. Yesterday I changed the names of uluses of Sakha Republic so that they became transliterated from Sakha language. Today my changes were reverted. The reasoning was: 1) consistency 2) "it is uncommon to see transliterated names of places in Russian from any other official languages besides Russian". I think, to transliterate the names directly from the original names would be most consistent. If the consistency meanes the names must be standardizated, my opinion is that Russia is too big to be standardizated in such way. The regional features are our cultural wealth. About "uncommon to see", most of the people reading articles about the uluses in English have no idea what is common and what is not. But for people inside the republic who use the names of uluses in every-day life, the names in Sakha language are common. So, I suggest to transliterate the names of the uluses directly from Sakha language. I'm looking forward for your response. Sorry for my English. --Otchut (talk) 00:09, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for you inquiry, Otchut. This is not the first time this particular issue has been raised (although it is the first time in relation to the Sakha names). In the past, we've had editors advocating for using Karelian names for the place names in the Republic of Karelia, Tatar names for Tatarstan, heck, even German names for Kaliningrad Oblast and Japanese names for Sakhalin Oblast! The consensus in all cases has been to use transliterated Russian names. Below is a re-cap of the reasons:

Russian is the official language on the whole territory of Russia, and is the only language official in each and every federal subject. Geographical names for any place in Russia undergo approval and registration on the federal level (see Federal Law #152-FZ of December 18, 1997 On the Names of the Geographic Objects). Thus, the naming practices are identical on the whole territory of the country, and yes, pattern-wise there is a standard (names in local languages are first normalized into Russian, and this Russian version becomes the official name). There is absolutely no problem with Russia being "too big" to apply a single standard, because this problem has been solved since the Soviet times! If anything, using federal subject-specific naming conventions would wreak havoc, because the structure of the disambiguation pages, as well as interlinking and cross-references, will all be messed up. As someone working in this area, I can attest that the problems that would arise would have much more serious repercussions that it may seem at first glance.

Now, when it comes to the English Wikipedia and the names that should be used here, we have a romanization guideline which explains, among other things, the process of selecting a title for an article about a place. First of all, we check if there is a conventional English name that can be used. That is done by checking major English-language dictionaries and encyclopedias, and applies only to a handful of names (Moscow and St. Petersburg being the most obvious and prominent examples). When no dictionary or encyclopedia mentions a certain name, it can only mean that the place is too minor to have an established name in English (the vast majority of the rural localities, as well as the districts, fall into this category). In absence of a conventional name, the romanization clause kicks in. WP:RUS is built on BGN/PCGN romanization of Russian—a system that primarily deals with the geographic names. What this means is that the majority of the English-language maps and atlases would use BGN/PCGN to romanize a Russian name that does not have an established English equivalent.

Now, why not use local names as a base to get an English equivalent? Why not title an article, say "Ulus of Öymököön" instead of Oymyakonsky Ulus? The short answer is that because "Ulus of Öymököön" is transliterated from Sakha, when item seven of WP:RUS#Place names explicitly says that the name should be transliterated from Russian. The long answer (which is basically the substantiation of the said item seven) is that there is no single English-language source that uses Sakha to transliterate place names—google search returns zero results; "Öymököön" itself returns only one result (which is a blog entry), other Sakha-based names do not fare any better. Truth is, all English-language maps/atlases/etc. always use Russian for place names located in Russia. Wikipedia should mirror that; not invent new names that "should be used" instead. There is absolutely no good reason to use the Sakha names other than to promote this spelling, and this is not what Wikipedia is for (we follow, not lead). It is true that "most of the people reading articles about the uluses in English have no idea what is common and what is not", but it does not mean that because of that it is OK to invent our own terms just because we happen to like them better. As for "people inside the republic" using the Sakha names, they use them in the Sakha language, not in English, and this here is the English Wikipedia we are working on. What's more, given the lack of any reliable sources using the Sakha-based names in English, such practice would simply be original research—something that is explicitly prohibited by policies.

For further reference, here is a link to the similar discussion regarding the place names in the Republic of Karelia (see also the Update section immediately below it), which justifies Russian names and shows that there is no solid base to use Karelian/Finnish names. This exact same logic works for the Sakha Republic.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:38, January 30, 2009 (UTC)

I can only agree with Ezhiki as per the usage of the terms in English, so I won't waste characters writing a long essay on that. However, Otchut please do create directs from the Sakha language translation and transliteration of these places names to the current article. This will ensure we keep inline with WP policies and other guidelines. Also, can you tell me if Өймөкөөн улууһа would be better translated to Öymököön Ulus, rather than Ulus of Öymököön? Please don't let this deter you from editing on English WP; don't mind your English, it can always be corrected in articles, and you are always welcome to ask questions in Russian; we both within the Russian Wikiproject and English Wikipedia in general could always do with someone who is familiar with the Sakha Republic and expand various articles on Sakha. If you need anything else or have questions or whatever, feel free to post them here and we will try to help. --Russavia ^Dialogue 17:11, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello!

Let's consider your arguments point by point.

1) The federal law. Are the federal laws of Russia in force in English Wikipedia? They can be only a base for rules of Wikipedia, as I think. And the rules are established by users. I am a new user, so I can be mistaken.

2) "There is absolutely no problem with Russia being "too big" to apply a single standard". No, there is a problem if widely-used on-site name of ulus "Амма" becomes "Amginsky". I take notice of that the words are both nouns.

3) An established consensus, item seven of WP:RUS#Place names. I suppose, when the rule was established, nobody here was familiar with the local features of Sakha Republic. Also, in the examples for the item seven there were only big cities (Ufa, Cheboksary) that are really conventionally should be transliterated from Russian. And in case of small places whose names know/use only the locals, it is wiser to transliterate the names from the local language, than to run it through Russian.

4) The Russian-based names are already conventional. Here I quote Ёzhiki from another discuss page "names that get only a few hundred google hits certainly cannot be called "conventional". May be "Oymyakon" can be called conventional, since it is quite well-known.

5) People using Sakha names use them in the Sakha language, not in English. The most important argument is how people call the place. In case of uluses, most of the people knowing the names of uluses live inside the republic and they use Sakha names. Also I pay attention that Sakha language has an official status in the republic. It is interesting that Ёzhiki reasoned Russian-based names in Karelia by the fact that there the locals used Russian names of places. "If it's Russian people there using place names of Karelian or Sami origins then it's Russian place names and WP:RUS should have priority."

I don't try to rename "Yakutsk" to "Jokuuskay" since it is really conventional to write "Yakutsk". And what about the hundreds of villages in Sakha Republic? To transliterate their names from Russian would be really strange.

Answer to Russavia: Yes, the Öymököön Ulus would be better. In Sakha language, to name ulus, two variants are used: short, e.g. Өймөкөөн, and long with word "ulus", e.g. Өймөкөөн улууһа. The short-one is used more often. The situation seems to be similar to the naming of states in the USA. --Otchut (talk) 01:04, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your analysis, Otchut, but sorry, you seem to have missed the points completely. I'll try to elaborate further.

1. The federal laws of Russia are of course not in force in the English Wikipedia. They are, however, considered reliable and verifiable sources and yes, it means they can be used as a base. They are not the sole base, however, as the sources from which the English language terms derive is of more importance.
2. What is the problem with "Amginsky"? It is the name of the ulus! It is also the official name of this ulus in the Sakha Republic (along with "Амма"), and the only official name of the ulus that is recognized on the federal level (which means this is the name that would be used on the Russian maps, which means this is going to be the name that is going to be looked at by foreign publishers during transliteration). Also, on the point of both words ("Amma" and "ulus") being nouns, so what? Why is that important? It's not like a reader who does not know Russian would be able to determine that "Amginsky" is in fact an adjective, and even if they do determine that, again, so what?
3. Actually, item seven was established exactly because of the problems with the local names (it was established soon after the discussion about place names in Karelia I linked to took place). Yes, only the large cities have conventional English names, which is why it is ever so important to establish a practice that deals with the names of smaller places uniformely. Romanization is exactly such a practice, and romanization of Russian (as opposed to that of local languages) is used because every place in Russia has a name in Russian, and that name is easily verified (via OKATO, or via local legislation, or via maps). The problem with local names is exactly what you have pointed out—they are often known only to a very limited number of people and often cannot be verified. And if they cannot be verified, we cannot use them at the base of the system as important as the guidelines for titling the articles. How are we to know that Amginsky Ulus is indeed called "Ulus of Amma" in English, when no single source exists attesting that usage? "Amginsky" can be verified via OKATO, via the Charter of the ulus itself, via the laws of the Sakha Republic dealing with the administrative and municipal divisions, via just about any map detailed enough to show the uluses of the Sakha Republic—in other words, via the types of sources which are available for every single federal subject in Russia. With this abundance of sources in Russian it is really no surprise that every single English-language source transliterates from the Russian name instead of using the elusive knowledge of the locals. I can't emphasize this enough—verifiability is one of the most important things in Wikipedia. In fact, it is even more important than truth!
4. The Russian-based names are not always conventional (the article about the capital of Russia is located at Moscow, not at "Moskva"). What is conventional is romanizing names of places in Russian using the BGN/PCGN romanization system of Russian. I have not seen any single map by an American/British/Australian/whatever-other-English-speaking-country's publisher that would use romanization of local languages for place names in Russian republics (and I have seen quite a few maps in my life). This is just not how it is traditionally done. And if no major publishers do it, Wikipedia will not do it either. Again, we follow, not lead. Also, the most important argument is not "how people call the place"; it is how English-language sources refer to it. If a place has a conventional English name ("Moscow", "St. Petersburg", "Rostov-on-Don"), we will use that name no matter what the locals think of it. If a place does not have a conventional English name ("Oymyakon", "Yeysk", "Gadyukino"), we will use the romanization practices which English-language sources favor; again, with no regards to the feelings of the locals. Wikipedia is not here to cater to the feelings of local residents, it is here to provide verifiable information to our mostly Anglophone readers, who would want to see the same names every other English-language source would use. If you don't understand it, ask yourself this—how would an average English-speaking reader find an article titled "Öymököön Ulus"? Do you expect him/her to contact the locals to find this name? Or is it more likely they will find this article by the name "Oymyakonsky" because that the spelling used in/on just about every English-language map/atlas/media reference?

All in all, I hope you don't believe that we are trying to squash local names just because we don't like the local languages, or, worse yet, are all in pay of Russian imperialism. Local names and their romanizations do belong in Wikipedia—they should be used as redirects and mentioned in the actual articles. They should never be used as the actual titles because doing so would be a disservice to our readers, nor should one try to translate them into English, as you did when moving the ulus articles. Your "ulus of xxx" translations are pure original research, which is exactly why they had to be reverted. The bottom line: Sakha names and their romanizations do belong in the articles; their translations do not, unless you can back them up by reliable English-language sources.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 03:01, February 1, 2009 (UTC)

First, I notice that are not the names of the uluses because the Russian-based names are not conventional. In fact, only a few cities and villages of Sakha Republic are presented im maps. And the uluses and smaller villages are still unknown for English-speaking readers.

I'd like to say that in Russian, it is clear that the adjective "Амгинский" has a reference to "Амга" (distorted "Амма"), the original Sakha name of the ulus, but in the word "Amginsky" this reference dissapears. Transliterating from the original names seems to me to be more consistent while transliterating from Russian names is a bad example of a burecracy that promotes forgetting the original names and replacing them by the colonial names. --Otchut (talk) 22:31, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I think I mentioned this before, but I am going to mention this again—Russian-based names are not conventional, the practice of romanizing of Russian names for the purpose of presenting them in the English-language texts is, and the practice of romanizing Sakha names for the purpose of presenting them in the English-language texts is not. Additionaly, official Russian names (again, those which are romanized for the purpose of being used in the English-language texts) can be easily verified using a great variety of sources (including the legislative documents of the Sakha Republic itself); official Sakha names are much harder to find (in fact, we have to take your word that the Sakha names you supplied in the articles are correct, as you referenced no sources).

The detalization of the maps has nothing to do with this discussion, as it only depends on the maps you are looking at (most of the generic maps of the area would indeed show only a handful of names, which does not mean more detailed maps do not exist, but rather that you don't have access to them).

Finally, regarding this jewel of a comment—[t]ransliterating from the original names seems to me to be more consistent while transliterating from Russian names is a bad example of a burecracy that promotes forgetting the original names and replacing them by the colonial names—we are not promoting anything, we are merely following an established practice. That practice may not be the best possible and it may even be offending to some, but nevertheless we will follow it and not because of our ambitions to promote colonialism but merely because we have a set of policies which we are expected to honor, most important of which being WP:V, WP:RS, and WP:NOR.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 22:48, February 9, 2009 (UTC)

Books on Moscow Kremlin?

Can any project members recommend any good books on the Moscow Kremlin? The entire series of articles I think should at least have a few FA quality articles in amongst them, and would like to do some works on this in future, but need some recommendations of material. NVO, you may know of some? Anyone else? --Russavia ^Dialogue 11:38, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Korobeiniki

Another editor suggested that the lyrics of this song do not belong in the article, as they fail the requirements of WP:LYRICS. I argued that since this song is a well-known and an important part of the Russian culture, the lyrics should stay, because the requirements of WP:LYRICS (lyrics should be put in an analytical framework, etc.) can easily be fulfilled by a person knowledgeable about the subject. No such knowledgeable person seems to be available, however, so the presence of the lyrics may be at odds with WP:LYRICS for the time being. If you have an opinion regarding this situation, please voice it at Talk:Korobeiniki#Lyrics.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:42, February 12, 2009 (UTC)

I've added my 50кп. All it will need is for someone who is, as you say, knowledgeable on that subject to dig up some relevant materials. And do our own translation of the lyrics. --Russavia ^Dialogue 15:56, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Vladivostok Air

This article has been greatly improved.... How can it get rerated.... as it is just a stub right now and it probably should be rated as a "starting" article or a "C" class article. It also needs to be rated on the importance scale... and it would probably be of medium importance.--76.22.21.99 (talk) 01:29, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your work, an anonymous editor! The article has indeed improved greatly. I've re-assessed it to "C" and assigned low importance (because compared to the overall project scope, mid importance would most certainly be an overkill). For future reference, you may request assessments and re-assessments on this page (or just do the assessment yourself—it's not rocket science and anyone is welcome to join in on the fun). Again, thanks, and hope to see you around!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 02:50, February 19, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliment! Im a bit lazy to make a wiki account and I always forget the one I made in the past.... I think Im going to update it some more to get it to a B rating. =) --76.22.21.99 (talk) 04:59, 19 February 2009 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.22.21.99 (talk) 04:50, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Dionysius Fedorovich Zarembo or Dionizy Zaremba?

Capt. Lt. Dionysius Fedorovich Zarembo, usually rendered in English as Dionysius Zarembo, is the namesake of Zarembo Island, Alaska. A previous editor/contributor to that page gave the Polish version of his name, Dionizy Zaremba, and had said he was a "worker and explorer"....I changed "worker" to "employee" although his military rank suggests strongly he was Russian Imperial Navy under contract to teh Russian American Company, rather than an employee of the fur company as such; he was commander of the vessel Chichagof during a confrontation with the Hudson's Bay Company in 1833-1834 near Wrangell, Alaska. Please see this GNIS reference and this History of Wrangell page. I've never seen the Polish reference about him before. I guess my question is what convention is there, if any, for choosign which form of a name to use in such cases? His birth/ethnic name, or the name by which he was known to the Russian military, or the name as he is usually known to history (Dionysius Zarembo). I note also that the fortification founded as a result of the confrontation, which later became Fort Stikine, used a Spanish form of the name i.e. Redoubt San Dionisio (it has also been called Redoubt Saint Dionysius, and commonly also simply "the Redoubt"). Now, I know what someone at WikiProject Poland is going to say....there are other similar cases such as that of Governor Furuhjelm (the Swedo-Finnish version of his name is used) and one of the other Governors of Russian America was German, I'd have to look at hte list; also Otto von Kotzebue is known by his German name rather than Russian.....have I got that right? Anyway I'd like to start an article on the redoubt, and it strikes me a biography of Captain Lieutenant Zarembo is needed....input on which name-form to use, please....this is Russian American history and Russian imperial conventions apply, I'm not bothering to post this on WP:Alaska or other WPs relating to Zarembo Island, other than noting this discussion on Talk:Zarembo Island.Skookum1 (talk) 02:43, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

This is actually a very simple case—if "Dionysius Zarembo" is the variant consistently used in the English-language history works, then that's what the title of the article should be. In general, names of Russian people (or people strongly associated with Russia, including Poland when it was under Russian despotic rule) are romanized from Russian, but when an established variant already exists in English (or when certain other criteria are met), then that variant is what should be used, as per WP:UE.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:56, February 23, 2009 (UTC)

Fort Stikine

Well, I finally made it, told straight-narrative, I'll add main refs and some line-cites later tonight, or in the next day or two; I may have missed cats needed and some layout work is maybe needed, and I didn't know enough of American Wrangell's history to write much on the end section; there's moer details to be had in all sections, I just wanted to establish the "storyboard" and get all the main elements in place....I think I may have gotten the Chichagof's companion-ship name wrong (the Orel I used, not sure if that's right) and details of the internal politicking within the RAC and the Russian Empire over the 1833 confrontation with the British and the 1838 treaty all need to be enriched...(likewise any Russian-source information on the trial of Urbain Heroux & co.)Skookum1 (talk) 03:47, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Russian Ground Forces

Russian Ground Forces has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Parrot of Doom (talk • contribs)

Assessments heads-up

Just a heads-up to folks who are doing assessments—when assessing/re-assessing articles, please spell out the banner name completely (i.e., use {{WikiProject Russia}}, not {{WPRUSSIA}} or any other shortcuts). The reason for that is the new {{ArticleAlertbotSubscription}} service available to WikiProjects—it watches the articles pertaining to the WikiProjects based on the banner which the articles are tagged with, but, unfortunately, it does not work with the redirects to the main banner. Thanks.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:53, February 24, 2009 (UTC)

Fort Ross, California - needs help

Please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_California#Fun_with_Fort_Ross.....Skookum1 (talk) 01:47, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Pierre de Poletica

Not the most Russian-looking name and maybe he was Polish or ?? but he was the Russian minister to the United States in the 1820s and was the plenipotentiary in the negotiations that brought about the Russo-American Treaty of 1824; I'm only really familiar with his name from Mount Poletica, which is one of the Alaska-British Columbia boundary peaks. Not sure anything about his origins or the rest of his career, but I'd think any Russian ambassdor in that period is worth having a bio on....If he was Russian, presumably his name was really Pyotr, I'd think, but...maybe he was a career diplomatic of French or ?? origin....anyway any light on this much appreciated; I may not stub up Mount Poletica yet but he's going to figure in writeups in various articles connected with the Alaska boundary and any Russo-American relations in that period, so....Skookum1 (talk) 04:13, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Found more Here he is described as Imperial Chancellor of State, in St. Petersburg, when Charles Bagot showed up to negotiate the British side of the dispute; Count Nesselrode was at the same time Imperial Secretary of State....no hint as to who outranked who, but I'd think a noble would outrank a commoner, no matter the title.Skookum1 (talk) 04:24, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

His name may be written as "Petr Poletica" or "Peter Poletica".

Biography from Russian Biographical Dictionary, in Russian.DonaldDuck (talk)

Set Index Articles and Russian dabs

First off, sorry for not coordinating all of this with y'all. It was a giant bonehead move on my part, fortunately a friendly editor reverted my changes, so hopefully no harm, no foul.;) Anyways, there has been several ongoing discussions on WP:DAB and WP:DPL about a number of what appears to be inappropriate uses of set index article templates on articles that appear to be disambiguation pages at first glance. If you wish to join in on the discussion, please do so here. Thanks! --Bobblehead ^(rants) 17:40, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Coordinators' working group

Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 06:27, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I've added myself as a contact person for now. If there is anyone who would like to officially take on project coordination responsibilities, feel free to bump me out.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 14:04, March 10, 2009 (UTC)

Portal:Roads

The World Roads Portal is at Peer Review, if any editors know of any articles, images, news items or DYKs which could be added to the Portal, please add them directly to the portal or contact ....SriMesh | talk 00:37, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Translation requests

I have just (nearly) completed a total overhaul of Wikipedia's translation system. Previously, there was a very complicated method of posting translation requests. Now there are simply tags, such as {{Expand Russian}}, that can be placed on stub articles (or longer articles if appropriate). I have tried to review all previous translation requests. Many translation requests were very old and no longer seemed needed, because the English Wikipedia article had developed in the meantime. Other translation requests were fixed by adding tags to existing English-language articles. However, a good number of requests remain that were redlinked. Many articles I could create stub articles for myself, based on the machine translation, but some of the machine translation was very bad and I didn't want to mess things up. So I am leaving a list of these articles below for members of this wikiproject to evaluate. Hopefully people here can create stubs as needed, and tag them with {{Expand Russian}}, so that translation can take place later. If you are interested in checking out other articles in need of translation (the ones that are properly tagged already), see Category:Articles needing translation from Russian Wikipedia. Thanks for your help! Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:40, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

The requests are:

• Wikipedia:Translation/Driven oscillations
• Wikipedia:Translation/Putin's_Plan
• Wikipedia:Translation/Nizhny Novgorod Governorate

Alan Dzagoev's patronymic

Sorry guys... Why is his patronymic "Elizbarovich" if his father's name is Tariel? Shouldn't it be "Tarielovich" or something like? Thank you! --necronudist (talk) 12:39, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

According to this, Tariel is his uncle, not his father. That's the only clue I was able to find during my (fairly cursory) search.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 14:02, March 10, 2009 (UTC)

Oh thank you Ëzhiki...! There seems to be much confusion about that issue... Here Alan himself says that Tariel is his father... --necronudist (talk) 14:22, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, that's the thing with the interviews—you never know which part came from the person being interviewed and which one was the result of the interviewing journalist "copyedit work" :) Anyway, you might want to post this question somewhere on the Russian Wikipedia—I am sure they have plenty more Russian soccer-loving editors than you'll find here.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 14:54, March 10, 2009 (UTC)

Yeah... except that I don't know a word in Russian! :-) However thank you Ëzhiki! --necronudist (talk) 14:59, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, you linked to an article in Russian, so... well, never mind. User:Grue knows Russian and is a sports enthusiast, and although he's not been seen around often recently you might still try to contact him and see if he'll be able/willing to help. Of course, if anyone else seeing this wants to help, I'm sure Necro will appreciate it :) Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:09, March 10, 2009 (UTC)

Need help from a native Russian speaker

An article about Yaroslav Kislyakov is currently being discussed for deletion, partly because of notability concerns but also as a potential violation of Wikipedia's policy regarding biographies of living people. The article does have a single reference, which is in Russian. I would very much like it if someone would have a look at the article, check that everything is backed up by the reference, and comment in the deletion debate. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 12:23, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

black dude on russian money

whats the name of the man of african ancestry that was or is on russian currency? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.198.192.120 (talk) 03:57, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't for sure - but Pushkin? This really isn't the best place to ask a question like this - it's better suited for the page on Russian currency. I hope you asked there too. But Pushkin was of African ancestry...--Levalley (talk) 16:32, 19 March 2009 (UTC)LeValley

Editing the categories for the Russian Project

First concern: when the category "Russian culture" is shown on the index page, it is weak. Culture is such a broad category that it's become a dumping ground for far too many unrelated topics. Second concern: Russian literature and Russian music both deserve their own categories here on this main Project page. I'm very surprised that they are not already there (Music and Dance could be one category). Then, we could start the work of adding the Russian project link to all the articles on Russian literature - most of which are badly in need of improvement (the article on Crime and Punishment, however, has been mentioned as an exemplary article for the 19th century project's literature subgroup; War and Peace has been called one of the worst articles on Wikipedia - I'm helping to edit that one, but it should be part of the Russian Project, for sure. Pushkin, Dostoevsky, Bunin, Tolstoy, Bulgakov articles need to be revised and maintained and linked to the various other parts of the Russian project (history and philosophy in particular). --Levalley (talk) 16:31, 19 March 2009 (UTC)LeValley

AssessorTags

Hello! I thought that I'd bring to your attention a new script which I have created, AssessorTags, which helps to add WikiProject banners to talk pages. The banner for this project has now been included in the script, so it may be helpful when locating and tagging articles. Documentation for the script can be found here, and if you have any questions feel free to ask at my talk page. Please not that I will probably not be watching this page, so comments left here will not be responded to. –Drilnoth (T • C) 16:40, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Most of these are just transliteration

It might be better to call the page: "List of Russian words used in English" There is something better but the title of this article makes the text seem redundant. I have been told many times that "intelligentsia" has no equivalent word in English and it requires a great deal of explaining. I would say it shouldn't count as an English word because most English speakers couldn't define it without studying Russian history/culture/language. Babushka's second example is a proper entry for this page but most of these words are just transliterated Russian words that shouldn't be called English words, they are just words in Russian that people pronounce differently in English. 76.15.43.243 (talk) 16:25, 20 March 2009 (UTC)ECT

Is this in reference to this list? If so, "English words" in that list are defined as words included into major English dictionaries (such as OED)—i.e., they are loanwords. Most of them are indeed just transliterations, but that's beyond the point. Also, if a word in the list is not included in any major English dictionaries, then it should be removed (as it would not qualify as an "English word" then).—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:32, March 20, 2009 (UTC)

Difficult article - project members' input appreciated

Hello proyect, I've put an article up at AfD which can be seen at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guerrilla phase of the Second Chechen War (2009) (2nd nomination). I am hoping that project members may be able to bring some opinion to this AfD, as it clear that editors are confused as to what the "Second Chechen War" is. One of the latest hotspots is of course Ingushetia, but the troubles in that Republic don't have anything to do with the Chechens, or the Chechen War, but is the result of its own unique set of circumstances. Of course, it can clearly be said that the Ingush have taken some lead from the Chechens in their "fight" (this is easy to ref so it's not my opinion), but to say that this is the guerilla part of the Second Chechen War is OR/SYN -- even if sources mention the Chechen war, the Chechen war it is not, and no sources used in that article (or anywhere else for that matter that I can find) portray troubles in the Caucasus republics as an extension, albeit guerilla, of the Second Chechen War. If there is a better article for them to be placed in, it needs to be found obviously, but even then I am having trouble comprehending just exactly which articles, and also the extent as to what information will or won't be included. Anyway, as this article is within the scope of this project, other project members will also be aware of the happenings in the Caucasus region of Russia, so please provide input at the AfD page.

On a sidenote, Chechnya has for around 18 months had regular airline flights from Moscow. Firstly operated by Aeroflot-Don for a local Chechen company called "Vainakh Avia", but I think this has now been taken over by Grozny Avia who has daily flights to Moscow, with 2 additional weekly flights to Moscow, and 2 flights a week to Rostov-on-Don. Obviously the security situation in Chechnya is much better than one would have expected, good to see. I think I might do up a Grozny Avia article shortly. Cheers, --Russavia ^Dialogue 20:28, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

The categories on the project page

What am I missing? Where is Russian art? Russian literature? Russian music? When I look under "Russian culture" - I don't see these there. Am I simply too tired to notice where these categories are?Levalley (talk) 03:54, 26 March 2009 (UTC)LeValley

It's all under Category:Arts in Russia. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 13:45, March 26, 2009 (UTC)

Template:Politics of Russia

One thing that is somewhat irking me is how Template:Politics of Russia is appearing on articles. It takes up a huge amount of space on articles, and considering many of these articles are not of great length, it creates huge amounts of white space, such as on Security Council of Russia. Additionally, I think that the space taken up by this template would be better off being taken up by prose and images -- we have an abundance of photos to choose from for these topics, and I think that photos are more beneficial than a template. Is there any objection from project editors if I were to convert this into a standard template which can be placed at the bottom of the articles, so that the article proper is used for encyclopaedic content instead? If there are no objections within a few days, or if there is agreeance before that, I will convert into a standard template and make the necessary changes on articles. --Russavia ^Dialogue 19:20, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Is there any objection to this amongst project members? If none is forthcoming within 24 hours, I'll convert the template. --Russavia ^Dialogue 17:13, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

I sometimes wonder how many of our members are actually watching this page. It sometimes seems merely an extension of yours and mine talk pages. Anyway, no objections from me.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 17:37, March 30, 2009 (UTC)

+1. As for the template, I'm for keeping it vertical, and only on the relevant articles on constitution and govt bodies. NVO (talk) 17:41, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

On that note, perhaps we should define what "politics of Russia" actually includes?—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 17:44, March 30, 2009 (UTC)

Do they exist, at all? Forget the title, the template outlines constitutional <D'oh!?> setup of the government, broadly defined. Rename it "Constitutional framework of Russian government", it makes things easier. NVO (talk)

I was wondering the same thing. Anyway Ezhiki, how are you today? Have a good weekend? :) If no objection, I'll do it then. --Russavia ^Dialogue 17:41, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I'll hold off for now, we've got an objection :) Is there a reason why you have that opinion NVO? ;) I'm for getting rid of the vertical, as most of the articles should probably have an infobox in the top right, which will be able to include pertinent information, and as most of the articles are hopelessly underdeveloped (at the moment), the additional vertical template will only add tons of more whitespace to the article. I guess, in effect, isn't this another "navigational template" of sorts? --Russavia ^Dialogue 17:46, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Article alerts

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Things we can do

Could some of the members of our numerous membership base please comment at Portal talk:Russia/Things you can do regarding how the "what you can do" banner situated at the top of this very page should be treated? Should we just worship it or is anyone planning on actually putting it to some use? Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 19:01, March 30, 2009 (UTC)

An ideal candidate for an FL

Federal subjects of Russia is an ideal candidate for a featured list nom. ResMar 17:30, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

The list is definitely worthy, but what it needs is prose to get it across up to that standard. If nothing happens with it with other editors, I may look at it sometime in the near future. --Russavia ^Dialogue 21:19, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I had my eye on that list for quite a while. Prose is not a problem at all. If anything is a problem it's the maps—the ones currently in the list are kind of on an ugly side, and my skills are only advanced enough to produce a similar abomination (which would hardly be an improvement). Any takers for this task? The section on the mergers (especially proposed ones) could also use a major overhaul, although an alternative can be moving them to a separate article which would be linked to from this list.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 14:02, March 30, 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, no can help on the maps. I wonder if Bakharev is able to do them? If not, I'll ask Zscout or someone who I know has some expertise in this area to perhaps lend a helping hand with them. --Russavia ^Dialogue 14:33, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Dmitry Glukhovsky

Hello chums, can a Russian speaker cast their eyes over Dmitry Glukhovsky and the sources used? --Cameron Scott (talk) 21:04, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

The first source is OK (I looked at the original Russian version); the second link is dead, and the other two are in English. Overall, not great, but OK for a starter article.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 14:06, March 30, 2009 (UTC)

Awards in infoboxes

OK, another of my smart ideas (you tell me). If you look at Sergei Krikalyov you will notice in the infobox the Hero of Russia medal. Instead of clicking thru to the image it goes to the article, and the medal name is available by way of "alt text" and by hovering the mouse over the image. This is done by way of Template:Hero of Russia. To see how it looks on ruwiki, where they have been doing this for some time, check out ru:Крикалёв, Сергей Константинович. It looks good, it isn't cluttery, there's no long lists of awards in the infobox, and they appear how they would if they were wearing them on uniform, etc. To implement this here for articles within our scope, there will obviously be quite a few templates to be created, but this is all part of the process I guess. Would there be any support/objections to this format for awards in infoboxes for our articles? Opinions please. --Russavia ^Dialogue 10:50, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

I know it's not constructive criticism, but... I don't like it. It's just too much work to go through each image and read the alt text. Infoboxes are supposed to contain vital condensed information which readers should be able to grasp on the first glance; this format hardly meets this requirement, unless you already know which little icon represents which award.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 14:31, April 6, 2009 (UTC)

Agree with herr Igels. I did some of these ribbon stunts in ru-wiki and it took more time than the text of an article... and still you need to re-check the appearance of the ribbons on different browsers and different monitor settings... and of course the proper sequence of all. One star says it much better. NVO (talk) 14:51, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

OK, that's the last idea I'll have for a while I think. Next time I won't say "you tell me" :D --Russavia ^Dialogue 15:21, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I actually liked the idea to put the awards the same way one puts them on the uniform. Would it be a good idea to create a subpage showing the awards this way with a possible link from the infobox? (Igny (talk) 21:51, 6 April 2009 (UTC))

Exact match is hardly possible as the template is not wide enough to fit five standard ribbons per line (ru-wiki template allows max four). Any wider it will take over the page on narrower screens. NVO (talk) 01:59, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Please peer review me wicked list

I have listed Ambassador of Russia to Austria for peer review, as I would like to take this to featured list nomination soon, but am looking for outside input on any improvements, etc which may be made to the article/list in order to improve it to give it greater chance of being passed. Please be kind, as this is my first time doing this, and it can be PR'ed at Wikipedia:Peer review/Ambassador of Russia to Austria/archive1. Welcome any input anyone may have. Cheers, --Russavia ^Dialogue 18:24, 5 April 2009 (UTC) P.S. NVO, I took your advice and managed to work out how to make the tables the same width, and they do look a lot better. Thanks for that suggestion. --Russavia ^Dialogue 18:29, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Template:Russian elections

There is edit warring on {{Russian elections}} over the inclusion of Soviet era elections in the RSFSR. As such articles are within the scope of this project, do were require such articles on the template? I think they should be, whether they were a sham or not is not reason to exclude them; being a sham could very well be POV in itself, as I am sure that communists do not regard them as a sham, and that would be covered within the articles. The only thing that I can think of to exclude them would be if there would not be necessary sources in order to build an article from. Although perhaps separating RSFSR from RF elections in the template may be in order? Anyway, what are views of others in the project on matters such as this? --Russavia ^Dialogue 03:23, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Basketball

There is the page Russian Basketball Super League , and Russian Basketball Super League 2007/2008 . We need the page Russian Basketball Super League 2008/2009 . Help please? (LAz17 (talk) 06:24, 11 April 2009 (UTC)).

Umar Israilov needs help

Tendentious editing is going on in Umar Israilov, the short bio of a Chechen soldier who was killed in exile, allegedly for accusing President Kadyrov of human rights abuses. Kadyrov allies deny the charge. The article would benefit from impartial review. I thought some WP:Russia volunteers would be interested and well qualified. — ℜob C. alias ᴀʟᴀʀoʙ 21:40, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

The article has been added to the WikiProject and rated, but no one has responded to the peer review request. The article is short, but some sources are in Russian and need to be evaluated. — ℜob C. alias ᴀʟᴀʀoʙ 16:09, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Truce term

Can anybody help me please with what Russian children use as a truce term. A truce term is a word used to call a temporary halt to a game for respite for something like discussing the rules or tying a shoelace etc? Fainites ^barleyscribs 21:24, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

While I haven't been to Russia for quite a while and it's been even longer since I was a child, I don't believe things have changed—no such term exists. If Russian kids need to call a temporary halt to a game, they would just use something generic, like "hey", "hold on", "wait", or "stop".—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:03, May 4, 2009 (UTC)

. I vaguely remember smth like "Четыре-четыре – я на перерыве". But I'm not sure. Beatle Fab Four (talk) 22:33, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Could you translate that for me? Fainites ^barleyscribs 07:38, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Untranslateable. It's a rhymed pun centered on "I've interrupted whatever we're doing". It is also only tenuously connected with the question. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 13:49, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

This one: ru:Чур. Transliterates as chur. I'm not sure of etymology, but it might be a mutated form of 'truce'.

Also keep in mind that children's culture is not as interconnected as adult culture, and tends to mutate faster. While чур has lived on long enough to become established to the point of being mentioned in various game rulebooks, there are many other, less known and faster-waning words to refer to this concept. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 13:54, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

The Russian Wikipedia's page claims that it's the name of an old Slavish god, and its use in games refers to protection of that god. I find it dubious. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 13:59, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Related Estonian word is tsurr. It is unlikely to be the source, but the Estonian usage might be borrowed from Russian. It's also possible that both are loans from a third source, possibly Swedish or Baltic German culture. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 14:06, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Great. Could you come up with one of those rules of games books for the chur one? Does the russian wikipedia page refer to its use in games as well as the etymology? I'd love you to put a section and a source on the Truce term page. For the Estonian use, is it actually a truce term or the word for a 'safe base'? Fainites ^barleyscribs 16:09, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh, hey, Fanites, you wanted rules of a game. I just remembered that, as a child in Moscow, I played a variant of hide-and-seek, where the spot at which the seeker counted off while everyone hid was 'home', and as he's searching for everyone, if a player can jump out of hiding, run to the 'home', touch it, and yell 'chur for myself', he's safe. And while you're home, if you can see someone jump out of hiding, and you know they aren't making home before the seeker gets them, you can touch home, point at them and yell 'chur for <Name>'. The goal of the seeker was to find and touch the players before they can be 'churred'. Not exactly a 'truce term' usage, more of a protective spell usage. --Cubbi (talk) 12:36, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Not off the top of my head, sorry. It's been more than a decade since I read about outdoors games in Russian. It might have been Zapletal's book's Russian translation (Zapletal originally writes in Czech), but I'm not certain, and I can't check it.

The Russian Wikipedia page is not very useful. The bulk of it is a copy from [10], which is a very laconic dictionary-style entry explaining that "chur" refers to a magical penis protection gesture and proceeding to a bunch of usage examples. The relevant example is this:

Чур меня! въ играх, не трогай меня, я в стороне. Чур меня от него! нвг. смл. не хочу его.

It could be translated somewhat like this:

Chur [used as a verb] me! In games, don't push me, I'm out. Chur me from him! [two abbreviations I do not recognise] I do not want him.

I don't buy this etymology, either. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 21:07, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

The Russian Wikipedia page has interwiki link to the Ukrainian Wikipedia page, uk:Цур. That article appears to claim the word is an Ukrainian interjection which invokes an agreed-on restriction on touching, pushing or grabbing, and can also mean the invoker's desire to get rid of something. The article has the old god etymology; this time, his name is spelt Щур, transliterable as 'Scur'. Finally, the article ends by mentioning the phrase цур моє -- I think it translates to Chur me! --, and it appears to say it was once used as a magic incantation supposed to keep bad spirits away, outside the personal space.

Keep in mind that I do not really read Ukrainian, so I might have misunderstood something in this article. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 21:21, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

In Estonian usage, 'tsurr' is not necessarily tied to a location (although there are some games which do that). Instead, 'tsurr' is a status, which may be conferred -- depending on the particular game -- by performing a bodily manœuvre such as ducking, yelling the word (or one of its alternatives, some games have their own traditional vocabulary) or, in some cases, by entering a safe base. Notably, Estonian 'tsurr' is not a verb; outside the interjection form, one might say "Mul on tsurr" (I have got tsurr).

I was surprised to find that 'tsurr' is mentioned in a stenogram of Estonian parliament. Specifically, Andres Herkel's short speech from August 12, 2008 during the first discussion of the proposed statement about Russian Federation's military aggression against Georgia has these lines, in response to a question by Aadu Must:

Aitäh! Küsija loogika on väga huvitav, sest sellest lähtudes, kui algab sõjaline agressioon, siis just nagu seda sõjalist agressiooni ei ole, sellel asjal, mis toimub, ei olegi nagu mingisugust nime, me laseme sellel rindejoonel nihkuda kuhugi ja ütleme, et nüüd on tsurr!, nüüd peatume ja nüüd nii jääbki. Ausalt öelda, seda ma kõige rohkem kardangi, et Lõuna-Osseetia ümber võib tekkida mingisugune nn Venemaa Föderatsiooni loodud turvakoridor, nagu nad seda nimetavad, tugevdatud rahuvalvemissiooniks, mis sisuliselt seisneb teise maa territooriumi okupeerimises. Sellises seisundis rahu sõlmimine või konflikti konserveerimine on äärmiselt ohtlik, ebaõiglane ja tegelikult hävitab Georgia rahvast ja riiki.

Rough translation:

Thank you! The enquirer's logic is very interesting because based on this, when a military aggression begins, then it's like there is no military aggression, this thing that is going on does not like have any name, we let the frontier to shift somewhere and say now it's tsurr! and let's stop and now it will be like this. Honestly, that I'm afraid of most that there might arise some sort of Russian Federation's so-called security corridor around South Ossetia, which they call strengthened peacekeeping mission, which will amount to occupation of another country's territory. In such a situation entering into a truce or conservation of the conflict is extremely dangerous, unfair, and actually destroys the people and state of Georgia.

-- Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 21:39, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Of the etymologies mentioned above, I think the magic formula to ward off evil might be somewhat plausible. If indeed there is such an old Slavic God, then naturally this magic formula might be related to him. However, I'd like another, independent, source to back it up before I could write this etymology down into Wikipedia. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 21:49, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

For what it's worth, Vasmer's Etymological Dictionary here and on the next page lists two main meanings of "chur": chur I meaning 'border', 'measure', and chur II meaning a protective or banishing exclamation. He lists about a dozen etymologies with references to respected linguists for both but rejects them all as unsubstantiated or incorrect. Of the more unusual suggestions for chur II I see someone relating it to the god Tyr, and someone even to Greek word χυριος (Lord). He also mentions the supposed deity Chur and says it's not proven either. I don't think we'll ever know. For chur I, I don't see Vasmer saying a big "no" to the suggested reconstruction to the PIE root sker (to cut), which makes it a relative of English 'score', but that's not the mystical-protective use of the word. --Cubbi (talk) 22:33, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

So is it a bit more than a truce term really then? A protection word? Or both depending on context? The english truce terms are very powerful in the sense that a child who doesn't follow them is pretty much unplayable with, but they are very specifically for a temporary respite only. Not surrender and not a 'safe base' word. Its often expressed as "I've got....". Like "I've got fains" instead of saying "fainites". 'Safe base' words are a whole other article!Fainites ^barleyscribs 20:37, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Now you're making it sound like a safeword! I do remember that in some games, a player could say "chur I'm in a house" and would be instantly protected from any game activities until they make a step. I've also used it for ad-hoc changes to the rules "chur no kicking". It's a multipurpose word. --Cubbi (talk) 21:37, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi guys. Here's my two kopeks: 1) "Чур" has two meanings in modern Russian: one is essentially identical to calling dibs on an object, status or role ("Чур моё!" (dibs on [that]), "Чур я первый" (dibs on the first [try, go]), "Чур я казак!"), the other is an archaic warding word/phrase "Чур меня, чур!" (usually said while performing the sign of the Cross repeatedly) that has been mostly relegated to humorous usage and mocking superstition. I must also add that the Russian article is in shambles - it has an entry from Dahl's dictionary reflecting mid-19th century usage, with the rest of it heavily ringing of WP:OR. 2) The only Russian truce term I know was mentioned by Cubbi: "(я) в домике" (meaning "(I'm) in the house", usually with arms held crossed on the chest) used by little children in hide and seek or catch-type games to become "immune" when discovered or caught, in certain situations. --Illythr (talk) 21:49, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Infobox practices and original research

There is a discussion going on at Template talk:Infobox Russian federal city regarding whether determining the elevation of a city via Google Earth is considered original research, and whether poorly-definable figures such as metro area/population should be included in the infoboxes at all. Additional input there would most certainly be appreciated.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 14:48, May 6, 2009 (UTC)

Chechens in Poland

Don't you think that we should expand Chechen_people#Geography_and_diaspora? Those sluggards are creating more and more problems, gaining national attention.

terror template

can someone create a template for the list of terror attacks in russia along the lines of that of pakistan, iraq or india (Template:Campaignbox Mumbai terrorism or Template:Campaignbox India terrorism)??

peer review

Can we get this article peer reviewed? 2010_Moscow_Metro_bombings it should be a GA or jsut below at least.

Borki Incident

I created the request article Borki Incident last night. It could still use work, but it's a good start. LikeHolyWater (talk) 16:11, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

• OMG what a sorry anecdote... Borki crash actually occured in southern Russia (present-day Kursk Oblast Kharkiv oblast of Ukraine) where'd you get the Gatchina lead? I inserted interwiki, check the ru/uk versions. NVO (talk) 05:46, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Proposed merger of Sirin into Siren

See talk:Siren#Merger proposal Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:55, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Sofia Rotaru

For those interested, please see the talk page. Someone is trying to delete portions of the article.--Rubikonchik (talk) 21:57, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Enikeev

This article is up on AFD and we could use some experts to determine if it meets inclusion criteria. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:35, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Dear web brigades

You're falling behind. An anonymous editor's insertion of "bloody Putin's regime" has stood for almost three days in the article about racism in Russia. I only noticed and reverted it a few minutes ago.

Please take care of such elementary stuff as vandalism patrol instead of just editwarring on popular topics. I know, I know, vandalism patrol is mindnumbingly boring -- but it's a necessary evil in Wikipedia. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 21:03, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and I almost forgot: somebody's got to go over Special:Contributions/213.80.170.74, which appears to contain other similar edits. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 21:06, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia department of the KGB issues its formal thanks. It's probably this guy. He seems to wander about randomly inserting this kind of stuff as a manifestation of an acute allergy to the Plague, which he appears to have caught himself in the process. Sad. --Illythr (talk) 01:41, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Lost in translation ... Heritage registers

We have a

1. [Единый государственный реестр объектов культурного наследия РФ] Error: {{Lang-xx}}: text has italic markup (help) [11], with >100,000 properties listed and some 50,000 more regional titles waiting for inclusion;
2. and also a far smaller and different ru:Государственный свод особо ценных объектов культурного наследия народов Российской Федерации, which includes both properties and living institutions (theatres, libraries etc.).

What will be a correct, unambiguous English translation for both of these terms (both appear in the same article on #1). NVO (talk) 16:27, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I would use the following:

1. Unified State Registry of the Cultural Heritage Objects
2. State Code [or Statute] of Critically Valuable Cultural Heritage Objects of the Peoples of the Russian Federation

...but these are, of course, not official translations.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:51, May 15, 2009 (UTC)

You're right on mark with the second; Council of Europe compendium translates it as "State Code of Particularly Valuable Objects of Cultural Heritage of the Peoples of the Russian Federation" [12]. But to me code sounds misleading, especially when Russian Tax Code and Civil Code appear in the same section. NVO (talk) 06:55, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I'd prefer "register" for свод, as a nod to the National Register of Historic Places. This is somewhat less ambiguous. --Ghirla^-трёп- 08:03, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Probably so, but единый реестр is far closer to NRHP than свод. And if свод is register, then what is реестр? I'd rather avoid having registry and register in one paragraph. NVO (talk) 08:08, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Our translation efforts border precariously on the verge of original research. You may use "inventory" or "catalogue" as a substitute for "cumulative register", keeping in mind that the language of Russian bureaucracy is not amenable to translation :) --Ghirla^-трёп- 08:19, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

What about "collection" for свод? According to the link you've given, the свод includes both a register and an archive of documents. Hoezo (talk) 12:41, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Alexander Lebedev article

Was reading the [Alexander Lebedev] article and realized the whole biography section is basically copied from his website. Does this not raise some copyright issues? (I'm new to Wikipedia so haven't quite got my head round everything yet!) Hoezo (talk) 19:15, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Hoezo, and welcome to WP. You are correct that text which is copied does raise copyright issues, as per WP:COPYVIO. Under that policy you are able to remove without question anything which is copied from a source which isn't released under a free licence. As Lebedev's website doesn't state that content is licenced under a free licence, and also because of the clear copyright notice, much of the text in his article is a copyright violation and I have removed it based upon that policy. I also noticed that you removed material from the talk page of that article, and it is a good removal; you may want to note the WP:BLP policy, for the removal of the comments on the talk page by yourself not only removed information which isn't relevant to the article and its improvement, but also removed a clear violation of the WP:BLP policy. You are going good so far, and if you have any questions relating to policies, and the like, feel free to post any questions here, we're all here to help new editors. Cheers, --Russavia ^Dialogue 05:30, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Proposal for a 200-WikiProject contest

A proposal has been posted for a contest between all 200 country WikiProjects. We're looking for judges, coordinators, ideas, and feedback.

The Transhumanist 00:39, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Please help with new template

please help enhance this template:

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ash sul (talk • contribs)

• I think that dumping two empires and present-day state in one bunch is incorrect. And if it's done, how deep should it go into primordial time - Kulikovo field? Deeper? Also: the first entry in the list, Kościuszko Uprising, is clearly not an "internal affair". Also: putting together Civil War and Yazov's putsch onto one line is, well, listcruft. Any idea how to separate major wars from three-day conflicts? NVO (talk) 02:56, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

By using categories instead of templates. What is the point of this template anyway? It sure does not aide navigation, no matter how you move stuff around. And why does the "Russian Armed Forces" link in the title lead to history of Russia?—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 13:33, May 20, 2009 (UTC)

GA Sweeps invitation

This message is being sent to WikiProjects with GAs under their scope. Since August 2007, WikiProject Good Articles has been participating in GA sweeps. The process helps to ensure that articles that have passed a nomination before that date meet the GA criteria. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. Instead of reviewing by topic, editors can consider picking and choosing whichever articles they are interested in.

We are always looking for new members to assist with reviewing the remaining articles, and since this project has GAs under its scope, it would be beneficial if any of its members could review a few articles (perhaps your project's articles). Your project's members are likely to be more knowledgeable about your topic GAs then an outside reviewer. As a result, reviewing your project's articles would improve the quality of the review in ensuring that the article meets your project's concerns on sourcing, content, and guidelines. However, members can also review any other article in the worklist to ensure it meets the GA criteria.

If any members are interested, please visit the GA sweeps page for further details and instructions in initiating a review. If you'd like to join the process, please add your name to the running total page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles from the worklist or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. With ~1,300 articles left to review, we would appreciate any editors that could contribute in helping to uphold the quality of GAs. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:24, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

FAR National Anthem of Russia

I have nominated National Anthem of Russia for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. OboeCrack (talk) 17:42, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Maps needed

Most of the articles on oblasts, cities, towns etc. lack maps to show where they are, and to bring out the local geography. Without that geography, their history loses something, and they are less useful to non-Russian readers. Unless you know where Rzhev is, and how it relates to the Volga and surrounding country, you lose value. I have no facility to add maps, so I can't help. Michael of Lucan (talk) 17:57, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

I hope you don't think we are keeping the maps to ourselves in hopes to keep all those places secret, eh? :) Whenever there is a map, it is added to appropriate places. If you know of a map that hasn't been added to appropriate places, that's obviously an oversight that needs to be fixed—you are welcome to point such cases out. In the meanwhile, the popup feature of the coordinates service is the place to go.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 18:42, May 26, 2009 (UTC)

I made my comment because these articles appear in the English language version of Wikipedia. So, you cannot assume that readers have any knowledge of Russia. Even people who go there as tourists usually see only Saint Petersburg or Moscow. I have been to Western Russia (mainly the Riga road and Rzhev area) many years ago, and remember it with interest and pleasure. However, when I read articles about the area, I get no sense of the geography of the place. The articles deal more with the history, which is interesting too of course. The picture of Rzhev is almost a century old, from before the Revolution, although it does show the relationship with the Volga. (BTW, the Zubtsov war memorial told me more about the War against Hitler than any history book. Maybe a good article to be written.) Michael of Lucan (talk) 11:13, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Providence Bay , Siberia. (Russian Provideniya) and English place names on the Siberian coast

There were a lot of Americans and other English speakers active on the Siberian coast in the 19th and early 20th centuries. They gave English names to places, sometimes in advance of Russian names. These are now mostly gone from modern maps, which is confusing for someone reading history. I spent some time sorting out Emma Harbor, Providence Bay, and Plover Bay, and wrote a short article Providence Bay, Siberia summarizing what I learned. Using the English version as the title appears to violate the naming guideline. I have a couple concerns. If the article needs to be renamed, I'd like to get it right the first time. That means I need an authoritative Russian name and some help with the transliteration, or an official transliteration. More broadly, is there an efficient way to handle these English place names or could one be developed? I'm thinking of something as simple as a list. Any help appreciated.Dankarl (talk) 14:04, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

• The story matches Russian books, apart from minor detail, but there's another side to it, i.e. in the same 1881 when "the revenue cutter Corwin took on coal at Plover Bay" Strelok, a Russian military steam corvette, was recording coastline and depths near Providenia (they reached Providenia July 27 and stayed in the area until late August, incidentally meeting American USS Rodgers (1879) and SS Handy) [13] quite a lot of ships, even more shipwrecsks ... Hey! put that coal back! oh well, we all see our side of history. NVO (talk) 15:22, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

• I was wondering about that. Looks like US Revenue Cutters called (and coaled?) at Providini[y]a Bay regularly, Corwin certainly more than once in 1881, I have not chased down the other references. I presume this was by some sort of arrangement. But did Russia have someone there to stop every steam whaler in the Pacific from coaling, or at least to keep track of their bill?

Do I take it from your use that Providenia, not Provideniya is the authoritative transliteration?Dankarl (talk) 16:14, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

US govt sources list Provideniya Bay FAA example, keep it. Done, added Webster dictionary ref. NVO (talk) 06:05, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

I recommend renaming to remove Siberia from the title. Far Eastern coastline is definitely not Siberia (see this article discussing the borderline issue). Providence Bay slot is empty, why not? NVO (talk) 07:42, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Could I get you to put the Strelok visit into the article? Since I don't read Russian I can't read your source. Thanks Dankarl (talk) 16:31, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Discussion continues at Providence Bay, Siberia —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dankarl (talk • contribs) 16:24, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Nomination for an article to be part of Wiki:Project Russia

I have noticed that this article is part of Wiki:Project Russia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Russians

So I thought why not this one? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrimination_of_ethnic_minorities_in_Estonia

Russians are the biggest ethnic minority in Estonia. The article looks promising and is well cited. I see no reason not to make it a part of Wiki:Project Russia.

Alas it is also being nominated for deletion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Discrimination_of_ethnic_minorities_in_Estonia

Personally I want to give this article a chance, and maybe including it in Wiki:Project Russia will give it that chance. Maybe not, but I figured it's worth a shot, what do you guys think? HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 21:02, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually, there is no need to nominate articles for project inclusion (we neither have a nomination/approval process in place, nor really need one). If you think an article should be covered by WP:RUSSIA (and, AfD issues aside, the one you mentioned does belong), just tag the talk page with {{WikiProject Russia}} and that's that. If you want to assess the article in the process, that's great, if not, that's OK, too—someone will get to it eventually. If anyone ever disagrees with your inclusion/assessment, the matter can be re-visited then.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 13:37, June 2, 2009 (UTC)

What I am pointing out here, is that a potential WikiProject:Russia article is about to be DELETED, and I would like to get the opinions of the members of WikiProject:Russia as to whether this article should be deleted or not. In addition having members in this group assess the project's quality would be great! I think the article has great potential, and is well sourced, but when the other side would rather delete it then debate, I come here to seek advice from fellow Wiki editors of WikiProject:Russia. HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 07:42, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Back cover does not matter. Front cover templates do not matter either. What matters is: who has the loudest mouth and the baddest gang besides them. Yes, sysops do check contents and weigh the arguments but they don't go against the pack either. These articles have a solid pro-deletion record; case, as I see it, is lost, waste of time. NVO (talk) 13:01, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

There has been a number of Russia related articles with nationalistic/political accusations and/or other POV agenda. Typically, these articles were created by one gang and soon after creation nominated for deletion by the opposite gang. On a typical AfD one side claims notability and media coverage, the other non-notability and POV issues. The result of the AfD was typically no consensus, and the articles were kept, and POV wars started over the titles and content, as well as merging/moving. Personally, I do not care much about this particular article, although I predict the result would be no consensus rather than delete. Even if this particular article does get deleted, it does not stop there, there is a bigger picture of an apparent battleground on WP related to Easter Europe/Russia/Soviet Union/communism. It is clearly not the right way to write articles on Wikipedia, even though WP became known for pushing POVs rather than creating an encyclopedia, which probably frustrates most contributors. I remember there was a proposal, I think by Miacek, to create a Wikiproject (or sub-project) to address these issues. What do you think about that? (Igny (talk) 14:46, 3 June 2009 (UTC))

Another Vote for article renaming for the 2008 South Ossetia War article

Yup folks, some users are trying rename this article yet again:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2008_South_Ossetia_war#Requested_move

Same arguments, same story. Also, so that I don't get accused of "canvassing" this time, can someone else ask others who edited that talkpage to comment and/or vote. Thank you! HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 07:26, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Nizhny Novgorod oblast --> Nizhni Novgorod oblast

Please help me change "Nizhny Novgorod oblast" to "Nizhni Novgorod oblast" regarding The Constitution of Russia (http://kremlin.ru/eng/articles/ConstEng3.shtml). There hundreds of articles with errors in name or content. nejron (talk) 08:50, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I have moved the article back. "Nizhny Novgorod Oblast" spelling is supported by the WP:UE and WP:RUS guidelines and is correct. "Nizhni Novgorod oblast" is not incorrect, but it is not the variant recommended by our guidelines.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:11, June 8, 2009 (UTC)

Why? It's in The Constitution of Russia (http://kremlin.ru/eng/articles/ConstEng3.shtml). I think The Constitution is the most important source. nejron (talk) 18:17, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

The Constitution of Russia, in Russian, is indeed a very important source. Its translations, however, depend very much on the preferences of translators and the guidelines of the agencies for whose purposes the translations are being done. If you consider Wikipedia as being one of such agencies, you should take into consideration the rules applicable to this kind of translation, which, in this case, are WP:UE and WP:RUS. We use "Nizhny", not "Nizhni" because of WP:RUS, we use "oblast" and not, say, "region" because our guidelines call for use of exact terminology (we are, after all, an encyclopedia), and we capitalize "Oblast" because this is the general approach taken by our naming conventions.

All in all, you can't single out just one source (no matter how good it is) and use it as the reason for doing something, especially if that something is not supporting the facts, but rather representing an arbitrary choice of formatting. With hundreds of different ways of doing any given thing, we have to standardize on something. From the encyclopedia point of view, WP:UE and BGN/PCGN-based romanization guidelines make a lot more sense than relying on whatever random choice one branch of government decided to use on its website. Hope this helps.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 18:35, June 8, 2009 (UTC)

Proposed Renaming of 2008 South Ossetia war

Hey everyone! I know that (HistoricWarrior007 has already brought this proposed renaming up on this page already, but I'd like to do so again in a more neutral manner.

Currently, there is a discussion underway at Talk:2008 South Ossetia war#Requested move about a renaming of the article from its current name ("2008 South Ossetia war") to "Russia-Georgia war" or "Russian-Georgian war". This discussion seems to be spending literally more space on Russia's war guilt, or absence thereof, than what English-speakers actually call this war!

A similar discussion already occurred about two to three months ago, during which an extraordinarily slim majority of users (the final tally was 24-23, although one user voted for both sides and the deciding vote was cast after the survey had been concluded for several hours) defeated the proposed renaming. However, the renaming proposal was brought back up, as some individuals feel that a new consensus has appeared.

I hope that the input from this project will help get the discussion back on track, so that the improvement of this article, which our project considers to be of Top Importance, will swiftly continue. And personally, I don't really care what we call the war, as long as we consider our readers in the process. Thank you, and happy editing! Laurinavicius (talk) 03:26, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

GA Reassessment of Erast Fandorin

I am conducting a reassessment as part of the GA sweeps process. I have found come concerns which need addressing if this article is to keep its GA status, which may be found at Talk:Erast Fandorin/GA1. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:19, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Belarusian/Russian spelling

User:Geregen2 is going around to every Belarusian article and changing the spelling to what he calls to "Belarusian spelling". Check out his edit history: [14] . Just in the past day he has probably moved a hundred articles to his "Belarusian spelling". Most Belarusian websites I've visited are in Russian. UEFA uses the Russian spelling for Belarusian footballers. For example, Sergei Kislyak is spelled as Sergei Kislyak according to UEFA (link here for proof = [15]), but User:Geregen2 moved the WP article to Syarhey Kislyak anyway. Is there any way we can annul his edits without having to go through tediously one by one? He's literally spent 6 straight hours just moving articles. I think he may be a bot. --Tocino 17:27, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually, he's not a bot, he's just a very prolific editor. Regarding the matter, I am not quite sure what it has to do with WP:RUSSIA. How the names of Belarusian athletes (or, indeed, not just athletes) are romanized is a matter of guidelines which should be developed by WP:BELARUS. For Russian names, we have WP:RUS, which, if the problem concerned people from Russia, would favor your approach (i.e., that the variant predominantly used in English takes priority), but for Belarusian all we have is WP:CYR#Belarusian, which doesn't exactly address the issue. I see you have posted this inquiry to WP:BELARUS as well; I trust it is them who should be responding to this. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 17:55, June 25, 2009 (UTC)

WP:BELARUS is not very active, so that's why I posted on here as well. --Tocino 18:26, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, if you need advice, I can recommend you to first and formost contact the user in question and let him know that you have a problem with his edits. Point out that many of his moves are in contradiction with WP:UE; show some examples. How it goes from there depends pretty much on how your communication develops. I would still think that polishing the nuances of WP:UE/WP:CYR#Belarusian divide are best left to the WP:BELARUS folks, but if they aren't very active, here's your chance to discuss setting some standards so this situation does not repeat in the future. My personal opinion—the moves, from what I see, do not conform with WP:UE and should be reverted, but each case still needs to be looked at individually. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 20:48, June 25, 2009 (UTC)

Dnepropetrovsk maniacs

Could someone help with this on the translation? Thanks, --♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 19:28, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Ruff

Hello all, in an attempt to address any English bias, I would be very grateful if any Russian-speaking person knew of or could find any folklore, or history of hunting or, or any other information on, the Ruff in their native country which might not be covered in the article currently at FAC. Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:41, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Gazprom

Hi, I'm interested in improving the article Gazprom. Does anyone have any improvement suggestions? There isn't a lot going on on the article talk page, so please tell me what you think. Offliner (talk) 19:22, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Kuril Islands dispute

Kuril Islands dispute was unilaterally renamed Northern Territories dispute. There is currently a requested move filed to move it back. 76.66.194.17 (talk) 08:05, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

It's been moved back by an admin, as there was no discussion.VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 09:35, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Most popular pages

I have request that a popular pages function be set up for the project at http://toolserver.org/~alexz/pop/config.php. Should be all good I think? --Russavia ^Dialogue 10:36, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Nice! I wasn't aware such a service was available on a project-by-project basis. Thanks for finding that! Now we just need to find people who'd be working on the top 100 or so pages once we establish what those pages are.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 14:48, July 14, 2009 (UTC)

Crazy Day or The Marriage of Figaro

This article has been nominated for deletion. There are enough sources available on internet. If someone is interested, please improve its contents. Thank you.--Rubikonchik (talk) 22:18, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

What is the Official English Name of Russia?

Hello,

There is a discussion on the Russia talk page about the Official name of Russia here: [[16]].

It can be difficult to determine an "official" name in English, but a google search quickly comes up with this: [[17]].

Any comments/suggestions on the talk page would be greatly appreciated, Thanks, Horlo (talk) 09:02, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

The dispute in a nutshell: Every editor involved in the dispute except Horlo agrees that, noting that there is no such thing as an official list of country names that applies across the English-speaking world, the Russian Constitution is the arbiter of this, and it clearly states that the two names "Russia" and "The Russian Federation" are both official and of precisely the same standing. Horlo believes that as the constitution was originally written in Russian it carries little weight on the English wikipedia, which should always prefer original English-language sources (i.e. approved translations of the constitution don't count). In support of this he cites WP:UE, although it has been pointed out more than once to him that WP:UE refers to the names of Wikipedia articles (And the title "Russia" is not in dispute), not details about official names of countries within articles. Please feel free to contribute.VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 22:02, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello, VsevolodKrolikov, please do not drag the "dispute" here. I have asked a large group of knowledgeable editors their opinions. Please allow them to accept the invitation, study the situation, and contribute. Please note that I will not be posting any more replies to you here - if you want, we can continue the discussion on the Russia talk page. Thanks, Horlo (talk) 10:16, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

• Official sight of Russian President: http://kremlin.ru/eng.--Andrey! 16:18, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
• Main law of russia: The Constitution of Rusiia.--Andrey! 16:18, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
• The first offer in official translate: The Constitution of the. Russian Federation was adopted on December 12, 1993.--Andrey! 16:18, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
• But thus the official site uses a word russia in all cases, except the ceremonial. Look.--Andrey! 16:18, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

  Hello, thank you, but all of the sources you provided were Russian in origin. It seems that English sources which do state a difference between common name and official name always give "Russian Federation" as the official name. Horlo (talk) 18:18, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

  Then they cannot be official.--Andrey! 16:18, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Horlo, I suggest you drag the conversation back to the relevant talk page, where, as you know, you've already been given accounts of several organisations that use Russia in addition to the Russian Federation. Forum shopping is not the same as inviting other people to the discussion.VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 16:23, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Help with a question about Russian bridges

If a member of this project is willing to help, I have a question about bridges in Russia. This is being done to assist in editing the Canton Viaduct article. There is a question as to whether two bridges on the Moscow–Saint Petersburg Railway modeled after this one exist or even were built. Knowing this will help answer the question of whether Canton Viaduct is a unique structure. Thanks in advance (also posted in machine translated Russian @ ru:Википедия:Форум/Иноязычный). Sswonk (talk) 23:41, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

About what bridge you ask?--Andrey! 12:03, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

This is the problem, we don't know which bridge or bridges – it is unknown if they were ever built. Here is the passage from the article Canton Viaduct, which will include information and links to articles about the Russian bridges if they are known:

Around this time Russia was interested in building railroads so Tsar Nicholas I sent workmen to draw extensive diagrams of the Canton Viaduct. He later summoned Whistler to Russia as a consulting engineer to design the Moscow–Saint Petersburg Railway, on which two bridges were modeled after the Canton Viaduct.

"Around this time" refers to 1832-1835. The bridges in Russia, if built, were designed using the Canton Viaduct as a model. The type of bridge is significant: double blind arcade, meaning filled arches resulting in a bridge that is built with a hollow walled structure. They would be bridges built in the period around 1835 on the Moscow–Saint Petersburg Railway. Any help would be appreciated. Sswonk (talk) 16:31, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Format of federal subjects articles

I think it would be better in many cases to use prose instead of lists. For example (this is from Republic of Karelia:

• Area: 172,400 km2 (66,600 sq mi)
• Borders:
  • internal: Murmansk Oblast (N), Arkhangelsk Oblast (E/SE), Vologda Oblast (SE/S), Leningrad Oblast (S/SW)
  • international: Finland (SW/W/NW) (border line length: 723 km)
  • water: White Sea (an inlet of the Barents Sea) (N/NE/E), Lake Onega (SE), Lake Ladoga (SW)
• Highest point: 576 m (1,890 ft), the Nuorunen peak.

Could be converted to something like:

"The republic of Karelia covers an area of 172,400 km2. To the west, it shares a 723 km long border with Finland, to the north it is bordered by Murmansk Oblast, to the east - by Arkhangelsk Oblast, etc... The White Sea is located to the north east of the region. Major lakes include Onega and Ladoga. The highest point is the Nuorunen peak (576 km)."

The prose style is more often used in encyclopedias, I think, and it doesn't look as ugly as the list. We might lose some small info (like the SW/W/NW things), but it doesn't seem important. Offliner (talk) 07:49, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Agree absolutely. The box is for quick reference (and perhaps information could be added there if lost in the text); it's better that information is presented in two different ways rather than have a list and a box that lists.VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 15:32, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Just as an FYI, these lists were added a long time ago when no usable infobox was available for these articles. The infobox is now in place, so converting these lists to prose makes all the sense. By the way, the orientation information can still be included with the prose as well—I don't see why it would a problem to keep it (the Foo Republic borders Foofoo Krai to the north, north-east, and east...).—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:30, August 3, 2009 (UTC)

Russian heraldry

As a member of WP:HV, I've created this page. If someone could give it a quick look-over and put it in a suitable Russia-based category and then rate/importance-rate it, that would be great. (You can also contribute!) Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 19:56, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

revevenues of Sofia Rotaru

Users who speak Russian, could you please help as third parties in reading the articles provided as sources in Russian on the talk page of Sofia Rotaru, namely articles from RIA Novosti and Kommersant:

Here is the simple rough translation by http://translate.google.com of 1) http://rian.com.ua/economy/20080718/77966106.html "...People's Artist of Ukraine Sofia Rotaru declared the highest revenue for the year 2008, said deputy chairman of the State Tax Administration of Ukraine Sergiy healer at a press briefing on Friday.

In doing so, he did not specify the amount of declared, but added that "the most revenue significantly exceeds 500 million (hryvnia) (about 100 million dollars)...."

"... Народная артистка Украины София Ротару задекларировала самые высокие доходы за 2008 год, сообщил заместитель председателя государственной налоговой администрации Украины Сергей Лекарь на брифинге в пятницу.

При этом, он не уточнил задекларированную сумму, но добавил, что "наибольший доход значительно превышает 500 миллионов (гривен) (около 100 миллионов долларов)". ..."

2) http://kommersant.ru/doc.aspx?DocsID=915810

"...The singer Sofia Rotaru declared the highest incomes in the Ukraine in 2007, said deputy chairman of the State Tax Administration of Ukraine Sergiy healer. He did not specify the amount of declared, but noted that revenue People's Artist of Ukraine "is much higher than 500 million hryvnia (about $ 100 million)...."--Rubikonchik (talk) 22:23, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

User: Erikupoeg, the matter is simple, all you have to do is to prove the contrary of what the sources say. So far you did not and your mere personal assertions, deliberately bad faithed, cannot certainly account for anything.

"...// ЧУЖОЙ КАРМАН И в рост и в гривну Певица София Ротару задекларировала самые высокие доходы на Украине за 2007 год, сообщил заместитель председателя государственной налоговой администрации Украины Сергей Лекарь. Он не уточнил задекларированную сумму, но отметил, что доход народной артистки Украины "значительно превышает 500 млн гривен" (около $100 млн). Также он сообщил, что по итогам прошлого года 360 украинцев задекларировали доход более 10 млн гривен (около $2 млн). Подобные декларации за 2006 год подали 200 граждан Украины. Более 1 млрд гривен дохода за прошлый год на Украине никто официально не получил. Зампред государственной налоговой администрации отметил, что высокие доходы декларируют футболисты, боксеры, артисты. ..."

Another user claims that this is not what the article says, however no source to support his assertion was provided aside his personal point of view. The ongoing debate is getting very long, to the point that I have asked for a comment about the conduct of the aforementioned user.

Your fresh reading input would be most valuable! Thank you.--Rubikonchik (talk) 08:38, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

It says exactly what your editing of google translate says. There's no ambiguity or nuance to be had. The rest of the second piece says (translating on the fly) "He also stated that according to results from the previous year, 360 Ukrainians declared income of more than 10 Million hryvna (around $2 million). Similar declarations were made in 2006 by 200 Citizens of Ukraine. No one officially received an income of more than a billion hryvnas. The deputy chariman of the state tax administration remarked that high incomes are declared by footballers, boxers, artists. ..." The user who disputes your claims is either acting in bad faith or cannot read Russian beyond an elementary level.VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 16:16, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for responding, I would appreciate if you could leave a word here Talk:Sofia Rotaru, or Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Erikupoeg, Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Sofia_Rotaru. Thank you very much in advance. I agree with you that the issue is quite simple, but a user has turned it in a major discussion on numerous talk pages, having as argument only "all means are good to exclude this info"...--Rubikonchik (talk) 16:41, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Symbols of change in Russia

Hi guys,

I'm really sorry to post something that is not about an article, but I thought this would be the perfect place to find some smart brains to help me out on the following issue:

I'm currently working on a think piece about 'symbols of change' in Russia. I unfortunately don't speak Russian and have only been to Moscow once for a couple of days. So to be honest: I don't have too much of a clue about Russian culture (especially when it comes to contemporary pop culture).

What I need is to find out how Russians interprete the word change, what they associate it with and how it is visually represented.

Or in more detail:

- Arts, architecture, films, music, plays, novels, mythologies etc. representing change - Idioms/proverbs about change - Cultural symbols of change (people, places, things) - Rituals that represent/cue change (e.g. rites of passage) - events that symbolise change (formal or informal) - common visual representations of change - How would Russians characterize “a changing world?” What factors are changing in this world? How and why? - How did people think about change in the past? What symbolized change in the past? Is this still the case, or has something else replaced these symbols of change? - What are the new symbols of change? What do you see emerging on the horizon? - What do people in Russia tend to do in times of change? - What are the top three core traditions in Russia? What must everyone participate in? How and when do these relate to change? - Who are the icons of change in each country (real or fictional, human or otherwise)? What do they represent? What is the message? How does it address the idea of change? Why does the story about them persist? - What do Russians understand under change? How does one know change has happened?

I don't expect you to take the time answering this whole catalogue of questions, but I would awfully happy, if anyone of you can suggest useful and reliable sources! But of course - if you have any spontaneous ideas on any of those points or in general.

Many many thanks!!

Kat--80.169.44.180 (talk) 18:01, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Translation help requested

I don't know if this is the right location, but I would like to post a request for assistance from Russian speakers for some English language articles where the use of Russian-language sources would be appropriate. If anyone can point me in the right direction, please leave a note on my talk page. Thanks in advance. Coleacanth (talk) 21:16, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

In particular, could someone translate this passage:

• Он умело и гибко применяет к анализу экономических процессов общенаучные методы, вскрывая ложные, антинаучные концепции и методы в математике, физике, термодинамике и господствующей в университетских учебных курсах экономике --Coleacanth (talk) 22:21, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

In an apt and versatile manner, he applies general scientific principles to the analysis of the economic processes, revealing along the way false, anti-scientific concepts and methods of mathematics, physics, thermodynamics, and economic science prevalent in the university courses.

To request a translation of a whole article (articles), please use WP:RFT.

As for pointing out article which could use Russian-language sources, I'm afraid I don't understand the question. Any article covered by WP:RUSSIA (and tagged accordingly) could use such sources. Best,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:42, August 10, 2009 (UTC)

Most popular pages II

We have a tool which shows us the most popular project articles available at [18]. Having looked at the report for August (so far),[19] there are some surprises as to what articles within the scope of this project are being viewed. World War II is the most popular article, which given the wide scope outside of the project is somewhat understandable. I am, however, a little bit surprised that Fedor Emelianenko is the second most popular article within the scope of this project, even more popular by almost 2 times than Russia. Does anyone have any suggestions on how we can utilise the list to better the articles which appear on it? Regular collaborations or something? --Russavia ^Dialogue 03:08, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

From previous experiences, the participants of this WikiProject aren't big on collaborating on one thing—we are too few, and our interests are too different. Doesn't mean we can't try it again, of course, but I, for one, am skeptical.

We could, however, incorporate a "monthly improvement suggestion" list into the WikiProject's page. Something like "here's three GA-articles that could be improved to FA, three Bs that could be improved to GA-level, a few Cs easily expandable to Bs, a few Stubs that are too high in the list to remain stubs", and so on. Inclusion would be by position in previous month's results list, as well as by diversity of the topics, so anyone would have something appealing to consider working on. Just an idea, though.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 13:31, August 11, 2009 (UTC)

I think we could use a general to-do list, where editors could manually insert articles where they need help. Important would be to state exactly what needs to be done. ("Improve this from C to B" with no other info is useless.) They could also insert the popularity rating of the article in the list, as a form of priority measurement. Offliner (talk) 14:28, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Translation help requested

I don't know if this is the right location, but I would like to post a request for assistance from Russian speakers for some English language articles where the use of Russian-language sources would be appropriate. If anyone can point me in the right direction, please leave a note on my talk page. Thanks in advance. Coleacanth (talk) 21:16, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

In particular, could someone translate this passage:

• Он умело и гибко применяет к анализу экономических процессов общенаучные методы, вскрывая ложные, антинаучные концепции и методы в математике, физике, термодинамике и господствующей в университетских учебных курсах экономике --Coleacanth (talk) 22:21, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

In an apt and versatile manner, he applies general scientific principles to the analysis of the economic processes, revealing along the way false, anti-scientific concepts and methods of mathematics, physics, thermodynamics, and economic science prevalent in the university courses.

To request a translation of a whole article (articles), please use WP:RFT.

As for pointing out article which could use Russian-language sources, I'm afraid I don't understand the question. Any article covered by WP:RUSSIA (and tagged accordingly) could use such sources. Best,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:42, August 10, 2009 (UTC)