From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article nominee Russians was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
November 20, 2007 Good article nominee Not listed
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Ethnic groups (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Russia / Demographics & ethnography (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia.
To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the demographics and ethnography of Russia task force.
WikiProject Eastern Europe (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Eastern Europe, a WikiProject related to the nations of Eastern Europe.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Central Asia (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon Russians is part of WikiProject Central Asia, a project to improve all Central Asia-related articles. This includes but is not limited to Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Tibet, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Xinjiang and Central Asian portions of Iran, Pakistan and Russia, region-specific topics, and anything else related to Central Asia. If you would like to help improve this and other Central Asia-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

The infobox redux[edit]

The infobox seems to be a target of a new edit war. I have protected it for a week so to reach some consensus. Alex Bakharev (talk) 05:29, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

General principles[edit]

The infobox have a number of conflicting purposes:

  • The people there are some sort of a bragging list, showing different contributions of Russians to the world;
  • At the same time this is supposed to show how an average Russian looks like (and typical variations of the norm)
  • The pictures should be of reasonable quality and copyright-free.

Thus, the people in the infobox should be:

  • World-famous, preferably household names known to an average en-Wikipedia reader (American or British high school student or graduate). Like e.g. Mendeleev, Leo Tolstoy or Tchaikovsky.
  • Usually cause positive connotations both in the West and in Russia. That excludes e.g. Ivan IV, Lenin, Brezhnev, Gorbachev or Putin.
  • Self-considered ethnic Russian - that excludes e.g. Boris Pasternak (a Jew) or Stanislav Richter (Baltic German).
  • Not being of very unusual appearance. Some people thinks that this e.g. excludes Pushkin, as his African ancestry is not usual for Russians even in the modern times and was extremely unusual in 19th century.
  • Have a good quality picture unquestionably copyright-free.
  • We should provide a balanced mix of genders, epochs, occupations.
  • The number of the pictures is limited. 16 is OK, 20 maybe OK, more seems to be excessive.

Any other considerations? Alex Bakharev (talk) 05:29, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Current version[edit]

Alexander Newski.jpg
Peter der-Grosse 1838.jpg
Suvorov Alex V.jpg
Oleg losev.jpg
Aleksandr Prokhorov.jpg
S.P. Korolev.jpg
Marina Tsvetaeva by Shumov, Paris 1925.jpg
Alexander Stepanovich Popov.jpg
L.N.Tolstoy Prokudin-Gorsky.jpg
Ivan Pavlov NLM3.jpg
RIAN archive 2410 Marshal Zhukov speaking.jpg
Anna Kournikova-Bagram Airfield 2009.jpg
Anna pavlova -c. 1905.jpg

No principal objections but:

Anonymous version[edit]

Alexander Newski.jpg
Peter der-Grosse 1838.jpg
Suvorov Alex V.jpg
Oleg losev.jpg
Aleksandr Prokhorov.jpg
Marina Tsvetaeva by Shumov, Paris 1925.jpg
Alexander Stepanovich Popov.jpg
Vasily Perov - Портрет Ф.М.Достоевского - Google Art Project.jpg
L.N.Tolstoy Prokudin-Gorsky.jpg
RIAN archive 2410 Marshal Zhukov speaking.jpg
Anna Kournikova-Bagram Airfield 2009.jpg
Porträt des Komponisten Pjotr I. Tschaikowski (1840-1893).jpg
Ivan Pavlov NLM3.jpg
Anton Chekhov with bow-tie sepia image.jpg
Федя Шаляпин.jpg
Anna Pavlova dressing room.jpg
Alexander Solzhenitsyn in Moscow, December 1998.jpg
RIAN archive 25981 Academician Sakharov.jpg
Gagarin in Sweden.jpg
Vladimir Putin - 2006.jpg

I am strongly against inclusion of Vladimir Putin as he is a very controversial modern politician who a significant part of our readers consider a criminal. Also is Boris Chertok a household name in the west? According to his Russian wikipage Chertok was born in a Jewish family, is it disqualifies him from the box on an ethnic Russian article?

3 women among 25 people do not look right IMHO. The occupation mix is better IMHO but we have gone from 16 people to 25 is it excessive? Alex Bakharev (talk) 05:35, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

lol who cares how many females are iut there. are you a crappy femenist or what? (talk) 04:53, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

My suggestion for 16 people: Nevsky, Peter the Great, Lomonosov, Suvorov, Mendeleev, Tchaikovsky, Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Tsvetaeva, Korolyov, Pavlov, Kandinsky, Pavlova, Sikorsky, Gagarin, Netrebko — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)

  • No problems with any of them. Have not checked that we have good copyright free images of the modern people. Other suggestions? Alex Bakharev (talk) 00:27, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Strongly Oppose - For said reasons below.

  1. Sergei Korolev can be replaced. I can overlook that.
  2. Alexander Popov is a household name and recognized as one of the fathers of the radio. Although Oleg Losev isn't, I purposely put him in because his contributions are tremendous despite being largely unknown.
  3. Suvorov is though to have been 1/4 Armenian. I believe that the general rule should be that someone is at least 1/2 Russian.
  4. The gender gap is even larger with you proposition so I don't see why you're objecting to a problem that you're seeking to escalate.
  5. Finding a non-controversial Russian leader is very hard. Which one isn't filled with controversy?
  6. The ideal size should be 3x5 or 4x4. The only featured article with an infobox about ethnic groups features that style.

Khazar (talk) 06:00, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

So what about my suggestion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:04, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Okay,, you've asked me to join in the discussion, so I will. IMHO, I find these galleries to be a sinkhole for editor energy and time (i.e., this is why I don't consider them to add value). They are not even a parameter in the ethnic group infobox, but were introduced by someone at some point because they decided that WP:ITSIMPORTANT. Soon, every ethnic group wanted one. Some are plain laughable (i.e., Italians: Dante Alighieri, Columbus, Bernini, Marco Polo, Machiavelli, et al). I don't know how much time I've wasted on articles on my watchlist where IP and SPA changes to South American galleries have driven myself and other editors mad. Everyone wants to add their favourite rapper, sports hero, TV star, supermodel, etc. and remove ones they don't like. The Romanians warring just got so out of hand that we reached consensus to just delete the gallery... so, that's my personal preference. I wish I could do the same to the Ukrainians article and... well, every article.
As for Alex's objections to using Pushkin, how do you identify a 'typical' Russian? Do you have access to the DNA of all the people you'd wouldn't object to being representative of "Russians" in order to establish that they are of the correct haplogroup? It's not my intention to be rude about the process of selection, but I honestly don't find these galleries to be of any intrinsic value. As for Alexander Nevsky (Rus' is not "Russia", no matter what kind of spin you try to put on it) and Anna Netrebko (Kuban Cossack ancestry with a Ukrainian surname?) being "Russians"... well, er... --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:46, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Your proposal? I find it absurd. Why? I don't need a reason because all these collages are built on opinions. As for Iryna, that's all a matter of opinion and many people like myself do not want Pushkin in the collage. Khazar (talk) 06:19, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

@Iryna Harpy Just a question: Do you like the current version more than mine? I mean, Losev, Prokhorov.... but no Tchaikovsky or Dostoevsky? That's mega bullshit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:22, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Воевода, if you wish to make bold changes to this section, please follow WP:BRD. I've reverted your new line-up of Russians featured in the infobox because there has been recent edit warring over who should feature and who should not. Please check talk pages before changing content as there may be information as to consensus regarding the content you wish to change. Thank you for your attention. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:14, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
I honestly believe that removing the collage altogether is the best choice for this situation. I would fully support such a proposition. Khazar (talk) 16:54, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
Support - This was done on the Romanians page for the same reasons: it becomes a sinkhole for editor time and energy and, of course, edit warring. Everyone who looks at such articles immediately wants to change someone to their own, personal favourite so there's a never-ending string of IP edits to contend with. It's not even a parameter in the ethnic group infobox and has just been deployed all over Wikipedia because someone saw it on other ethnic group page. In fact, it's an exercise in self-lauding which I'd love to see removed from the Ukrainians page... and, well, every ethnicity page. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 05:31, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

1,000,000 "Russians" in Israel.[edit]

What is "Russian"? Everyone from ex-Soviet lands? If in Israel there is 1,000,000 "Russians" than in Belarus it must be 10,000,000, in Russia 140 millions, in Ukraine 45,000,000, in Kazakhstan 18 millions, etc.

The reference 7 shows total number of immigrants to Israel from USSR and post-USSR. It doesn't show not how many citizens of Russian Federation are living in Israel and doesn't show how many ethnic Russians are living there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:35, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

That's a good point. At best, this figure only reflects the number of Russophones. Considering the number of Soviet Republics that existed, there is no indication of where the majority of the million immigrants came from. I'd consider this to be WP:OR working on assumptions. I could just as easily assume that only 5,000 of them were from Russian SFR. For the time being, I'll leave a template query next to the existing citation. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 21:23, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
It's better to get rid of it. This article is about an ethnic group and no sources mentioned the 1+ million Russians in Israel as Slavs while most of them mention them as Jews. Khazar (talk) 03:00, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
I'll just go bold and remove it. I'm predisposed to understanding the figure as meaning that they are predominantly Jews by ethnicity (and would probably perceive themselves as such) unless there's any RS to indicate otherwise. If anyone has objections based on RS, they're welcome to chime in here. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 03:21, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

I think the figure of 3,500,000 Russians living in Germany should be removed as well. The majority of immigrants from Russia in Germany are ethnic Germans (Russian Germans, ru:Немецкие переселенцы), and there is also a smaller community of Russian Jews (see ru:Контингентные_беженцы#Беженцы из СССР). As in Israel, ethnic Russians came usually as family members with them, however I suppose their number is by far lower than the total number of Russian immigrants. --Off-shell (talk) 15:51, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Catherine the Great[edit]

She shouldn't be included in this article, since this article is about the Russian ethnic group. Catherine the Great was not Russian. She was born a Prussian/German. Leading Russia does not make her Russian in the sense used in this article (ethnically). She converted from Lutheranism to Eastern Orthodoxy, and become fascinated with Russian culture - that's correct, but she wasn't Russian.

Therefore she should be removed from the box.

Nationality, Ethnicity, etc.[edit]

I found this topics extremely controversial, especially when it comes to big nations like Russians, etc. Everyone start to draws water to his own mill "No he's not X, he's Y", "He has 0,00000001% of Nigerian blood". That's pathetic. If we dig deep enough we can question also are these 80% Russians in Russia are actually of Russian ethincity? You know, there is no question about ethnic background in Russian census. They questioned only nationality. I'm of Ukranian ancestry but I call myself Russian. I'm not anthropologically different from some Russian. Am I Russian, or still Ukranian? What we should do, check up haplogroups of all who perceive themselves as "Russian", also dug up all graves and check them? I think that every article on ethnicity should be rewrited as article on nation and create much smaller separate articles on ethnicity without all these great figures, farts and whistles. (talk) 09:20, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

There IS a question about your ethnic group in Russian census. They ask you about your национальность which for people in Russia means ethnicity. And people reply accordingly: Tatars say they're are Tatars, Yakuts say they're Yakuts, Russians say they're are Russians. Just look at the results. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexxzz123 (talkcontribs) 12:34, 23 March 2015 (UTC)


@Al Khazar: What exactly is "unconstructive" about the infobox? You are aware that nearly all ethnic group articles have one, right? I fixed the persons depicted in chronological order, removed some that weren't actual Russians, added famous people missing, and it came out really good and should be kept. --Steverci (talk) 02:42, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

@Al Khazar: If you will not defend your reverts, I'm going to restore my edits. --Steverci (talk) 19:20, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
I don't negotiate with people who abuse sock puppets. You've caused a lot of trouble on other topics in Wikipedia and have been topic banned as a result. Don't let this one be another topic ban. Khazar (talk) 00:42, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
I don't abuse sock puppets; IP's,, and are not me. Regardless, please read Wikipedia:Don't remind others of past misdeeds. It is an accusation of bad faith, a personal attack, and an example of incivility. Again, defend your reverts or I will remove them. --Steverci (talk) 17:04, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
They all appear to be. Like I said, I don't have to defend anything since sock puppetry is not tolerable here on Wikipedia. Bring this up again and you'll find yourself at the center of a sock puppet investigation. Khazar (talk) 22:34, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Steverci, past misdeeds are overlooked unless you make it evident that you haven't actually learned anything from those mistakes, and are resuming the same behavioural problems. At the moment, it certainly looks as if you're becoming disruptive here and on the Romanians article, pushing for an image gallery there, also. Why are you obsessing about something there's been consensus to remove because it's proved to be a time and energy sinkhole for editors? What, according to you, makes it so important? --Iryna Harpy (talk) 23:43, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Iryna, accusing someone of WP:POVPUSH is uncivil. You clearly have no idea what is going on here and are exhibiting bad faith. Al Khazar has been reverting my edits without any reason and is now making accusations and personal attacks, and I've been very patient in trying to discuss this. And yet you accuse me of behavioural problems? --Steverci (talk) 02:14, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Iryna is well aware of the faults of having a collage in an Ethnic group info box. It's simply a waste of time and is like having flags in the infobox. The only difference is that the officials at Wikipedia haven't been as quick to pick up on how wasteful the former is like the latter. Khazar (talk) 04:44, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Steverci, you are being WP:DISRUPTive here, and on the Romanians article. As Khazar notes, I am very, very much aware as to what is going on. You've still not been able to make any arguments as to why a gallery/collage is advantageous. I've already spent my valuable time trying to establish why you want it back on the other article; now you expect me to engage with you further on non-arguments for the reintroduction here. Your to and fro-ing in trying to wear other editors down is now becoming downright WP:POINTy. Please present a solid argument based on policy and guidelines. If you can do so, then we'll all have something worth discussing. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 06:10, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

infobox pictures[edit]

I just briefly read the above discussion; can someone kindly explain why it is seemingly redudant to create a gallery of pictures of notable Russians here? Russian is both an ethnicity and a nationality in the strictest senses of the words, but this infobox is obviously ment for the ethnicity Russians,'aka Slavic Russians, aka natively East Slavic Russian speaking Russians.

I think this is all pretty common logic no? So could someone tell why the pictures are removed from the infobox?

Kind regards - LouisAragon (talk) 01:56, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm also curious about that issue. kazekagetr 08:15, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Please feel free to go through the talk page archives regarding this issue. A gallery has never been a parameter in the the 'ethnic group' infobox. It is still not a parameter, but something that someone had the bright idea of introducing to the infobox of one article for an ethnic group at some point. Other ethnic group articles decided that they like it because WP:ITSIMPORTANT and followed suit. With the number of articles the average Wikipedian has on their watchlist, it is an energy sinkhole spending half our time undoing changes to the gallery after various one-off contributors have come through and put their personal favourites into galleries, followed by edit warring between a number of users over who, what, why belongs in the gallery (but most prominently, never actually discussed).
Personally, I'm fed up with having to check whether the person added to the Latin American whatever ethnic group's gallery actually is of that ethnicity. As has also been discussed on the Romanians article, other long time editors agree that it's WP:NOTVALUABLE to waste editor time on articles that rarely see any real content development, but merely have their galleries played with because Wikipedia can is a resource anyone can edit... and do... constantly... frequently... irritatingly. We've had enough of the 'neglected article' syndrome, and the 'interested parties with their own ideas as to what constitutes an ethnicity' syndrome to call it a day on some articles. I'd like this to be applied across the board, but that's not likely to happen. If we're sick to death of content introduced to the article as not being worth the grief, effort, or importance, it reverts to being a WP:PAGEDECIDE issue. Editors maintaining the page have reached consensus that it's been given an adequate period of time to prove itself to be a liability. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 01:49, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
User:Iryna Harpy, get what you mean, and I can find myself in that rationale. If that's what the consensus demanded, then that is how it will be. I'd recommend adding that it's been discussed in a note under the Banner Shell though, so that we can avoid getting the same questions over and over. - LouisAragon (talk) 09:46, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Cheers, LouisAragon, for an excellent idea! I've become acclimatised to contributors not even bothering to look at the talk page, much less bother reading the talk page messages under the banner shell, that it didn't even occur to me. Not all regular editors, new contributors, or passing IP's are as diligent as you in actually paying attention to talk pages (I'm sure you're utterly stunned and amazed by this revelation Face-smile.svg)! I've now added a 'circular argument' template.
While I can also appreciate that such image galleries have the potential to be interesting and informative for readers, by their very nature they call for WP:OR decisions in establishing who constitutes a member of the ethnic group and who does not (how do you define an ethnic group: through DNA; self-identification by those who lived in a previous era that wouldn't recognise the concepts being applied; by how a more contemporary individual defines themselves?). The concept of ethnicity is far more complex to unravel than might superficially be imagined. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 04:38, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Iryna Harpy I'm happy that we're once again having the same idea about how it should be. Even more perfect that other numerous users agreed as well :) Thanks a lot for adding the note already under the banner shell btw!
I concur with you about the concept of ethnicity placing on Wiki as well. It's a very fluid concept in general, even sometimes in modern day/every day life, when discussed. Especially for such "continental" nations like Russia, it's rather difficult. Of course everyone knows that the Russian ethnic group is something that exists for a long time, but I guess this way is just for the best. Maybe some day when someone else will bring it up and many users will say they want a gallery back, then we can do that.
I think we should perhaps apply this same rationale for the galleries of Ukrainian people/Belorussian people as well, given how closely they and Russians are and were historically related (I don't think I need to waste a single word about this, especially for someone who's Ukrainian herself, haha) and the fact that there was no such country as Ukraine/Belorussia until just several decades ago. As you indeed say, the concept of "ethnicity" is a complex thing that can easily be adjusted given what conditions are prevalent.
In our era however, we can see that ethnicity is, to a noticeable degree, determined by (often ungrounded) nationalism.
- LouisAragon (talk) 06:22, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
I'd love to be able to apply the same principle to Ukrainians, etc... but the problem of identity issues are as equally entrenched there as on the majority of articles surrounding ethnicity. I've always avoided discussion regarding who is 'Ukrainian' and, therefore, 'appropriate' for the gallery there even if I consider entries there to be inappropriate. As with many of these articles, however, there are contributors/editors who do !vote for representative notables, therefore it's difficult to bring up a discussion as to its being OR (or wishful thinking). Considering that Eastern European articles fall under ARBEE sanctions, even bringing the topic up is perilous. I don't want to be the centre of an edit war, nor to be accused of having other POV ulterior motives. At the end of the day, so long as the regular editors for that article !vote for who is and isn't included, it's a challenge. It would be a positive move to initiate more community-level discussions as to who and what is actually being represented, but it would also be extremely problematic. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 06:58, 22 May 2015 (UTC)