Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Russia/Archive 6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 ← Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6

Requested move 13 January 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. (non-admin closure) ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 07:14, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

– Articles in Category:Defunct magazines published in Russia. Mass-proposing these because they are all historical journal titles being moved based on WP:COMMONNAME with Google Books Ngram as evidence.,

External links above are relevant Google Ngram charts. Russkaia rech for Moscow & Saint Petersburg share the same evidence link.

Capitalization: in every case the most common spelling also follows the native Russian form, with words after the first in lowercase, excepting proper names (in the instance of Mir Bozhii).

Background

All these names are likely derived from the original Russian in the same way.

Historical journal titles are most commonly cited by a spelling determined by the ALA-LC romanization for Russian system (a.k.a. the Library of Congress system). Many academic publications use a modified version in bibliographies without ligatures (e.g., Armi͡anskiĭ vestnik becomes Armianskiĭ vestnik), and in the main text without diacritics (Armianskii vestnik), and possibly with simplified endings (Armiansky vestnik) and leading Iu- and Ia- becoming Yu- and Ya-, etc. This modified LOC system is codified in:

  • J. Thomas Shaw, The transliteration of modern Russian for English-language publications, Wikidata Q104587676.

   —Michael Z. 22:52, 13 January 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. BD2412 T 06:12, 24 January 2023 (UTC)— Relisting. —usernamekiran (talk) 05:44, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

  • Support per multiple nomination. The twenty links provided as corroborative evidence are convincing. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 01:16, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
  • If I look at Ngrams the only conclusin I am able to make is that the number of citations is so low that it can not be used to determine what is the most common name. Seriously, if one name was cited 3 times and another one 5 times, which is the most common? Now, if I understand it correctly, the names of the articles were determined by romanization of the Russian names using WP:RUS. I do not understand what is wrong with that.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:20, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
    The Ngram docs say “we only consider ngrams that occur in at least 40 books.”[21] Can you refer to a specific example or two that we can examine more closely?
    It can be helpful to form an expression showing the proportional use, like this example that makes it clear one form prevailed with 60 to 90 percent of combined usage for over four decades.
    Were they named by WP:RUS? I don’t know, I doubt it, and I don’t think it matters much, or at all in cases like all of these where there is a clear COMMONNAME. That essay has permission but not consensus in my view. It corresponds to no standard, guaranteeing that its results will not be consistent with any real-world usage, and likely no editor has internalized its complex rules that require native knowledge of Russian. We’d probably be better off without it, and certainly would be by adopting a real, usable standard as the default romanization.  —Michael Z. 15:48, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
    1) 80% says nothing without absolute numbers. If it is 80% with 50 instances over all years it is just white noise. 2) If you do not like WP:RUS, which seems to follow from your remark, you should propose it for deletion and and suggest how we are going to deal with cases when there is no clear English name. Your method to determine the common name is clearly flawed. AllWikipedia articles on Russian subjects, including localities, personalia etc follow WP:COMMON, and, in the absence of WP:COMMON, they follow WP:RUS. This has been built up in the last 15 or so years by many editors and refers to probably dozens if not hundreds thousands of articles. Ymblanter (talk) 18:04, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
    1) WP:COMMONNAME asks for the “single, obvious name that is demonstrably the most frequently used for the topic by these sources,” which is an expression of relative frequency, not an absolute number. 80% is a high level of relative frequency. When you turn the smoothing down to 1 year and one name’s curve remains the highest for every year in the last 47,[22] that is an indicator of high frequency with low noise.
    It’s easily confirmed with a G Books search for 1976–2019:
    208 out of (208+75=283) = 73% of the total, or (208/75=2.77) 177% more than the other result.
    2) Good idea.
    What’s flawed how? What’s built up? There’s no evidence that a majority of Russian-derived article titles correspond to WP:RUS. There’s no deadline. Names that have been arbitrarily chosen (including those that happen to correspond to arbitrarily developed WP:RUS) will end up at their commonname sooner or later anyway, and there is good reason to believe that most of them will not correspond to the current WP:RUS.
    This mass page move is part of demonstrating that WP:RUS should be changed. Without such evidence, editors would just vote ILIKEIT and WP:RUS would remain arbitrary.  —Michael Z. 22:45, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
    Collect the evidence then before destroying the work of dozens of editors just because you do not like it. What you do it is pure disruption. Ymblanter (talk) 22:52, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
    I’ve collected and presented evidence above. Asking for input and consensus before moving articles to meet our guidelines is not “destruction” or “disruption.”
    As I said, if you have any specific concerns about any of these article titles, just let us know and I’m glad to examine them more closely.  —Michael Z. 23:15, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
    As I mentioned many times before, just presenting a search result proves nothing. To your other point, you also said "There’s no evidence that a majority of Russian-derived article titles correspond to WP:RUS". Well, investigate the question then and collect the evidence. This can be done by simple counting, and, as an active editor of this project for 12 years, I know it is correct. There are good reasons why we are using WP:RUS all this time. Ymblanter (talk) 23:22, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
  • Support particularly the lowercasing. I haven't looked deeply into the other issues. Dicklyon (talk) 06:58, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
  • Oppose the changes to transliteration per Ymblanter. There are thousands of obscure articles for which it's hard to properly determine the relative frequency. I wouldn't open this can of worms. Alaexis¿question? 20:38, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
    1) It’s not hard to determine the relative frequency, as I have done for these names. See the how-to guide, WP:SET. 2) Thousands of obscure articles are renamed every month. This is not new, and it is what leads to consensus and stability in article titles. The guideline WP:COMMONNAME explains why and WP:RM explains how. What can of worms?  —Michael Z. 21:03, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Ymblanter and WP:TITLECHANGES If an article title has been stable for a long time,[9] and there is no good reason to change it, it should not be changed. I fail to see that "good reason" here, and this is a pointless exercise of replacing one transcription with another, with no clear benefit. No such user (talk) 12:16, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
    Conforming to WP:TITLE and specifically WP:COMMONNAME are good reasons. WP:CONSISTENT capitalization is another.
    Some of the current spellings do not conform to WP:RUS. Some don’t reflect any systemic romanization method.
    TITLECHANGES is about seeking consensus for controversial titles. None of these are controversial, but I am seeking consensus, for the first time in all 20 cases.  —Michael Z. 15:31, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
    I do not see a single one which does not conform to WP:RUS. For the second one, Mir Bozhy could be an alt title, the rest are fully aligned with WP:RUS. Ymblanter (talk) 15:43, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
    Are you saying Mir Bozhiy does correspond to WP:RUS? No, it does not. And I see at least one other that doesn’t.  —Michael Z. 15:56, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
    The domain-specific guideline Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Titles of works#Translations also reinforces adherence to COMMONNAME.  —Michael Z. 16:25, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
    Sure, the argument is that these do not have COMMONNAME. Ymblanter (talk) 16:36, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
    Ah. Which ones and what is the evidence? You wrote “one name was cited 3 times and another one 5 times,” but I demonstrated that each of these spellings has been used much more than that, and clearly more than other spellings.  —Michael Z. 18:14, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
    13 of the 20 are classified as stubs, and the other 7 each have 13 to 50 total edits, and none of their titles have ever been discussed. The fact that they don’t conform to COMMONNAME is a good reason to discuss them.
    I welcome specific reasons to reconsider renaming any of these on the merits of the specific proposal, but opposing twenty separate changes for the sake of opposing change in general seems against the spirit of improving the encyclopedia.  —Michael Z. 20:05, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
    Because we don't see those changes as improving anything. No such user (talk) 11:02, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
    The policy explains why they are an improvement. Seems to me that the existence of many guides to romanization in Wikipedia: space supports the notion that there is consensus that such things provide benefits (too bad the one for Russian is not a consensus guideline that follows any best-practices standard). As I won’t change your mind, I’ll agree to disagree.  —Michael Z. 18:47, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
  • Oppose both capitalisation & spelling changes. The arguments for bypassing WP:RUS do not look convincing. Same for capitalisation, as it appears to change when proper Russian names are rendered in English, i.e. it's Crime and Punishment, not Crime and punishment. Specific to periodicals, compare with nGrams for Krasnaya Zvezda vs Krasnaya zvezda, where the former dominates the latter: link. --K.e.coffman (talk) 16:40, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
    I don’t want to bypass WP:RUS. We never get to WP:RUS because COMMONNAME comes first. (The essay WP:RUS doesn’t say when to use WP:RUS, but refers to the proposal lacking consensus WP:NCRUS, which starts by referring to COMMONNAME. It’s all trumped by WP:TITLE anyway which includes WP:CRITERIA and COMMONNAME.)
    I am not proposing moving Krasnaya Zvezda. The proposed capitalization is supported by each specific Ngram chart above. Some of them are close, and if you think any one is wrong, I can remove it from this proposal and file a separate RM.  —Michael Z. 17:52, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
The publications are quite obscure so COMMONNAME may not be as useful; WP:CONSISTENT should also be taken into account. For example, proposing that capitalisation be changed for some publications, but not for Mir Bozhiy, does not make much sense. That's why perhaps the more prominent publications, such as Novy Mir & Krasnaya Zvezda, are not included? See also: Category:Literary magazines published in Russia, where most of the titles shown are rendered with title case. In general, this RM, along with the RMs for obscure Russian localities ([23]), appears to be a solution in search of a problem. Debating minor spelling variations & and (partially) introducing a new capitalisation scheme does not seem to be a good use of community's time as the result would not significantly improve the readers' experience. --K.e.coffman (talk) 11:50, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
Mir Bozhii means “world of God” or “peace of God,” hence the capitalization. The Ngram link shows that usage supports this capitalization for this title only.
Currently, Russian-language journals articles’ capitalization is mixed. Changing individual ones to the most common and consistent capitalization is an improvement. If you’re saying this is evidence to create a convention or to change every single one, I won’t argue that someone could investigate that possibility.
Doing things better improves the reader’s experience. I don’t believe there’s a threshold of minimum impact required for changes: hundreds of individual articles are retitled daily, and I thought it would save time to do a batch instead. I agree a lot of debate against it without substantive objections is not a good use of the community’s time, but that was not my idea.  —Michael Z. 17:36, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
So what are you arguing is a good way to ensure these titles are at their best spelling and capitalization? Each should be RM’d separately? Only every single one must be RM’d together? Only a convention can be used for them and COMMONNAME not considered? Russian journals should never be retitled? You’re hinting this is the wrong way for you, so what is the right way?  —Michael Z. 17:41, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
Wikipedia already appears to have a capitalisation scheme for Russian-language periodicals. For example, Category:Literary magazines published in Russia only a few titles currently use sentence case; the rest, ~27, use title case. Likewise, in the Category:Russian-language_newspapers_published_in_Russia, 100% of multi-word titles (44 in all) use title case, rather than sentence case. I don't see a reason to change that, especially when this proposal would result in haphazard capitalisation. --K.e.coffman (talk) 19:25, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
Not a “scheme.” That is just evidence of a combination of coincidence and the naïve assumption that nineteenth-century Russian-language journals are referred by reliable sources the same way that modern English-language magazines are. As you can see, none of the 20 titles we’re considering has been renamed as subject of a discussion, and I see no evidence that anyone has followed any scheme in that category.  —Michael Z. 19:39, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
And it’s not 100% in that category: Pavlovo-Posadskiye izvestiya is titled sentence-case.
Some have mandatory caps in place names, including Delovoy Peterburg, Nedvizhimost Belorussii, Sovetskaya Rossiya, Sovetskaya Sibir, Sovetsky Sakhalin, Vecherniy Krasnoyarsk, Vecherniy Murmansk, Vecherniy Novosibirsk, and Vecherniy Stavropol, so a significant percentage is “undetermined.”
Some do not correspond to WP:RUS. Some are translated into English. At least one is just misspelled. This indicates the absence of a universal scheme.  —Michael Z. 19:46, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
Let's call it a convention then, whereas the vast majority of the Russian-language periodicals are rendered with names that use title case, not sentence case, however "naïve" this approach may be. In the above example of Category:Russian-language_newspapers_published_in_Russia, excluding titles that use mandatory caps, 1 out of ~28 publications use sentence case; the rest use title case. So it does not make sense to give up on the existing convention, in favor of a haphazard capitalization approach based on alleged COMMONNAMEs -- which may or may not exist given the small sample size. My opinion remains unchanged. --K.e.coffman (talk) 22:56, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
Such a survey, if large enough, could be evidence of prevalence in editors’ historical choices, but there’s no indication if these were anything but random, and if not still doesn’t constitute a rationale. But on its own it is not evidence of any approach or a convention which implies a rationale, agreement, or standard.
But since you mention conventions, I checked:
  • Wikipedia:Naming conventions (books) (there’s no convention for periodicals and the one on comics is mute on capitulation): The titles of books (usually meaning the title of the literary work contained in the book) are capitalized by the same convention that governs other literary and artistic works such as plays, films, paintings etc.
  • Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Capital letters/Titles of Works: Capitalization in foreign-language titles varies, even over time within the same language; generally, retain the style of the original for modern works, and follow the usage in current[e] English-language reliable sources for historical works.
    • (Note e also recommends Google Ngram: In MoS's own wording, "recent", "current", "modern", and "contemporary" in reference to sources and usage should usually be interpreted as referring to reliable material published within the last forty years or so. In the consideration of name changes of persons and organizations, focus on sources from the last few years. For broader English-language usage matters, about forty years is typical. While style guides with fewer than five years in print have not been in publication long enough to have had as much real-world impact as those from around 2000–2015 (on which MoS is primarily based), the corpora used for Google ngrams are updated through 2019, and we frequently rely on what they indicate from the late 20th century and onward.)
  • Wikipedia:Naming conventions (capitalization)#Capitalization of expressions borrowed from other languages implies that foreign capitalization rules are generally applied.
 —Michael Z. 00:53, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for these. In this environment, it's instructive to look at the way that major publications are capitalised, so I added Novy Mir/Novy mir/Novii Mir to the nGram of 'one for the entries in this RM: [24]. One can see that both capitalisation approaches are used for Novy Mir, but the title cap version is more prominent. While Russkaya Beseda becomes indistinguishable from Russkaia beseda because it's much more obscure. It does not make sense for the capitalisation to differ between articles in the same category, based on limited number of samples to argue common name. It's unclear to me if the suggested names offer "the best spelling and capitalization". I don't see a compelling reason to move these titles while leaving Novy Mir, Krasnaya Zvezda, and the rest of the entries in Category:Russian-language_newspapers_published_in_Russia alone. --K.e.coffman (talk) 05:38, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
I don’t see the point of comparing the two different names. Are you sure novyi mir isn’t used for other meanings?
Anyway you missed some systematic spellings.[25] —Michael Z. 06:19, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
  • Support lowercasing. Oppose spelling changes that are not consistent with WP:RUS (as bad as that is). As User:Ymblanter pointed out above, the n of sources on these topics is too low to violate the house standard. —  AjaxSmack  04:55, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
    For all 20? Which guideline is this n from and what is n?  —Michael Z. 05:16, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
    No, not for all 20. As this was presented as a mass nomination, I only checked five. If you want the individual merits of each one considered, separate nominations would be a better course. The n derives from my own judg(e)ment and is higher than the numbers given in the discussion above. Sources for these journals are relatively few and usage is mixed. In addition, in some cases like Osvobozhdeni(y)e there are a huge number of false positives; in others like Adskay/ia pochta and Russkay/ia beseda the hits are on topic, but the number of ALA-LC is increased by transliterated Russian texts and bibiliography entries in sources that use that as their house romanization. Considering all of this, I see no strong compelling reason to ignore Wikipedia's own house transliteration. (Cf. if you care the strict adherence to WP:PINYIN for equally obscure Chinese topics even if sources overwhelmingly use Wade-Giles.) —  AjaxSmack  05:52, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
    Are the “false positives” also romanizations of the Russian word osvobozhdenie? Then they are not false. No one sets out to spell a word one way when it’s in a title and another when it’s not.
    Also not sure what you mean by the number is “increased by.” It is in part comprised of. If by “house style” you’re saying that consistent spelling is used by sources, then that is part of usage to be counted, not something that disqualifies it from being counted. (On top of that it points to adopting a standard.)
    Pinyin and Wade-Giles are standards. WP:RUS is an amateur system based on ILIKEIT for no reason, and its only definable characteristics are 1) it is not just transliteration but has complicated rules, and 2) it corresponds to no standard, and therefore is less likely to hit on the COMMONNAME than a one-line else. Compare the consensus guideline WP:CHINESE which refers to standards and academic practice to the essay WP:RUS.
    I was surprised that every one of these has hundreds up of examples of usage indexed by Google books, and every one has a clearly most commonly used one.
    So is your own acceptable n 1,000? 10,0000? Does it jive with any RM decisions that have found “no single most commonly used name”? —Michael Z. 15:35, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
    I agree with your assessment of WP:RUS romanization and would likely support replacing it with a real one if the chance arose. —  AjaxSmack  04:26, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move at Talk:En-ghe#Requested move 16 February 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:En-ghe#Requested move 16 February 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 16:40, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Nikolai Sokov

I created a draft for Nikolai Sokov. Any help with sourcing would be appreciated. Thank you, Thriley (talk) 01:57, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure he passes the notability criteria, please review WP:PROF and add more sources as necessary. Alaexis¿question? 20:40, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Second Cold War (March 2023)

Discussion about maps representing Russia and Ukraine has been started. Link: Talk:Second Cold War#Maps in the Russo-Ukrainian War section. George Ho (talk) 14:46, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

RFC on general & party elections

An RFC about the intros to general & party elections, is being held. GoodDay (talk) 16:32, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Category and description changes in biographies

I've noticed that an editor is removing many articles from "Russian" categories and placing them into "Russian Empire" categories, eg from Category:Russian revolutionaries to Category:Revolutionaries from the Russian Empire. Has there been any discussion among WP:RUSSIA editors about these changes? They are nested categories, so broadly speaking a person is only supposed to be in the most specific one, but since "Russian" is supposed to indicate both geographic and ethnic origin I don't know that this is a change that ought to be made by people unfamiliar with the subject matter. It's also leading to some strange constructions in the articles themselves, like Petr Maslov (economist), whose article now describes him as "a Russian Empire and Soviet economist and agriculturist" (with wikilink to Russian Empire), instead of "a Russian economist" (with wikilink to Russian people). -- asilvering (talk) 19:20, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for 152 mm howitzer M1943 (D-1)

152 mm howitzer M1943 (D-1) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 00:52, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Volodymyr Saldo#Requested move 6 March 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Volodymyr Saldo#Requested move 6 March 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 13:53, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

FAR for Vkhutemas

I have nominated Vkhutemas for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the 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 "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 21:37, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

FAR for Regulamentul Organic

User:Buidhe has nominated Regulamentul Organic for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the 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 "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:36, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Project-independent quality assessments

Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:44, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Federal subject infoboxes

I have noticed that a number of infoboxes for the articles on federal subjects were changed from Template:Infobox Russian federal subject to Template:Infobox settlement. Take for example Bashkortostan which was changed in this edit. It seems this was to include 2021 census figures for population but there is some missing information and inconsistencies with other articles. Mellk (talk) 14:58, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

No, these need to be restored, and we also should find some way to include the 2021 population to the infobox (I could not see how to do it in a couple of minutes, but it should not be difficult anyway). Ymblanter (talk) 19:36, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Onion dome

Onion dome has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Hog Farm Talk 14:26, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Katyusha rocket launcher

Katyusha rocket launcher has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 01:36, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Soviet Empire#Requested move 26 April 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Soviet Empire#Requested move 26 April 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – MaterialWorks 16:21, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Ivan III of Russia#Requested move 5 May 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Ivan III of Russia#Requested move 5 May 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Favonian (talk) 09:06, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Rostov-on-Don

Good morning. The paragraph "Notable people" is organized and structured very badly, to the point that I would rather not change anything, because I could be wrong, since in some parts it is not understandable at all, and in all other parts almost nothing is understood. For example, it's not clear (due to the incorrect or lack of use of commas, to distinguish one known person from another) who is who (e.g., the name of a singer is present, but his genre (i.e. 'classical') is not specified; the singer in question is Yuri Bashmet; its genre is not "pop", but "classical" (within the subparagraph "Musicians, composers and singers")). Could someone take care of the paragraph I refer to and put it in order? Page: Rostov-on-Don. JackkBrown (talk) 22:13, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:List of larger indigenous peoples of Russia#Requested move 19 May 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:List of larger indigenous peoples of Russia#Requested move 19 May 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 13:46, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Russian-speaker needed

Hello, I need the help of someone who speaks Russian. Context at Talk:Cobasna ammunition depot#Four years. Does this source [26] say that the 1411th ammunition depot was in Voznesensk from July 1945 to May 1949, or that it took that timeframe to move it from Voznesensk to Cobasna and that we therefore don't know when was it first moved to Voznesensk? Super Ψ Dro 07:43, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

It literally says that the depot was being moved to Voznesensk from July 1945 to May 1949, and that the depot is now located in Cobasna. Ymblanter (talk) 07:15, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
Would it then be accurate to say that the depot was located in Kungur on 28 July 1941–July 1945, in Voznesensk in July 1945–May 1949 and in Cobasna from May 1949 onwards? Super Ψ Dro 08:32, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
Approximately yes. My understanding is that 1945 to 1949 was the transition period, when the depot was being moved. I do not think the source goes into more details. Ymblanter (talk) 08:48, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
Ok, thank you for your help. Super Ψ Dro 09:05, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Ruble vs rouble

There is a discussion at Talk:Ruble#"Rouble" - permissible or mandatory for BrE? that may interest members of this project.  Stepho  talk  11:59, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

My opinion is that "ruble" is specifically North American English and that unless an article is tagged "use American/Canadian English" then "rouble" is to be preferred as this is used in more forms of English than "ruble". Non-American sources almost universally use "rouble", such as the European Central Bank (and the English websites of all EU national central banks), Reuters, the Oxford English Dictionary, and Goznak. 92.21.251.88 (talk) 12:42, 31 May 2023 (UTC) Ban-evasion by Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TheCurrencyGuy 74.73.224.126 (talk) 14:20, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
Much of the support for "ruble" over "rouble" on Wikipedia outside of articles specifically written in North American English seems to be a result of regional bias and some degree of WP:IDONTLIKEIT. A certain editor who had something of an obsession with trying to force one of the spellings depended entirely on using American sources and cherrypicking minor uses elsewhere (which were usually direct quotes from a specific person or fringe sources of little overall importance). 92.9.7.4 (talk) 05:50, 3 June 2023 (UTC) Ban-evasion by Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TheCurrencyGuy 74.73.224.126 (talk) 14:20, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Merger proposal

There is currently a discussion on whether to merge Russian Social Democratic Labour Party (Mensheviks) into Mensheviks underway here, for which input from members of the WikiProject would be very valuable. Felix QW (talk) 17:23, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Merging Genocide of the Ingrian Finns into Deportation of the Ingrian Finns

There is currently a discussion ongoing on whether to merge Genocide of the Ingrian Finns back into Deportation of the Ingrian Finns underway here, for which further input would be very valuable. Felix QW (talk) 18:08, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Using an image non-freely licensed on the Russian Wikipedia here?

As the title states, I was wondering if ru:Файл:Фонтан Урта-Булак 1963.jpg could be used on this Wikipedia? I am writing an article for the Urta-Bulak gas field and I feel like the image would serve as a useful illustration. I am unsure of how to navigate copyright surrounding images, so any help is appreciated. TIA. X750. Spin a yarn? Articles I've screwed over? 02:51, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

It is used on a WP:fair use basis in ru-wiki. To be on the safe side I would re-upload it to en-wiki as the fair use criteria may be different for different wikipedias. Alaexis¿question? 12:55, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
Yes, I think so too. Do you think it is a good image, however? There are other examples on the Internet, but apparently it is from a documentary called "Extinguishing with a Nuclear Charge. 1074 Days of Burning", but, I cannot find the original. Keen to hear your thoughts. X750. Spin a yarn? Articles I've screwed over? 10:48, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

WikiProject Russia template parameters

Hello! I've been editing many WikiProject Russia templates at the talk pages of Russian city/town/village articles, and I have two questions. Firstly, does |humgeo=yes belong in every city article (e.g., Talk:Dve Viski)? And secondly, is it also acceptable to add the |imageneeded= parameter to articles that lack images? Thank you. Nythar (💬-🍀) 21:42, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Pinging Ezhiki and Slon02, who are active in this WikiProject. Nythar (💬-🍀) 13:32, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for working on these, Nythar! All cities (and populated places in general) are within scope of "human geography", so if you see a humgeo parameter missing, please add it. And also "yes" on the second question (although I'm not sure how many people are actively working on finding/adding images, but at least it'll be tagged). Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); June 23, 2023; 13:36 (UTC) 13:36, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

AS-28

I've suggested that Russian deep submergence rescue vehicle AS-28 be split to Rescue of AS-28, as the majority of the article is about its rescue, so should exist as an accident article instead of a sub article. For the discussion, please see Talk:Russian deep submergence rescue vehicle AS-28 -- 64.229.90.172 (talk) 23:55, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:2022–2023 Dnieper campaign#Requested move 29 June 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:2022–2023 Dnieper campaign#Requested move 29 June 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – MaterialWorks 09:53, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:2022–2023 western Russia attacks#Requested move 24 June 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:2022–2023 western Russia attacks#Requested move 24 June 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Sennecaster (Chat) 00:05, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Input requested

There is a discussion at the Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities on July 14 about the "Age of majority and Russian monarchs". If you can contribute that would be great. Regards, --Thinker78 (talk) 23:58, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Translation check please

Hello, I'm working my way through List_of_people_with_bipolar_disorder to check that the referencing is suitable for all the people on the list. For a Russian rapper, Oxxxymiron, there is the following link - https://www.forbes.ru/forbeslife/445803-oksimiron-vypustil-mikstejp-so-starymi-trekami-smutnoe-vrema-vmesto-novogo-al-boma Google translate says there's nothing in that article about bipolar disorder but I know not to trust Google translate so I was wondering if anyone in your project would have the time to confirm whether the link says anything about bipolar? Red Fiona (talk) 23:54, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

It doesn't but Oxxxymiron did say he suffers from it [27]. I don't know if it's enough for the inclusion in the list. Alaexis¿question? 06:06, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for checking. I think what I'll do is replace the reference with the other one, and stick a better reference needed template next to it. Thank you again. Red Fiona (talk) 23:26, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

"There are 5 streets."

This exact sentence shows up in a lot of Russian village/locality/selo articles, sometimes with a citation and sometimes not. I've been changing the "5" to "five" per MOS:NUM, got 36 today, and am beginning to doubt whether it's even true. Can anyone who reads Russian or knows about rural civic planning shed some light on the situation (or could someone who runs bots mass delete the string if it's a lie)? InedibleHulk (talk) 04:30, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

I think that these articles were created automatically and just state the number of streets a given settlement has. It's not necessarily five, Plishki has only four, for example. Alaexis¿question? 06:40, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
That's a relief. But even there, how does the autocreator know? Is there a database? InedibleHulk (talk) 07:04, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
Yes, I'm pretty sure you can download it yourself here https://fias.nalog.ru/Frontend. Alaexis¿question? 09:45, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
I won't, but thanks, good to know! InedibleHulk (talk) 22:10, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
I'm not even sure this is a fact worth including, referenced or not. The population count gives a far more accurate estimation of the rural locality's size than the number of streets (which can range from 1–2 houses to hundreds anyway).—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); July 20, 2023; 14:03 (UTC) 14:03, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Requested merge at Talk:Russian hussars#Merge proposal 1 April 2023

An editor has requested a merge at Talk:Russian hussars#Requested merge 1 April 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Raulois (talk) 21:54, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Mikhail Fedorovich von Schultz rewrite

I have rewritten the article based on the information already present in said article, as such I need someone proficient in Russian to ensure that my rewrite is at least comparable to the source texts. If possible, also verify that said sources are reliable (some websites are only archived) and replace/remove those sources which are not.

Thank you/Спасибо! 123Writer talk 14:21, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Another discussion at Talk:Second Cold War

The matter of the {{globalize}} tag in the Second Cold War article is discussed. More inputs are welcome there. Link: Talk:Second Cold War#Remove "globalize" tag? George Ho (talk) 22:49, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

POV at Russia–Africa Summit 2023

This article reads like a (bad) translation of a Kremlin press release. I'm not very competent in this area, so I bring it here that knowledgeable editors can have a look. Thanks! --Randykitty (talk) 14:55, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Indeed, there are sentences like The second summit Russia-Africa is being challenging and critical one for Russia after several rounds of unilateral sanctions, multipolarity world, and new hegemony for equal treated partners happen rooted by west counterparts to support Russo-Ukrainian war since February 2022 ago. This summit has been received any challenges and obstacles doubled by several occasion provoked and insults by western countries, especially pressure towards the leaders of most African nations to reduce, anticipated, or ignored to attend this summit, especially from former western colonizer in African continent to ensure their grips in Africa, like US, UK, Finland, dan France. I'm also not going to be able to do much here, but someone certainly should at the least clean up the English. I'm not even entirely sure what those sentences are supposed to mean.--Ermenrich (talk) 15:30, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
I toned it down a bit, pls free to copyedit. Since the summit will apparently continue, more POV edits could be introduced, but I added the article to my watchlist. Ymblanter (talk) 15:08, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Timeline of Kaliningrad#Requested move 19 July 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Timeline of Kaliningrad#Requested move 19 July 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 14:34, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Maps to include in infobox of Russia

There is a discussion at Talk:Russia#Removal of maps about the inclusion of several maps in the infobox. Your input in the discussion is appreciated. Regards,--Thinker78 (talk) 02:37, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

The picture

No coat of arms found, why?

That's sort of odd there's no heraldic stuff or coat of arms (e.g. the two-headed bird) is used for "WikiProject RUSSIA" logo, unlike many other "WikiProject x" logos. Профессор кислых щей (talk) 13:39, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

If you want to try your hand at designing a new, better logo, by all means go for it :) Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); August 1, 2023; 16:05 (UTC) 16:05, 1 August 2023 (UTC)


Credibility bot

As this is a highly active WikiProject, I would like to introduce you to Credibility bot. This is a bot that makes it easier to track source usage across articles through automated reports and alerts. We piloted this approach at Wikipedia:Vaccine safety and we want to offer it to any subject area or domain. We need your support to demonstrate demand for this toolkit. If you have a desire for this functionality, or would like to leave other feedback, please endorse the tool or comment at WP:CREDBOT. Thanks! Harej (talk) 18:07, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

DEFAULTSORT for mediaeval Russian nobility

Right now, it makes no sense: Ivan the Young is sorted under Young, Rostislav of Tmutarakan under Tmutarakan, a majority of Category:Yurievichi family under their patronymics, etc. Perhaps someone can run a script and erase DEFAULTSORT from all Russians who lived before the 14th century and therefore couldn't possibly have a family name, and additionally for all "X the Y" and "X of Y" names, where Y is either a nickname or an estate name, but cannot possibly be a family name. 147.234.72.52 (talk) 21:01, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Bortkiewicz' nationality

There is an edit war and accompanying discussion at Talk:Sergei Bortkiewicz regarding whether Bortkiewicz should be described in the lead as Russian, Ukrainian, or possibly a compromise solution. The talk also lacks a clear consensus on whether Russian or Ukrainian place names should be used in the biography section. I'm soliciting input from this Wikiproject and WP:WikiProject Ukraine in an effort to build community consensus. 167.102.146.19 (talk) 20:24, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Input needed - Talk:Kievan_Rus'#Iranian_Poliane

There is a discussion about the possible Iranian/Sarmatian origin of Poliane. It's not clear what the scholarly consensus is, so inputs would be helpful. Alaexis¿question? 11:21, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Abkhazia#Requested move 28 July 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Abkhazia#Requested move 28 July 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 19:12, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Allegations of genocide of Ukrainians in the Russian invasion of Ukraine/Archive 1#Requested move 4 August 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Allegations of genocide of Ukrainians in the Russian invasion of Ukraine/Archive 1#Requested move 4 August 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 08:50, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Discussion at Template talk:WikiProject Russia § Broken with B-class

 You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:WikiProject Russia § Broken with B-class. CLYDE TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE 07:03, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

To save you a click: I managed to fix it. CLYDE TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE 07:24, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Requested deletion of Dmitry Strashnov

Greetings, all. Could someone from the project, please, assess the sources in the Russian article? Are they reliable? And, if so, could we have some partial, at least, translation of the text in those sources that supports the subject's notability? Thanks. -The Gnome (talk) 13:07, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

There is only one source in the article, and the source is reliable. The article pretty much follows the source. Ymblanter (talk) 01:49, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Korenizatsiia#Requested move 21 August 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Korenizatsiia#Requested move 21 August 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. —usernamekiran (talk) 21:05, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Russian Manchuria (Russia)#Requested move 15 August 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Russian Manchuria (Russia)#Requested move 15 August 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. —usernamekiran (talk) 22:20, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Avua-Siav Leo Nelson#Requested move 30 August 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Avua-Siav Leo Nelson#Requested move 30 August 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 20:47, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Also, please see: Talk:Leonid Alfonsovich Ostrovski, Talk:Dmitri N. Smirnov (footballer), and Talk:Artyom Aleksandrovich Smirnov ASUKITE 20:51, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Russian Empire subdivisions' translations

​​​For the subdivisions of the Russian Empire, I suggest using an {{efn}} note for multiple translations; or if there's only a Russian translation, to put it simply in parenthesis. In regards to the Russian translation itself, since the subdivisions would be mentioned in Russian literature and texts printed prior to the orthographic reform in 1917–18, we should include the pre-reform orthography alongside the modern Russian translation in the note, but use modern Russian everywhere else in the article including in the infobox. For example, here are the Brestsky uezd's translations which contain a Russian and Belarusian translation inside an {{efn}} note:

Code:

{{efn|{{bulletedlist|{{lang-ru|Брестский уезд}}, {{lang-ru|label=<small>[[pre-reform orthography]]</small>|Брестскій уѣздъ}}|{{lang-be|Брэсцкі павет}}}}}}

Appears in the note as:

However, where the modern and pre-reform Russian spellings are identical, there shant be a need to add the latter template – for example, see the translation in Dagestan Oblast. Also, needless to say, the Russian romanisation should be done in accordance with WP:RUS (redundant if the article title is the romanised Russian translation). Moreover, there is a consensus against using stress marks, at least in this niche area. Let me know if you have any thoughts/suggestions. Best, – Olympian loquere 08:42, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

I am fine with this, and I do not think the stress marks are needed, though users would add them anyway. Ymblanter (talk) 08:56, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
Ymblanter, I vaguely recall some weeks ago stumbling upon a discussion wherein users were trying to form a consensus against using stress marks / pronunciation diacritics for Russian translations, are you aware of it? Best, – Olympian loquere 12:02, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
Yes, I remember about as much, and I think there was no consensus, but I do not remember where it was. WT:MOS? Ymblanter (talk) 12:04, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
Found it: the outcome of the RfC was "there is a discernible consensus to generally omit stress marks" and "[the RFC proposal] re-iterates existing policies like WP:COMMONNAME and MOS:DIACRITICS. This discussion establishes that stress marks in Cyrillic should be used in accordance with those policies, that is, only where the best-quality English language sources demonstrate that their use is generally accepted as a best practice." I haven't seen any sources using stress marks for the uezd translations so I don't see why they should be included in this case. – Olympian loquere 12:38, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
I agree with you, my point is that users who are unaware of this consensus (and some would not even care about consensus) would add stress marks, and a few people who try top impose consensus would have to watch all these articles. Ymblanter (talk) 12:50, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
Olympian, thank you for pointing out that RfC; I totally missed, having been on an extended wikibreak and all. I do think much of the reasoning in support of the removal of stress marks, at least from the Russian translation of the article's title, was based on a rather silly premise (stress marks in Cyrillic should be used... only where the best-quality English language sources demonstrate that their use is generally accepted as a best practice, seriously? Is there one English-language source in existence, outside of the realm of language study, where this is the case?) Plus, anyone trying to learn how to read Cyrillic will learn about stress marks pretty much on that same day, but pretending that everyone can parse IPA or learn it in a jiffy is a rather bold assumption. I'd be all for revisiting this; the RfC made some valid points, but the overall outcome is just too drastic.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); August 3, 2023; 19:03 (UTC) 19:03, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
That looks pretty good.
Should we not list the appropriate languages in alphabetical order? Belarusian-Estonian-Kazakh-Russian-Ukrainian-Uzbek, etcetera.
Should the use of efn be mandated? Why not normally list one or two languages in the lead, as is usual, and only bury the additional obsolete spelling in a note? Obviously there may be exceptions where an article has a “Name” section, too.  —Michael Z. 14:37, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
I'd be OK with using alpha order all else being equal. But Russian should come first simply because the units being discussed were a part of the Russian Empire, and the local language(s) should come next (except, obviously, for cases where a unit has been inherited from the Russian Empire but continued to exist in the successor entity). Everything else that's relevant for other reasons can be alphabetical no problem.
Pre-reform spelling should definitely be included (if only because so many good sources are pre-1917). If having it in the lede is too visually straining, it can always be made into a footnote annotating the modern spelling; I have no problem with that.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); August 3, 2023; 19:03 (UTC) 19:03, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
The national languages should come first, simply because the Russian empire was a foreign empire.  —Michael Z. 05:49, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
Russian should come first simply because it was the language that was forced upon national populations and, as a result, the language in which the majority of the sources will be in. Putting national languages first, albeit a minor decision, is a step towards whitewashing history. You can't have it both ways!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); August 4, 2023; 13:44 (UTC) 13:44, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
(And just to clarify, I'm talking strictly about the Russian Empire here; not about the modern occupied regions. With those, putting Russian first only makes sense if a separate article about the occupied territory exists).—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); August 4, 2023; 13:47 (UTC) 13:47, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your thoughts. I definitely think the {{efn}} template is useful for listing multiple translations without cluttering the lead, it's done well in Crimea, for example. In regards to the order of translations, I think the official (Russian) translation first should come first followed by the translations of prevalent linguistic groups. Exceptions can be made for more detailed such articles with "Name" sections, though this is unlikely to be the case for the majority of these articles. – Olympian loquere 22:59, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
“Prevalent linguistic groups” sounds like some kind of infection. They’re actually the nations.
”official (Russian) translation” — what?  —Michael Z. 05:45, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
I think (and correct me if I'm wrong), Olympian means the official Russian name of the administrative unit. The one which is romanized (and used as the title) in absence of an established common English name. Which is another good argument for putting Russian first—romanizing the name in the national language would make no sense, because no matter how obscure the romanized Russian name might be, the variant based on the local language is going to be even less common.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); August 4, 2023; 13:52 (UTC) 13:52, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
Thank you, Ezhiki, that's exactly what I meant – it's the same reason that the German translation precedes the Polish translation in Province of Posen. Russian was the official/state language of the Russian Empire—which established and abolished these subdivisions—so it makes sense to put it first as it would be the most widely used in publications mentioning these subdivisions. By "linguistic groups", I refer to the results of the 1897 census which didn't indicate the inhabitants' nationality, rather, the inhabitants' native language. – Olympian loquere 00:09, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
Well is it “official language” or “most widely used”?
It’s not so much that Russian was official, but that other languages were suppressed and denigrated: Ukrainian was banned in print and public performances from the 1860s, for example. Privileging the imperial language arbitrarily seems inappropriate to me.
Russian is most widely used in what set of publications? Do you mean what was published in Moscow is always more important to readers than how, for example, Georgians, Kazakhs, or Crimean Tatars referred to their ancestral homelands and places they inhabited? How do you know that’s so? And how does that relate to presenting it for readers? Again, is this not arbitrarily privileging the imperial language over that of the subaltern?
Please review WP:BIAS if you’re not familiar with it. These are articles about places that were in an empire for some period of time. We should not write about them from the POV of the empire.
I would prefer to alphabetize the list of foreign names.  —Michael Z. 01:10, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
That's precisely the point I'm trying to make—sources in Russian are prevalent because local languages were often suppressed and denigrated. Sources, however, are sources; as long as they meet our reliability guidelines, we'll use what we have. Just because Russian was artificially elevated above local languages does not necessarily make the sources in Russian unusable or less preferable; sources are judged on their own merits. And in the end, most of them are going to be in Russian, which makes putting a local language first look like you're trying to make a point; especially if you make this practice into a guideline. WP:BIAS works both ways, you know!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); August 31, 2023; 01:57 (UTC) 01:57, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
Except in practice it’s imposing an anachronistic view by stereotyping the form and interpretation of sources. For example, the Ukrainian gubernias included “Chernigov,” “Kiev,” and “Kharkov.” But there is a firm, guideline-based consensus to use the spellings Chernihiv, Kyiv, and Kharkiv for these names.
In the case of the name Kyiv, we don’t even bother going through that exercise, but have blatantly WP:VOTEd without any rationale or relation to the guidelines to create the arbitrary WP:KYIV “historical articles” exception in defiance of the general consensus for the main article’s title, purely based on personal preferences. In fact, sources on history use the spelling Kyiv more often than general sources did when we renamed the main article.[28][29]  —Michael Z. 06:34, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
  • I support this and agree with including Russian first followed by alphabetical order of other relevant languages. Mellk (talk) 17:10, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Editing issues at Russian undesirable organizations law

An IP editor has been adding some questionable edits to the main table in Russian undesirable organizations law. Some organisations have had their names changed to non-English scripts, the date formats had been changed, and some entries have references that only link to their official website, which is not what references are meant for. I already reverted the changes once due to the issues, but the IP editor is adding it back despite the issues raised. I don't want to touch the article because I fear I may get into trouble for edit warring, hence I am asking here for assistance, analysis, whatever. --Minoa (talk) 17:03, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

I've checked a couple of newly added references and they seem to be okay, that is, they confirm the designation of certain organisation as undesirable ([30], [31]). These seem to be valuable additions, so I don't think the changes should be reverted wholesale. I agree that we should use the names of the articles and the date formats as per MOS:DATE. I'll leave a note at the talk page. Alaexis¿question? 18:50, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
I have restored the original date format and I wonder if it is okay to restore the original organisation names? If the IP editor tries to revert it again, I don't know what to do. --Minoa (talk) 19:42, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
@Alaexis and Ymblanter: can you please help me to answer the IP editor's questions at User talk:2A02:810D:13C0:3792:78A0:3A8:E0DA:E6D9? Gonna need to take a break because of other projects. --Minoa (talk) 06:48, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Russian patriotic lessons

Hello, the so-called Conversations about important things is now in its second year and I feel that I would like collaborative help in improving the article so that it can go to the article space. It appears I'm good with tables, but not always with the text, especially when I am trying to address my doomscrolling problem. The draft can be found at User:Minoa/Propaganda and the notes are at User talk:Minoa#Russian_propaganda lessons help. Best, --Minoa (talk) 09:25, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

I can't help you with writing at the moment, but I've reviewed it and left a few comments at the draft's talk page. This is certainly an important topic! Alaexis¿question? 12:11, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Wagner Line#Requested move 31 August 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Wagner Line#Requested move 31 August 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 16:24, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Grand Duchy of Moscow#Requested move 19 August 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Grand Duchy of Moscow#Requested move 19 August 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. —usernamekiran (talk) 10:29, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Input needed at Talk:Ukrainian language#Little Russian language

There is currently a dispute about whether verifiable references to Ivan Kotliarevsky, Ivan Vahylevych, Pylyp Morachevskyi (and possibly others) calling the language Little Russian before the 1860s should be included in the article, or excluded. Crash48 (talk) 16:50, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Who is the author of Dark Eyes (Очи Чёрные)?

A discussion Talk:Dark Eyes (Russian song)#Sindo Garay got stalled and can benefit from extra eyes looking at the issue. In short, some Cuban musician in his interview apparently claimed the authorship of very well-known Dark Eyes (Russian song). No independent claims (either confirming or denying it) exist, but Lute88 insists on the current version of the text that describes this WP:EXTRAORDINARY claim based on the interview with the claiming side alone (primary, non-independent source). If you are interested, please join the discussion using the link in the first sentence (Talk:Dark Eyes (Russian song)#Sindo Garay). Викидим (talk) 06:02, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

Women in Green's 5th Edit-a-thon

Hello WikiProject Russia:

WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-long Good Article Edit-a-thon event in October 2023!

Running from October 1 to 31, 2023, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) edit-a-thon event with the theme Around the World in 31 Days! All experience levels welcome. Never worked on a GA project before? We'll teach you how to get started. Or maybe you're an old hand at GAs – we'd love to have you involved! Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to women and women's works (e.g., books, films) during the event period. We hope to collectively cover article subjects from at least 31 countries (or broader international articles) by month's end. GA resources and one-on-one support will be provided by experienced GA editors, and participants will have the opportunity to earn a special WiG barnstar for their efforts.

We hope to see you there!

Grnrchst (talk) 13:38, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Military headquarters buildings in Moscow

I have done clean-up on Main Building of the Ministry of Defense (Russia), which seemed very confused. Checking or improving welcome. In particular, see Talk:Main Building of the Ministry of Defense (Russia) regarding the name of the building.

Also see Talk:General Staff Building (Moscow) regarding whether "General Staff Building" is actually the proper name of that building. Thanks. Nurg (talk) 21:22, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Soyot–Tsaatan language#Requested move 22 September 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Soyot–Tsaatan language#Requested move 22 September 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 00:37, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Arab–Khazar wars FAC

The article on the Arab–Khazar wars, which falls under the scope of this project, is currently undergoing a Featured Article review. Interested editors are invited to participate. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 12:46, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Grand Duke Nicholas Nikolaevich of Russia (1831–1891)#Requested move 29 September 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Grand Duke Nicholas Nikolaevich of Russia (1831–1891)#Requested move 29 September 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 03:52, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Requested moves involving addition of "Tsarevna" to article titles

See Talk:Xenia Borisovna#Requested move 6 September 2023; the first request is to move this page to Tsarevna Xenia Borisovna of Russia. There is discussion around naming policies and prevalent romanizations of Russian names. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 20:28, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Help with decyphering 19th-century Cyrillic

Hello, could someone help me with decyphering one single name in this image [32]? I just need someone to write out only the name that is in the extreme left column in Cyrillic letters and a transliteration as well. It's 19th-century cursive Cyrillic, so I can't read it even if I know some Cyrillic letters. I'm trying to do more research on this person and that's why I need to know this. Cukrakalnis (talk) 12:49, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Плеловичей (Plelovichey), declination of Плелович/Плеловичи (Plelovich/Plelovichi), does this make sense? Ymblanter (talk) 15:46, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your help, I'll see if this helps me find more about this person. Cukrakalnis (talk) 18:28, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
Most likely Плеховичей: the same name can be found in the middle column (second cell, third line) where the cursive "x" is much more distinguishable. Also, it matches the file name Plechavicius..., this last name is somewhat known: Povilas Plechavičius. Викидим (talk) 04:59, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

RfC related to this WikiProject

There is an ongoing RfC to determine whether Russia qualifies as a belligerent in the 2023 Israel–Hamas war. You can participate in the discussion here: Talk:2023 Israel–Hamas war#RfC - Infobox Belligerents (Adding). The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 20:09, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Tinkoff (cycling team)

Tinkoff (cycling team) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Hog Farm Talk 03:59, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

B-checklist in project template

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council § Determining the future of B-class checklists. This project is being notified since it is one of the 82 WikiProjects that opted-in to support B-checklists (B1-B6) in your project banner. DFlhb (talk) 11:52, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Nuclear threats during the Russian invasion of Ukraine#Requested move 16 October 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Nuclear threats during the Russian invasion of Ukraine#Requested move 16 October 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 04:49, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Request for input on categories

Input is needed to close a discussion on deleting and merging a number of categories at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 19#Category:Russian and Soviet emigrants to Albania. Thanks.  —Michael Z. 05:43, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Categorization request

this discussion has been closed but implementation is still pending. Would someone be willing to remove articles from the category about territories where Russian is not an official language? Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:09, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Split proposal on Stanislav Markelov

I want to split off the section of the murder of Stanislav Markelov and lesser section on Anastasia Baburova into a combined article on the murder of both. I believe having it split awkwardly between the pages is confusing and prone to them desyncing. I have a draft here Draft:Murders of Stanislav Markelov and Anastasia Baburova do you think this is warranted?Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 21:30, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Looks good! Alaexis¿question? 12:29, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Head of the Republic of Crimea § History section

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Head of the Republic of Crimea § History section. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 01:00, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Republic of Crimea § A new category for this ?

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Republic of Crimea § A new category for this ?. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 01:00, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Suspicious "Rostov" page move

What the hell is going on with Russian Wikipedians? Please see Talk:Rostov, Yaroslavl Oblast. An ignorant move happened with Rostov in September: Talk:Rostov,_Yaroslavl_Oblast#Requested_move_11_September_2023 and nobody expert in Russia noticed. I requested the revert of the move, Talk:Rostov,_Yaroslavl_Oblast#Requested_move_26_November_2023, see explanations. Please discuss. I admit, I am old and maybe I am brainless myself. - Altenmann >talk 21:34, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

I noticed, but I am so tired arguing with these users about every single comma that I just let it go. They do not care about any previously established consensus. I thought I would live longer if I just do not get involved. Ymblanter (talk) 21:39, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
Probably "with these users" is redundant. Pretty much with any users in any topic related to the former Soviet Union. Ymblanter (talk) 21:43, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
Well, please vote my request now. Will not take more time than venting frustration here. (Usually I am feeling just like you recently, but this one was a really major screw-up and disruption of the structure of Wikipedia, see my detailed explanation there). - Altenmann >talk 22:02, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Rostov, Yaroslavl Oblast#Requested move 26 November 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Rostov, Yaroslavl Oblast#Requested move 26 November 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 15:44, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Individual churches

Posted here because Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Russia/Religion in Russia task force redirects here

I would appreciate any advice at Talk:Russian Orthodox Church#Individual churches. Certes (talk) 23:00, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Merge discussion at Talk:Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine#Merge_discussion

There is a requested merge discussion at Talk:Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine#Merge_discussion that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Dan the Animator 22:23, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:History of the Russian Federation#Requested move 25 December 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:History of the Russian Federation#Requested move 25 December 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – Hilst [talk] 16:00, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

“Geographical zenith” question

There is a question someone asked about when did Russia reach its geographic zenith, at Talk:Nicholas I of Russia#“Geographical zenith”? Your input is welcome. Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 04:39, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

@Thinker78, answered at the talk page. Alaexis¿question? 18:56, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Qajar Iran#Requested move 7 January 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Qajar Iran#Requested move 7 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:17, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

CfD of Revolutionaries from the Russian Empire

Forgot to post here when I started this CfD, sorry. In general this is about whether people should be referred to and categorized by "from the Russian Empire" or "Russian" (or Polish, or what-have-you). Input from editors who are familiar with Russia/Russian history would be welcome. -- asilvering (talk) 23:18, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:2022–2023 Belarusian and Russian partisan movement#Requested move 8 January 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:2022–2023 Belarusian and Russian partisan movement#Requested move 8 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:30, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:China's peace plan#Requested move 8 January 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:China's peace plan#Requested move 8 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 17:36, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Help finding sources for Draft:Arkady Dubnov

I recently created Draft:Arkady Dubnov. I’m not great at finding material in Russian. I would appreciate any help! Thriley (talk) 23:19, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Having done a google search in Russian, I'm not sure he satisfies the notability criteria. Alaexis¿question? 18:50, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
Thank you. I thought he might meet notability as an academic- The New York Times called him an expert on Central Asia. He could also meet WP:AUTH depending on how many books he’s published. Thriley (talk) 00:49, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
I see him quite a lot as an invited media expert, but I did not check for references. Ymblanter (talk) 10:03, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Internal Troops#Requested move 12 January 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Internal Troops#Requested move 12 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:11, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:A260 highway (Russia)#Requested move 13 January 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:A260 highway (Russia)#Requested move 13 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 18:54, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Dmitry Medvedev (partisan)#Requested move 16 January 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Dmitry Medvedev (partisan)#Requested move 16 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:56, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Wedding of Grand Duke George Mikhailovich of Russia and Rebecca Virginia Bettarini#Requested move 16 January 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Wedding of Grand Duke George Mikhailovich of Russia and Rebecca Virginia Bettarini#Requested move 16 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:56, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Dmitry Medvedev (partisan)#Requested move 16 January 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Dmitry Medvedev (partisan)#Requested move 16 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:45, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Proposed merge at Candidates in the 2024 Russian presidential election

I have proposed merging Candidates in the 2024 Russian presidential election into 2024 Russian presidential election. Discussion is taking place here. (Sorry, I don't know why this wasn't automatically included in the list of proposed merges). BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 12:04, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Kemerovo Oblast — Kuzbass#Requested move 23 January 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Kemerovo Oblast — Kuzbass#Requested move 23 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:09, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

feedback for draft

i made this draft Draft:Tlum HD we need feedback 72.94.190.201 (talk) 18:26, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Russia/Archive_6&oldid=1221501552"