Wikipedia talk:Russian wikipedians' notice board/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Does RCOTW mean that a person should not nominate a Russia-related topic in a general COTW section from now on? Could somebody clarify this? KNewman 03:22, Nov 28, 2004 (UTC)

I'm sure the word Collaboration can extend to inter-notice-board collaboration. Lets try any see. Seabhcán 12:55, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Red Terror

Could someone tell me if the phrase, "Red Terror" was used by early Soviet leaders? Fred Bauder 16:50, Nov 29, 2004 (UTC)

  • Trotsky: the whole book in 1920, The Defence of Terrorism.
  • Chicherin: Soviet Government Explains Red Terror. Chicherin to Major Wardwell. 11 September 1918
  • Lenin loved the word "terror", just as he loved the Paris Commune. Most probably he picked the word from them.

Mikkalai 20:23, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)


A couple of months ago I mercilessly cleaned all Russia-related topics from my watch list, and here you go! Someone managed to delete an article about a Russian tsar! Would someone of you russophiles like to put all Tsars, Veliki Kniazes, Emperors, etc. on your watch list? Mikkalai 20:27, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

  • Hi, Mikkalai! Which article are you talking about, exactly? Do you mean this one - List of Russian rulers? KNewman 20:44, Nov 29, 2004 (UTC)
    • Sorry. I was lazy to write which tsar. It was Vasili IV of Russia. It quietly went thru Copyvio and then was deleted without vfd. I restored it. Mikkalai 23:51, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

To Admins

I'm sure the Wikipedian Russian community is larger than this. You have to figure out ways to do mass mailings and let the Russian-speaking participants know that RCOTW exists. I don't know how you, guys, plan on doing this, but it has to be done the sooner the better. Otherwise, Moscow State University will be the first and the last RCOTW in English Wikipedia. A concerned Wikipidean, KNewman 14:27, Dec 2, 2004 (UTC)

Google the following "User Russia OR Moscow OR Petersburg OR kremlin OR USSR OR Soviet" gives 592 hits, most of which seem to be Wikipedian User pages. We should post invite messages on these User Talk pages.
For the Russian Wikipedians, as in users, we can just post a message on Main Talk Page. My Russian grammar is laughable, any native speakers want to do this? Seabhcán 15:48, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)
If you provide me with the text in English, I'll translate and post it.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 17:58, Dec 2, 2004 (UTC)
I just did some work on the MSU page. Maybe the references to Russian wikipedians are a bit narrow? Even an expat of Russian descent would not necessarily consider themselves Russian. Maybe refer to a Russian wikipedians and russian interest notice board or something like that? Also, some speakers of both Russian and English would be good as a lot of material out there is not in English. My local library has a shelf of books in Russian, none of them published prior to 1990. Anyhow, a section like this is not going to take off right away, it needs time. I just happened to stumble across it, I didn't even know of its existence until today and I have been editing many pages related to Russia. Ruy Lopez 07:33, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I would also say nominating interesting articles for Collaboration of the Week is necessary. Moscow State University and Left Opposition are topics of interest to me. Even stuff like Agriculture of the Soviet Union is of interest to me, including endless debates over how productive Soviet agriculture was. No dull topics have been nominated yet, but it should be remembered that nominating dull topics while this section is trying to take off will not attract people. Ruy Lopez 07:35, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I made a great edit to MSU article, but my cumputer hanged before I had the chance to save it :(. Maybe I'll retype all that stuff again, but now I can't. Grue 07:16, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • I wouldn't say MGU is a very fascinating topic for the grand opening of the RCOTW. And it's been stuck here for too long. This is exactly why people are not participating. It is not challenging enough, because it seems that we know everything about it already. KNewman 02:57, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)
  • Lets pick something new - there's no shortage of stub pages on russia: Category:Russia-related stubs Seabhcán 22:00, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)


Please make the charter for the stub notice more detailed.

  • In particular, is it related to modern Russia only? Or it covers issues from pre-Imperial Russia, Imperial Russia and Soviet Russia as well?
  • What is the relationship with USSR-related issues?

Mikkalai 17:53, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)

It is my understanding that "Russia-stub" relates to any stub that concerns Russia. It would cover pre-Imperial, Imperial, Soviet, and modern Russia equally. If the subject of the stub can be further classified, I assume there are going to be multiple stub messages (Andrey Vyshinsky, for example, would fall under both "Russia-stub" and "biography-stub"). If my understanding is incorrect, would the originator of the "Russia-stub" please let us all know here. Thanks.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 19:03, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

Two new Russia related stubs have just been created. Description is further down the page under the heading "Two new Russia related stubs..." Irpen

Losing faith

It looks like the RCOTW was stillborn from the beginning... It's either no one knows that it exists or people just need a kick in the b*tt. I thought this project would be a huge success. Where are those wikipedians, who held endless debates over Chechnya, Russkaya Pravda, Holodomor, Joseph Stalin and other articles? Wake up and act! KNewman 04:16, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

What do you actually propose? Is there a plan of action? Making a list of tasks and adding them to the page was a good idea. What else? What can we do better as a group rather than as individuals?
As for articles, I would like to bring attention to the fact, that, for example an article Second Chechen War was turned into an incoherent rambling (sections with {{NPOV}}) by a single determined editor. It can be cleaned up by us as a group. --Gene s 08:23, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

We have no shortage of interest in the history related articles, but what I'd like to see is more up to date information about current conditions and events, information about which there is very little published information in English. Fred Bauder 13:06, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

Medieval Russian states

Hi, there is a discussion at Talk:List of state leaders in 1124 about what is and what is not an independent state in 1124 (I just picked an arbitary medieval year). The list has some Russian states - Kiev, of course (which is definitely independent so it is on the main article), Novgorod, etc etc. If anyone here knows which states are independent at this period and which are part of a larger state, it would be a great help. Thanks! Adam Bishop 20:20, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Ukrainian famine

The topic of Ukrainian famine of 1932-1933 is covered in detail in Collectivisation in the USSR. If you still feel there's need for expansion or a separate article, let us know your reasons and suggestions. Thanks! KNewman 21:48, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)

Ukraine usurped the famine for its political reasons. The famine affected the whole South-West of Soviet Union: Ukraine, Lower Volga, Stavropol Krai, Northern Cacasus. Also, one should start from Famines in Imperial Russia and Soviet Union, to demonstrate that these famines struck regularly every 10-12 years, i.e., they were not a murderous plot of bolsheviks (although admittedly Stalin made a good use of it). Mikkalai 18:29, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Old Ruthenian language

Please vote at Wikipedia:Requested_moves#Old_Ruthenian_language__.26rarr.3B_Old_Russian_language

finding a better Russian translation for "wikisource"

Please see the discussion at wikisource:Talk:Заглавная Страница#викисорс-викисос... BACbKA 16:55, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

A couple of articles on Russian history

A couple of articles Michael I of Russia and Vasili IV of Russia are being reverted by two people, who refuse to discuss the changes in any meaningful way. Please take a look at what is happening. --Gene s 09:20, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Na Sibir s nyemi! Space Cadet 09:23, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Polish-Soviet War

I am trying to clean out the heavy POV out of this article, but I keep getting reverted without cause by Polish nationalist editors. Can anyone here help me out? Thanks. 172 22:13, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

What make you think that Russians want to cover up the crimes of the Soviet Union? Fred Bauder 22:17, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)

Fred, read Wikipedia:No personal attacks. I reported you before during the Arbcom election and I will not hesitate to report you again. I made this posting here because there are a number of well-informed users involved whom I'm sure are familiar with the topic. 172 22:22, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

You just threaten everybody to show your superiority as an admin. Ok, You are. Now can You do something constructive? Space Cadet 22:35, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Fred Bauder is an admin too and also an arbitrator. His status is higher than mine. Now can You do something constructive? Like correct factual inaccuracies and NPOV history articles? Oh, wait, thanks to you I can't do that for now on Polish-Sovet War, because you created the need to have that article protected. 172 22:46, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
No, YOU created the need to have that article protected. I've always though that admins were neutral..., its seems not in the case of Russian admins.--Emax 23:06, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
I guess 172's in a PMS mood -- wait, hold on... he's always like that.
I'm sowwy 172, did I hurt your pwofessionul feewings? J. Parker Stone 05:39, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I believe the actions of Emax and Space_Cadet are disruptive. Specifically, I object that neither one of them is willing to discuss the changes in any kind of a meaningful way. Such behavior is abusive. --Gene s 08:04, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Vstavay strana agromnaya, vstavay na smiertniy boy!
S kadyetskoy seewoy tyomnoyu, s praklyatoyu adnoy!
Space Cadet 03:51, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Polish-Soviet War - different wording

Uvazhayemyie Gospoda! (Doesn't it look hillarious in English transcription? :) ) We've had a little disagreement over the wording of the Polish-Soviet War article recently. The article was written mostly by Polish contributors and then replaced by 172's own version, which is currently disputed.

We kindly invite you to add your 2 kopeks to the cooperative effort of preparing a great article out of it. Also, there is a draft version of 172's header being worked on at User:172/Polish-Soviet War. Please participate! Halibutt 14:08, Jan 14, 2005 (UTC)

The page is protected. --Gene s 15:35, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Bah, I forgot about that. But still, Talk:Polish-Soviet War and User:172/Polish-Soviet War are not blocked and can be used. Halibutt 15:43, Jan 14, 2005 (UTC)

Historical revisionism

It has been proposed that page Old Ruthenian language be renamed and moved to Old Russian language. The consensus has been reached at Wikipedia:Requested moves and the page was moved to the Old East Slavic language.

This notice just got removed from this page's news items, after quite a few days with no comment. Am I the only one who sees the irony? Michael Z. 16:39, 2005 Jan 14 (UTC)

Oh, it's there! Would that all could see it! Genyo 23:45, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)

  • I moved it, Michael Z., and there was no special intention behind it. You're more than welcome to post it back. KNewman 03:41, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)
It was stale; nothing wrong with removing it. I'm just amused that no one pointed out that it was a rather, um, completely untrue account of events. Michael Z. 04:13, 2005 Jan 17 (UTC)

Categories: Towns in Russia and Cities in Russia

I decided to transfer small towns from the [Category:Cities in Russia] to a separate category. Ghirlandajo 09:39, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Can you tell me for which Russian places we should use this category? Does it depend on population? If so - tell me border between towns and cities, because in Russia cites and towns are not divided. Thank you. MaxiMaxiMax 07:14, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

In Russia, a difference between municipalities of less than 50000 inhabitants and more is always felt. The localities in the category "Towns of Russia" go by the name of "malye goroda Rossii". They have their own association and maintain a website at
By the way, there are categories "Cities in Ukraine" and "Towns in Ukraine", although in Ukrainian there is no precise distinction between towns and cities as well. Ghirlandajo 07:20, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I'm sure that we should not have this category as well as we have no "towns" in Russia, I don't know about Ukraine. At least I'm definetely against the idea to divide russian cities into 2 categories, it's against Russian cultural tradition, so it is very artifical idea, and only you are it's supporter. BTW - you can take part in Russian Wikipedia if you have any interesting ideas :) MaxiMaxiMax 07:29, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
How can you tell that I'm the only supporter of this category? I just think it drollish to put Novosibirsk in the same category with Tara. You may do what you like in the Russian Wikipedia, but this is the English Wiki, and in English there *is* a distinction between cities and towns. Ghirlandajo 07:34, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Please give me link to any directions or rules in en: where it is written how to categorize foreign cities or any other than your opinion about Russian cities. Then we will continue. PS. Calm down, you may get heart attack if you respond so agressively to any criticism MaxiMaxiMax 07:40, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
If you don't answer I will have to revert your category changes, sorry. MaxiMaxiMax 09:00, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
You would return Gzhel and Ust-Izhora in the same category with Moscow and St Petersburg? Good luck to you! I don't think that such changes are good for the Wiki, however. There is so much more important things you can do. I transfer this discussion from my page to RWNB talk page. Ghirlandajo 09:29, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Ok, I hope it will help. MaxiMaxiMax 09:31, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • I am against. There is no distinction between "city" and "town" in Russia. And "small towns" notion depends on year. towns shrink/grow all the time. And the attitude that leads to the unwilling to put Novosibirsk and Tara into the same category is the shame for Russia. Isn't it the reason that only Moscow, Leningrad (sorry, St.P.) were the only normally developed cities, unlike, say, Germany, where Gera or Jena has the same status and quality of life as Dresden? Mikkalai 17:22, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Summary: It looks like the poll is closed, nobody added comments last day. People are either indifferent or against this new category. There is the only status "city" in Russia and therefore (to avoid of indeterminacy to which category this or that city should belong) new category looks needless and even inconsistent. It will give us no new information but will cause only mistakes and doubts. I suggest to Ghirlandajo either transfer articles from Category:Towns in Russia into Category:Cities in Russia by himself, or I will do it later. MaxiMaxiMax 06:43, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

  • It's funny how you close this "poll" on a long-abandoned page. The whole Russia section seems to be deserted. Oh well, if you ask me, I always thought there was a clear distinction between towns and cities in Russia (remember how they used to show big cities as white cirles with black dots in them, smaller cities as white cirles and towns as black circles in Soviet\Russian encyclopedias?). Anyway, what's good for Maximaximax is probably good for Wikipedia :). KNewman 02:45, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)
There is no need for personal attacks. Both sides have valid points. English makes a distinction between city and town, while Russian has no such distinction, everything is "gorod". Obviously, it's wrong to categorize small "gorods" as "cities" because it would be false in English. This is an English wiki and English "city" (defined as a center of population, commerce, and culture; a town of significant size and importance [1]) clearly does not apply to small Russian towns, like the majority of district centers. The problem can be approached in several ways. For example, we can set an arbitrary population threshold, like 500,000 people and categorize everything above it is a city. Another approach is to categorize the capitals of federal subjects as cities, everything else as towns. These two can be combined: "federal capital" OR "population above 500K" = "city". Another way would be to make a category Category:Urban settlements of Russia to categorize all towns and cities together. --Gene s
For sure personal attacks is not our way. Ok, if somebody is still interested in subject, let's continue to discuss. Type of circles used on maps cannot be used to distinguish between cities and towns. Some villages are greater than some of the small towns, type of circle tells only about population, but we know it without maps. Usually in articles I name small places as towns and large places as cities, it is no problem because it is just text, but categories are something else - if we put some articles to one category and other similar articles to another one we should have strong reasons and strict rules to do so. About centers of federal subjects - unfortunately some of them are townlets, while other not center cities are rather large cities indeed. I support the idea to rename Category:Cities in Russia to Category:Urban settlements of Russia, it is quite correct, and anyway it is much better than have categories for cities and towns. MaxiMaxiMax 06:13, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
There is not need in "urban settlements". In English, a city is a town, only big. And "townlet" is not town, according to its official status, so it is distinguishable. Mikkalai 16:04, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Sorry if I sounded rough, didn't mean to offend anybody. KNewman 16:56, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)

I've been using the term "urban settlements" when referring to "посёлки городского типа". To me, it's a better term than "townlet", which (again, to me) sound rather silly when describing administrative structure and composition of the federal subjects. It's seems like Gene s's suggestion is so far the best (and it's not only because I wholeheartedly support it myself, albeit at a lower threshold of 100K). I would, however, be stronly against using "urban settlements" to describe what in fact are towns. Just my 2 cents.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 18:31, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)

Ok, may be I liked "Urban settlements of Russia" because of my poor English. Let's name it "Cities and towns of Russia" - it will be absolutely correct and we will have no problem with dividing towns into 2 categories. MaxiMaxiMax 07:43, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

OK, let's summarize the possible solutions:

Solution 1

Assign city/town labels according to a rule, which should be discussed.

  1. I would prefer this one, although option #2 is also passable. --Gene s
  2. Support --Ghirlandajo 11:22, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Solution 2

Merge and rename city/town categories to something else (to be discussed) to sidestep the issue.

  1. Pro. I vote for merge of this categories to one category with a name "Category:Cities and towns of in Russia" MaxiMaxiMax 05:18, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  2. pro. There already are precedents, the most far-going one would be category:Cities, towns and villages in France. And BTW you probably meant category:Cities and towns in Russia, not "of Ru".
    • Yes, sure, it was my mistake once again :(
  3. Support. Option #1 looks appealing, but I do not like the fact that whatever population limit is selected to distinguish between cities and towns, it is going to be of arbitrary nature.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 15:31, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)

Solution 3

Leave everything as is, with understanding that it would be confusing to a lot of readers (I never heard NY called "town" and never heard Riverhead called "city". It's equally wrong to categorize Myshkin as "city" or Moscow as "town")

  1. Gene s 08:16, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)


Also, it might be reasonable to have a subcat for cities with population over 1 million. This is a notable number, not like 50,000 or 500,000. What do you think? Mikkalai 21:04, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

About such a category - in ru: we have a category ru:Category:Мегаполисы for cities anywhere in the world which have population is higher than 1 million. I guess it would be good for en: to have such a category (without dividing by countries) as well. In fact, I was wondered that there is still no such a category here. MaxiMaxiMax 04:18, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
In English, the word megapolis has a different meaning. Mikkalai 04:52, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Looks like a good addition to the option #2. --Gene s 05:42, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)


Now we have 2:2 2:3. May be somebody else want to express his opinion or may be somebody changed his mind? Let's decide. I'm absolutely sure that Category:Cities and towns in Russia is better than dividing towns into 2 categories (because there is no difference between them in Russia), but I cannot compel others to believe in it. If my variant is accepted, I will move all the cities into the new category. Just note, that in WikiCommons we have category "Cities and villages in Russia" and it causes no problems. MaxiMaxiMax 07:23, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This page is really totally dead. Ok, after so many days and unfortunately not consensus but majority I declare that I will move all articles about "города России" to the new-created category Category:Cities and towns in Russia. I have no time to do it fast, but if somebody wants to take part - welcome! MaxiMaxiMax 16:28, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)