Template talk:Ru-census2002

Name in Russian

I have restored the Russian name of the document for two reasons: first, the Russian name is the official name of the document and second, although less important, having only the English name creates an impression that the document is in English (it is very easy to miss that "in Russian" note). If the document had an official name in English (i.e., if it had been named in English by Rosstat itself), then the Russian name would have been optional and could have been omitted, but in this case, the English name is nothing but a translation done by a Wikipedian (me), and to only use it in the reference is to create a false impression of it being official.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 13:52, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

But it's tooooooooooooo loooooooooooong... please do something with it, or in some articles this template is longer than the rest of the text. --Yuriy Lapitskiy ~ 21:42, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, I am open to suggestions :) The title of the document is quite long in the first place, and so, of course, is its translation. My only consolation is that each and every article in which this template appears can be expanded to the point where the ref section is no longer the overwhelming focus point of the article...—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 17:44, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, my suggestion is to drop that translation made by you. As I see it could be done by two ways:

1. to change the title completely by pointing that the link is a dynamically generated web page
   Federal State Statistics Service (2004-05-21). "All-Russia Population Census of 2002 Information Server". All-Russia Population Census of 2002 (in Russian). Federal State Statistics Service. Retrieved 2008-07-25.
2. to leave only the official name in Russian
   Federal State Statistics Service (2004-05-21). "Численность населения России, субъектов Российской Федерации в составе федеральных округов, районов, городских поселений, сельских населённых пунктов – районных центров и сельских населённых пунктов с населением 3 тысячи и более человек". All-Russia Population Census of 2002 (in Russian). Federal State Statistics Service. Retrieved 2008-07-25.

The first one, like I previously said, creates a false impression that the name in English is official (not to mention that an inattentive reader may expect to see text in English after following the link), and the second one leaves a question of "what exactly is in this cited source and can it be trusted?" unanswered, unless the reader knows Russian. Are you willing to purposefully deteriorate the quality of the reference just because it happens to be too long? Is length really that big of a problem? Apart from looking overwhelming in articles which should be expanded in the first place, are there any other drawbacks? Anyway, I would recommend to move this discussion to a more public spot (Russian portal noticeboard perhaps?), so we could get more feedback. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 21:44, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Just one more try to reach a consensus before posting to NB :)
Federal State Statistics Service (2004-05-21). "Database". All-Russia Population Census of 2002 (in Russian). Retrieved 2008-07-25.

Note, that the word "Database" hardly creates a false impression you've mention. And the dynamic page may have several official name, as in this case. Also, note that short description is preferable for inattentive readers... --Yuriy Lapitskiy ~ 08:14, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

My primary point is Occam's Razor. That double written "Federal State Statistics Service" in the template appears completely smashing after such a long reference. --Yuriy Lapitskiy ~ 08:22, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

"Database" approach might very well work (although if we go that way, I'd prefer to see it replaced with something more descriptive—should we just link "(Results of the) All-Russia Population Census of 2002" perhaps?), but my remaining concern is how this new wording is going to conform with WP:CITE, namely WP:CITE#Citation styles, which postulates that "[a]ll citation techniques require detailed full citations to be provided for each source used" (emphasis mine). As further clarified, "detailed full citations" are to include the title of the source, if one is availabe. What's your take on this? To me it seems that omitting a vital attribute of a citation is more akin to cutting off one's hand in order to be able to fit in a particularly small economy car than it is to cutting out the non-essential entities as the Occam's Razor principle maintains :)—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 18:36, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Requested edit

This template generates a link of the form [[Russian Census (2002)|2002 Russian Census]], where the target of the piping is in fact a redirect to 2002 Russian census. Please modify the template to pipe directly to that target. Colonies Chris (talk) 22:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

 Completed. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 01:37, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. Colonies Chris (talk) 10:23, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Happy to help! Paine  12:05, 24 April 2024 (UTC)