Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Russia

Latest comment: 5 days ago by Grnrchst in topic Women in Green's 5th Edit-a-thon
WikiProject iconRussia Project‑class
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia.
To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.
ProjectThis page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Category:Hero Cities of the Soviet Union has been nominated for discussion Edit


Category:Hero Cities of the Soviet Union, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); May 6, 2016; 12:47 (UTC)

equal marriages Romanov Bagration . Edit

When Princess Tatiana Konstantinovna , daughter of G-D Konstantine Konstantinovich, obtained the consent of her father to marry Konstantine Bagration and of course the blessing of HIM Nicholas II, she signed an official renouncement to their future children's rights, and that was BEFORE the abdication of the Romanov dynasty. So did her niece Ekaterina Ioannovna, princess of the Imperial Blood, in the late thirties, when she married Ruggero, marchese (in italian, or marquess, it means the same,) Farace di Villaforesta, for their children. Neither of these children : Nicoletta, Fiammetta and Ivan Farace ever considered themselves as heirs.... but Ivan, now marchese Farace di Villaforesta, is an active honorary member of the Family Association since his mother passed away in 2007. Like HM the King of Greece, Prince Michael of Kent, and other members of the Family, not necessCite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).arily of the Dynasty. If Konstantine was not equal to Tatiana Konstantinovna, Leonida was not equal to Vladimir Kirilovich.( Who was not a grand duke himself, according to the Laws, it was a "titre de courtoisie"...). This is simple and clear . Grand dukes, during the last years of the Empire, were only brothers, children and grand children of the Emperor. The sons of GD Konstantine Konstantinovich were born as grand dukes, but became princes when the Laws were modified, before the end or the monarchy. The last Emperor was GD Mikhail for a very short time, and all the grand dukes and grand duchesses are now dead, alas. Sources : myself, marchesa Farace di Villaforesta— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a01:cb11:192:3f00:cc03:3d6f:ac49:d639 (talkcontribs)

Antarctica Edit

I have nominated Antarctica for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.

AS-28 Edit

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 -- (talk) 23:55, 5 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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


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)Reply[reply]

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


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)Reply[reply]

Input requested Edit

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)Reply[reply]

"There are 5 streets." Edit

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]
That's a relief. But even there, how does the autocreator know? Is there a database? InedibleHulk (talk) 07:04, 16 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, I'm pretty sure you can download it yourself here Alaexis¿question? 09:45, 16 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I won't, but thanks, good to know! InedibleHulk (talk) 22:10, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]

Translation check please Edit

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 - 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)Reply[reply]

It doesn't but Oxxxymiron did say he suffers from it [1]. I don't know if it's enough for the inclusion in the list. Alaexis¿question? 06:06, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]

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


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)Reply[reply]

Mikhail Fedorovich von Schultz rewrite Edit

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)Reply[reply]

Another discussion at Talk:Second Cold War Edit

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)Reply[reply]

POV at Russia–Africa Summit 2023 Edit

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]

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


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 (talkcontribs) 14:34, 28 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Maps to include in infobox of Russia Edit

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)Reply[reply]

The picture Edit

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

Russian Empire subdivisions' translations Edit

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:


{{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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
The national languages should come first, simply because the Russian empire was a foreign empire.  —Michael Z. 05:49, 4 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
(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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
“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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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.[2][3]  —Michael Z. 06:34, 31 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • 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)Reply[reply]

Credibility bot Edit

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)Reply[reply]

DEFAULTSORT for mediaeval Russian nobility Edit

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. (talk) 21:01, 5 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bortkiewicz' nationality Edit

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. (talk) 20:24, 8 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Input needed - Talk:Kievan_Rus'#Iranian_Poliane Edit

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)Reply[reply]

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


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)Reply[reply]


There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Allegations of genocide of Ukrainians in the Russian invasion of Ukraine#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)Reply[reply]

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

  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)Reply[reply]

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

Requested deletion of Dmitry Strashnov Edit

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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


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)Reply[reply]

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


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)Reply[reply]

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


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)Reply[reply]

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

Editing issues at Russian undesirable organizations law Edit

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)Reply[reply]

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 ([4], [5]). 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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
@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)Reply[reply]

Russian patriotic lessons Edit

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

Help with decyphering 19th-century Cyrillic Edit

Hello, could someone help me with decyphering one single name in this image [6]? 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)Reply[reply]

Плеловичей (Plelovichey), declination of Плелович/Плеловичи (Plelovich/Plelovichi), does this make sense? Ymblanter (talk) 15:46, 5 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for your help, I'll see if this helps me find more about this person. Cukrakalnis (talk) 18:28, 7 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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


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)Reply[reply]

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


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)Reply[reply]

Input needed at Talk:Ukrainian language#Little Russian language Edit

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)Reply[reply]

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

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)Reply[reply]

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


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)Reply[reply]