Talk:Russia

New Map

Hi everyone, I noticed that there were a few issues with the map of federal subjects with the Kerson Oblast missing some of the territories that it claims from the Mykolaiv Oblast. On further inspection the map also had a range of different formatting issues to the point at which it would be easier to just create a new map, which I have done. I've also tried to make it colour blind freinds -though the current one appears to already be so as well. Hope this resource is useful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kappasi (talk • contribs) 14:06, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

  Republics

  Krais

  Oblasts

  Federal cities

  Autonomous oblast

  Autonomous okrugs

Political parties in Russia problem

Good morning,

Russia is classified (rightly) on here as being under an authoritarian dictatorship. So I have a real problem with many of the articles on political parties in Russia on here failing to mention their loyalty to Putin and his regime, and how they fit into this authoritarian system. For example the article on the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, the second biggest party in Russia after the Kremlin-sponsored United Russia, fails to mention how it is widely considered to be loyal to the regime and not a serious opposition party. This is despite the fact that this can be verified by a wide range of reliable sources, e.g.:

• [1]
• [2]
• [3]
• [4]
• [5]
• [6]
• [7]
• [8]
• [9]
• [10]
• [11]
• [12]
• [13]
• [14]
• [15]
• [16]

This means that the articles on many political parties in Russia do not give a realistic overview that is in keeping with the context of the Putin regime. As such, this makes me suspect NPOV issues that allow a pro-Russian or pro-Putin tilt on such articles, providing a false image of there being legitimate opposition in the country when literally all reliable sources say otherwise.

Would esteemed Russia editors be able to assist? I'm not saying that the articles should be about bashing Putin. I'm saying that they should be appropriate to the political context of Russia today. Skin from lip (talk) 07:36, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

None of the sources you're providing are conclusively supporting a narrative you're asking to be asserted as fact furthermore virtually all are opinion pieces that per WP:RSOPINION should be made clear to the readers these are opinions if this topic were included. It's perfectly WP:NPOV to include the opinions and subjective analysis reported in reliable sources but it crosses the line to assert as fact an opinion regardless how popular an opinion is, please see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum Jetsettokaiba (talk) 03:46, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Russia is, like Venezuela, in its final stage of autocratization. Of course something written in 2018 will need to be updated eventually, but things aren’t clear enough to do it all at once. Remember, Chavez never faked any elections, and had a thriving economy, Maduro did that. In the 2000s people were happy that old Yeltsin was gone, and some thought that Putin would bring Russia to democracy… Encyclopédisme (talk) 11:30, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Thats an interesting opinion but in so far as we're speaking about editing a controversial page lets use reliable sources and present information in a wp:npov way and avoid presenting opinions pieces as facts. If you have personal opinions and views you wish to discuss try https://www.reddit.com Jetsettokaiba (talk) 09:32, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for shutting me down, I guess. What I meant to say is that we need to observe the situation and the sources (the academic sources only of course, it’s war time, sadly…). The Russian parties support the war in Ukraine because of nationalism and probably have a minimum of independence vis-à-vis Putin. Besides, the Routledge guide does the job as a source. Encyclopédisme (talk) 11:29, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Editors can use conclusions from recent works like The Routledge Handbook of Political Parties - Google Books p. 357, good luck ManyAreasExpert (talk) 11:38, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the source. Encyclopédisme (talk) 11:41, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

That is really good material! This seems far stronger and more reliable (and wp:npov) than some of the single author sources used to compile recent changes made to this page. I look forward to using this source to make necessary corrections when I get WP:XC. Jetsettokaiba (talk) 09:54, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

You can feel free to request edits on this talk. Firestar464 (talk) 16:28, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Inclusion of other occupied areas on the infobox map

I feel if we are including occupied regions of Ukraine we should also include Russian-occupied territories in Georgia on the map, as well as Russian military presence in Transnistria. Current infobox does not show full extent of Russia's military occupations. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 23:21, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

These territories are not claimed by Russia. Vanyka-slovanyka (talk) 00:39, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

fair enough. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 01:14, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

should infobox include "authoritarian" as goverment description

Hey All in the China talk page theere ia vote that is related to this page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:China#RfC

The question is whether infobox of countries should include information live if goverment is authoriterian. If it is decided that not, we should remove it from this article as well. 85.65.237.103 (talk) 13:48, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

map should be altered to follow China map

On the China map the controlled areas are in dark green and the claimed but not controlled areas are in light green. Using the same coloration, the Russia controlled part of Donbas should be colored dark green and the remaining part of Donbas which Russia claims but does not control should be colored in light green. The southern Kurils should also be colored dark green because these are controlled by Russia.

China

216.165.212.113 (talk) 21:01, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Russian cities listed in lead

@Juihui Since you are continuing to edit war rather than opening a talk page discussion, here you go. Please explain why it is necessary to list almost a dozen cities in the immediate lead when it is unsupported by the body of the article or references. TylerBurden (talk) 17:42, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Let's keep random examples to a minimum in the lead.WP:COUNTRYLEAD. Moxy🍁 17:46, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Note that you are also edit warring and are at three reverts now. You removed the list of cities entirely. I have restored the long-standing version for now. Mellk (talk) 17:46, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

What is the criteria for the current list...is it just size? For example at the fa article Canada the capital is listed and the three population centers over 2 million.... at Japan they only list the one area... the most populated area. Moxy🍁 18:04, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

I think these are ordered by population but I am not sure what is the cut off point, there are many more cities with a population of more than one million. But I would not be opposed to reducing the number of cities altogether. Mellk (talk) 18:08, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Why don't we say something actually informative.... rather than just a random list... along the lines of.... Russia is a highly urbanized country consisting of 16 population centers with over million inhabitants Moxy🍁 18:22, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

It looks like it is 75% urbanized,[17] which is not as high as some other countries, but I think something along those lines would be better, or a different way of rephrasing it. "Other major cities" is not very clear. Mellk (talk) 18:32, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Sorry forgot the source...

Klimanova, Oxana; Illarionova, Olga; Grunewald, Karsten; Bukvareva, Elena (2021-11-25). "Green Infrastructure, Urbanization, and Ecosystem Services: The Main Challenges for Russia's Largest Cities". Land. 10 (12). MDPI AG. doi:10.3390/land10121292. ISSN 2073-445X. Russia is a highly urbanized country: ....Russia's 16 largest cities, including ......e=1292 Moxy🍁 18:52, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

OK, sure, that could work. Mellk (talk) 19:10, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

@TylerBurden:.... What do you think of the green text above?Moxy🍁 19:40, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

@Moxy Seems like a much better summary than randomly listing large population cities when editors apparently can't agree on what order to put them, so I'm not opposed to making that change. TylerBurden (talk) 19:47, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

 Done...plus tweak economy ....as it drop random stats already in infobox and body.Moxy🍁 03:47, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Map is wrong

The light green part is disputed but not claimed. This area is controlled by Russia and claimed by Ukraine. The remaining part of Donbas is controlled by Ukraine and claimed by Russia.

136.143.213.226 (talk) 00:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

State leaders in infobox

I don’t understand why my edits adding state leaders of Russia - the leaders of parliament and the Supreme Court - to the infobox are consistently deleted? One argument for removing these edits is that these leaders are not mentioned in the article. But after I saw this argument, I checked the relevant articles of Ukraine, Moldova and China, and saw that they listed other state leaders in the infobox, but not in the article itself. Double standards? Since I don't want to start an edit war, I would like to discuss with you why it is NOT possible to add Russian state leaders to the infobox, thereby creating the false illusion that there are no major state positions in Russia other than the President and PM. @Moxy. PLATEL (talk) 01:46, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure how in a dictatorship listing non-relevant people helps our readers. The reason they're not mentioning in the article is they're completely insignificant. Moxy🍁 01:48, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Syria? Iran? North Korea? Myanmar? Transnistria? Cuba?

At first, you argued for the removal of Russian state leaders by the fact that they were not mentioned in the article. Now you have changed your argument to say that the third, fourth and fifth most important positions in the country are held by irrelevant people. Both of your arguments are not used in any existing “dictatorship” except Russia and Belarus. Please can you tell me the real and permanent reason for your removal of Russian (and Belarusian) state leaders from their respective pages? Or maybe you would be so kind as to allow me to add these important government positions to these countries, and not play with double standards. Please. PLATEL (talk) 01:57, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

No change in position don't care about other articles. If they are listing people that are irrelevant it should be removed as well. The info box is to regurgitate information that's in the article.... not to set a precedence. Moxy🍁 02:01, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

UPD counterquestion. How will removing all leaders except the President and PM help readers? I think this will only lead to inconvenience. If the reader wants to know about the head of the State Duma or the Supreme Court, they will have to follow two links, not one. Because you decided that it would be more convenient for them to navigate through two links, rather than through one. PLATEL (talk) 01:59, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

What you should be doing is proposing text for the body of article and perhaps then we can move to the info box. Please search the archive you'll see we've talked about this before. Moxy🍁 02:01, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Okay, in this case, I will add to the page mentions of who holds the post of heads of the Federation Council, State Duma and Supreme Court, and will also add them to the Infobox. Are you satisfied with this conflict resolution? PLATEL (talk) 02:03, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

None of these individuals have merited inclusion in the article body throughout the many years and review processes this article has undergone, it seems a big jump to go straight to adding them into the lead. CMD (talk) 02:36, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and I want to improve this encyclopedia by adding those state leaders who for some reason were not in the article before. What's the problem, honestly? Is there any ban on adding all Russian leaders except the President and PM? and why, if you consider Russia a dictatorship, should you leave the PM, but not the heads of parliament, for example, although they are generally in equal de facto positions today? PLATEL (talk) 02:42, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

I don't personally think the classification of a dictatorship matters by itself, dictatorships come in different forms as do non-dictatorships. Either way, the question is due weight, and if these are de facto equal positions it would be very helpful if you could provide good sources to this point that help demonstrate such weight. CMD (talk) 02:45, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Above, I expressed to you a position that I myself do not support. However, the position where Russia is described as an authoritarian or even totalitarian dictatorship is supported by consensus, which you can see in the article. According to this position, all absolute power in Russia belongs to Putin, and other positions are only nominal and irrelevant. Look above at this discussion. I support another, marginal position on Wikipedia, where according to the Russian constitution, there are important government positions in key branches of government that are truly relevant in the Russian system.

But even despite the "fact" that Russia is the same authoritarian country as Iran, for example, in Russia's page government positions other than the president and PM are not mentioned, unlike Iran's page, where they are mentioned, including in the infobox.

I don't understand why not mentioning important state positions is a good thing for Wikipedia. Perhaps this is a boon for the narrative that all power in Russia belongs to Putin. But Wikipedia is not a collection of narratives, but an encyclopedia. And I want to make a positive contribution to this encyclopedia. PLATEL (talk) 02:54, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

As I stated, it's a question of WP:DUE weight. These individuals have not even merited a mention on Politics of Russia. To establish weight, it would be helpful if you could provide reliable secondary sourcing to the points you are making, rather than referring to other en.wiki country pages, which are commonly bloated. CMD (talk) 03:14, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Ranking for Russia GDPPC nominal is incorrect for some reason?

GDP per capita nominal ranking for Russia here is incorrect, it should be 65th according to IMF,

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita Hongediting2013 (talk) 07:19, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

 Done Charliehdb (talk) 09:38, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Authoritarian

A recent RfC for China overwhelmingly opposed the inclusion of "Authoritarian" in the infobox. The main argument was that "authoritatian" isn't a government system. I believe the same should apply to Russia (and other articles with similar infoboxes). Any thoughts? '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 08:16, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

What are government types?

Quick find: "Totalitarianism is a form of government in which the state holds total control over society and seeks to regulate every aspect of public and private life (Gregor, 2012; Gregor, 2008; Siegel, 1998; Guilhot, 2005)." 10 Real-Life Totalitarianism Examples (2024) (helpfulprofessor.com) ManyAreasExpert (talk) 08:43, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

But the word is "authoritarian" not "totalitarian". My initial reaction is that "totalitarianism" is a government system whereas "authoritarian" is more of descriptive style of whatever the system is. Maybe that's too pedantic. Don't know. DeCausa (talk) 08:01, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

There is no rule that we should be constrained by the template field name. The goal is to represent what reliable sources say the best we can. ManyAreasExpert (talk) 08:09, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

No, we should follow the template documentation. DeCausa (talk) 08:12, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

The doc is also not a solid stone and is a subject of an agreement and change. ManyAreasExpert (talk) 08:16, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

If the template doesn't conform to the common use of terms, then the template is wrong. GMG^talk 11:34, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

That's an issue for the template talk page. Not here. DeCausa (talk) 14:29, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

The template doc can or can't be a fit for all the pages. It's not a rule and and it's imperfection should not hinder us from improving this page - WP:NOTBURO. ManyAreasExpert (talk) 14:35, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

I don't see a problem with the template. I've never seen anyone else say there is a problem. Sounds like an artificial way of shoe-horning a particular point of view. DeCausa (talk) 21:18, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

I...honestly don't really care, other than to say that the template documentation is a technical guide, and not a rationale for deciding a content dispute. GMG^talk 15:53, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Just to add to my earlier comment. I took a look at the China RfC. Pincrete while supporting the China change distinguished it from the Russia infobox as follows: Russia actually has "under an authoritarian dictatorship", not simply the adjective 'authoritarian'. Dictatorship is a system of government, not simply a disapproving adjective like 'authoritarian'. That seems a valid point. DeCausa (talk) 08:11, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Democracy Index by the Economist Intelligence Unit, 2022. Green countries are democratic, yellow are hybrid regimes, and red are authoritarian governments.

As seen over at RfC for China it was filled with people that lack basic knowledge of the sources. Even claming there were no sources at all dispite it being the example used in most publications. Somtimes RFCs lead us down a road that is less informative for our readers espesiacly when they are closed fast and by someone that was involved in the debate. The debate that is taking place for Russia is "Authoritarianism to totalitarianism?" .Moxy🍁 10:12, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Agree ManyAreasExpert (talk) 10:19, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

I don't have any knowledge or opinion about the use of 'authoritarian' iro Russia. but just point out that 'authoritarian' and 'dictatorship' are nearly tautologous (benign dictatorship being largely theoretical and democratic dictatorship being a contradiction in terms). Dictatorship is a form of govt, but authoritarian is an adjective describing a character rather than a form, that can be applied to most forms of govt, including the nominally democratic, monarchist etc. Last night I happened to watch a PBS documentary in which Woodrow Wilson's administration was described as 'authoritarian' towards the end of WWI.Pincrete (talk) 10:58, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

But what we should be doing is regurgitating the sources...... and with those sources leading our readers to more informative academic opinion. If there's are sources out there that say this is a rainbow democracy we should also use those....... however this is simply not the case. Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL. Moxy🍁 22:48, 13 May 2024 (UTC)