This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Russian Wikipedia article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article was nominated for deletion on February 18, 2007. The result of the discussion was keep. |
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There is a broken link underneath. Википедия:Посольство. -- Bakhteiarov 13:21, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
If the Russian Wikipedia surpasses the Swedish one (and becomes the 10th largest), as will likely happen in about a week, will it replace the Swedish on the title page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kostja ( talk • contribs) 19:49, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
If find these edits very peculiar. The user somehow did not notice that the whole article does not have external sources and is filled with questionable statements, but deleted very well known facts: (1) ru_wiki arbitration committee blocks users for their comments in external blogs; (2) ru_wiki checkusers disclose private information of the users. I do not buy the explanation of the user who censored this article ("Policies: non-notable, no non-wiki sources") because this same explanation can be used to delete pretty much everything in the article. SA ru ( talk) 03:01, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
I still demand reliable secondary sources for such addition. vvv t 15:31, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
There are two paragraphs in question (they can be found in article history). Are they notable enough and are they properly sourced to be included in the article? SkyBon Talk/ Contributions 19:40, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
If somebody uninvolved still feels that it's necessary to keep this can of worms open, I propose the following edit:
The arbitration committee has on several occasions blocked users for behavior outside Wikipedia such as posting abusive comments about sysops on other sites [1]. Such blocks have proven to be quite controversial, and as a result, a major discussion to establish whether a user can be blocked for external behavior took place in February 2010. [2].-- Victoria ( talk) 23:50, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
Here is my proposal: Do not include paras in question. Remove all wiki-sourced statements (4 out of 6 sources). SkyBon Talk/ Contributions 16:42, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
I have noted recent deletion of the information from the article ( http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Russian_Wikipedia&action=historysubmit&diff=391233891&oldid=391207687).
- Hermitage Capital corruption scandal. Russian Wikipedia bans links to – an anticorruption site launched by friends and relatives of late Russian lawyer Sergei Magnitsky, who died in Moscow prison after he was denied medical help on the orders of corrupted police officials.
I think this information is important. Information on the Magnitsky case is censored heavily in Russian mass media. I see banning of the information site from Russian Wiki as another move of the corrupted Russian police and FSB officials. IMHO this case of censorship is important feature of Russian Wikipedia and as such should be present in the article. Stop Censorship ( talk) 13:51, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
As of March 1th. 2011, it has surpassed Portuguese and Dutch Wikipedias. It must be written in this article-- Noder4 ( talk) 17:10, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Lui (2013-05-11), Why Wikipedia's Millionth Russian Page Is Worth Celebrating, archived from the original on 2013-05-15, retrieved 2013-05-15-- Felix Folio Secundus ( talk) 09:59, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Russian Wikipedia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:13, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Википедию. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. 1234qwer1234qwer4 ( talk) 22:13, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
1) Putin mistakenly talked "alternative" — Western press wrote. Putin's secretary Peskov the next day disproved — Western press didn't write. 2) Russian press mistakenly said "abandoned" — Western press wrote. Russian ministry the next day disproved — Western press didn't write. RESULT: English Wikipedia collects 2 mistakes. When I try to fix it — Philip Cross returns the mistakes on his good faith. -- ssr ( talk) 19:51, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
This information about "edit warring" in the Russian Wikipedia will be useful? This information is available in ruwiki. This "edits warring" is due to disagreements over the different beliefs of the participants. By beliefs in religion, politics, history, sexual orientation, and so on. From what the participants are the constant requests to administrators, and administrators are constantly putting the protection on the article. For example, participants have disagreements during armed conflicts in the post-Soviet space, and Wikipedia users are representatives of warring nations (Armenians and Azerbaijanis during conflicts in Nagorno-Karabakh are a vivid example). AntonBanderos ( talk) 15:45, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Contents describes 900,000 pages, now 1,800,000. Xx236 ( talk) 09:04, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
https://www.npr.org/2022/04/01/1090279187/russia-wikipedia-fine?t=1649322090690 Xx236 ( talk) 09:03, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
Interesting to find a report of the Russian Army using Wikipedia to learn how to use their weapons. Jim.henderson ( talk) 21:25, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
Is there any reason to believe that the judgement has any possibility of being enforced? Has the Foundation responded in any way? 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 13:01, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
The Signpost has coverage of a new fork of ruwiki here. So far, I can't see any coverage of it on WP:RS, but when they do, this should be covered in a "forks" subsection in this article, along with the existing mention of Runiversalis. — The Anome ( talk) 10:40, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
Russian Wikipedia pages are patrolled.
Википедия:Проверка статей/Пояснение для читателей Википедия:Проверка статей/Пояснение для читателей Wisdood ( talk) 14:43, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Russian Wikipedia article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article was nominated for deletion on February 18, 2007. The result of the discussion was keep. |
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There is a broken link underneath. Википедия:Посольство. -- Bakhteiarov 13:21, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
If the Russian Wikipedia surpasses the Swedish one (and becomes the 10th largest), as will likely happen in about a week, will it replace the Swedish on the title page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kostja ( talk • contribs) 19:49, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
If find these edits very peculiar. The user somehow did not notice that the whole article does not have external sources and is filled with questionable statements, but deleted very well known facts: (1) ru_wiki arbitration committee blocks users for their comments in external blogs; (2) ru_wiki checkusers disclose private information of the users. I do not buy the explanation of the user who censored this article ("Policies: non-notable, no non-wiki sources") because this same explanation can be used to delete pretty much everything in the article. SA ru ( talk) 03:01, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
I still demand reliable secondary sources for such addition. vvv t 15:31, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
There are two paragraphs in question (they can be found in article history). Are they notable enough and are they properly sourced to be included in the article? SkyBon Talk/ Contributions 19:40, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
If somebody uninvolved still feels that it's necessary to keep this can of worms open, I propose the following edit:
The arbitration committee has on several occasions blocked users for behavior outside Wikipedia such as posting abusive comments about sysops on other sites [1]. Such blocks have proven to be quite controversial, and as a result, a major discussion to establish whether a user can be blocked for external behavior took place in February 2010. [2].-- Victoria ( talk) 23:50, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
Here is my proposal: Do not include paras in question. Remove all wiki-sourced statements (4 out of 6 sources). SkyBon Talk/ Contributions 16:42, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
I have noted recent deletion of the information from the article ( http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Russian_Wikipedia&action=historysubmit&diff=391233891&oldid=391207687).
- Hermitage Capital corruption scandal. Russian Wikipedia bans links to – an anticorruption site launched by friends and relatives of late Russian lawyer Sergei Magnitsky, who died in Moscow prison after he was denied medical help on the orders of corrupted police officials.
I think this information is important. Information on the Magnitsky case is censored heavily in Russian mass media. I see banning of the information site from Russian Wiki as another move of the corrupted Russian police and FSB officials. IMHO this case of censorship is important feature of Russian Wikipedia and as such should be present in the article. Stop Censorship ( talk) 13:51, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
As of March 1th. 2011, it has surpassed Portuguese and Dutch Wikipedias. It must be written in this article-- Noder4 ( talk) 17:10, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Lui (2013-05-11), Why Wikipedia's Millionth Russian Page Is Worth Celebrating, archived from the original on 2013-05-15, retrieved 2013-05-15-- Felix Folio Secundus ( talk) 09:59, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Russian Wikipedia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:13, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Википедию. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. 1234qwer1234qwer4 ( talk) 22:13, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
1) Putin mistakenly talked "alternative" — Western press wrote. Putin's secretary Peskov the next day disproved — Western press didn't write. 2) Russian press mistakenly said "abandoned" — Western press wrote. Russian ministry the next day disproved — Western press didn't write. RESULT: English Wikipedia collects 2 mistakes. When I try to fix it — Philip Cross returns the mistakes on his good faith. -- ssr ( talk) 19:51, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
This information about "edit warring" in the Russian Wikipedia will be useful? This information is available in ruwiki. This "edits warring" is due to disagreements over the different beliefs of the participants. By beliefs in religion, politics, history, sexual orientation, and so on. From what the participants are the constant requests to administrators, and administrators are constantly putting the protection on the article. For example, participants have disagreements during armed conflicts in the post-Soviet space, and Wikipedia users are representatives of warring nations (Armenians and Azerbaijanis during conflicts in Nagorno-Karabakh are a vivid example). AntonBanderos ( talk) 15:45, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Contents describes 900,000 pages, now 1,800,000. Xx236 ( talk) 09:04, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
https://www.npr.org/2022/04/01/1090279187/russia-wikipedia-fine?t=1649322090690 Xx236 ( talk) 09:03, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
Interesting to find a report of the Russian Army using Wikipedia to learn how to use their weapons. Jim.henderson ( talk) 21:25, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
Is there any reason to believe that the judgement has any possibility of being enforced? Has the Foundation responded in any way? 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 13:01, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
The Signpost has coverage of a new fork of ruwiki here. So far, I can't see any coverage of it on WP:RS, but when they do, this should be covered in a "forks" subsection in this article, along with the existing mention of Runiversalis. — The Anome ( talk) 10:40, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
Russian Wikipedia pages are patrolled.
Википедия:Проверка статей/Пояснение для читателей Википедия:Проверка статей/Пояснение для читателей Wisdood ( talk) 14:43, 11 January 2024 (UTC)