Jump to content

Talk:Russia/Archive 11

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5←Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12Archive 13→Archive 15

Government Type

Would it be out of the question to add Dominant-party to the official form of government for Russia? No other party has even come close to challenging the dominance of the United Russia party in over 15+ years, and multiple sources seem to argue the same.<ref name="europarl.europa.eu">{{cite web|author1=European Parliament|title=Russia: political parties in a 'managed democracy'|url=http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/ATAG/2014/545703/EPRS_ATA(2014)545703_REV1_EN.pdf|publisher=European Parliament|accessdate=13 February 2017|date=December 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Russia parliament elections: How the parties line up|url=http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-15939801|website=BBC News|publisher=BBC|accessdate=13 February 2017|ref=BBC|date=6 March 2012}}</ref> Would this be too confusing or is it warranted enough to be put in? HapHaxion (talk) 01:25, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Ther is no problem of a dominant party, there is a problem who dominates. The party is a tool, it may be dissolved or reconstructed any day.Xx236 (talk) 07:58, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
That doesn't necessarily answer my question. All that is required for a country to be labeled as having a dominant-party system is "a category of parties/political organisations that have successively won election victories and whose future defeat cannot be envisaged or is unlikely for the foreseeable future."<ref name=Suttner>Suttner, R. (2006), "Party dominance 'theory': Of what value?", ''Politikon'' 33 (3), pp. 277-297</ref> United Russia clearly fits the bill in this case, at least definition wise. My question is whether or not it would be pertinent to add it into the main article under "Government". HapHaxion (talk) 23:26, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
We don't know the future.
This party is different than GOP, it's a party of Mr Putin. The next president may reuse the party rather than the party make a new president.Xx236 (talk) 08:42, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Religion

  • Levada is a small-sample survey of West Russia.
  • Arena is a large-sample survey of all the federation.

Someone has recently replaced Arena with Levada; the edit should be reversed.--87.4.45.226 (talk) 20:41, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

...who relocated from across the Baltic Sea and founded a state centered on Novgorod that later became Kievan Rus.

What the heck is this? Kiev city as center of Kiev Rus' and Novgorod as center of Novgorod Respublic were two competing powers in russian world at that time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.204.108.92 (talk) 15:30, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Levada and Sreda Arena 2012 surveys of religion

  • Levada 2012, was conducted on a sample of 1596 people (area and methodology are not specified), as the article says.
  • Sreda Arena 2012, was conducted on a sample of 56,900 people from each region of Russia, through interviewing methods, as the official website says.

Ultimately, Sreda Arena 2012 is the most reliable survey of religion in Russia to date, as it was made clear by the press when its results were published, and in spite of what user "Отрок 12" claims. This user has recently replaced Arena- with Levada-results in this article (Russia) as well as in the article "religion in Russia" claiming that Levada is more reliable than Sreda Arena. Both the edits should be reversed.--79.16.78.55 (talk) 17:36, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 April 2017

Add to the end of first part of the Economy section the update. State owned Enterprises make up a significant part of the Russian economy (70% as of 2017). PyroDroid (talk) 18:07, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 12:12, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 April 2017

BEFORE CHANGE: Russia (Listeni/ˈrʌʃə/; Russian: Россия, tr. Rossiya; IPA: [rɐˈsʲijə]), also officially the Russian Federation[12] (Russian: Российская Федерация, tr. Rossiyskaya Federatsiya; IPA: [rɐˈsʲijskəjə fʲɪdʲɪˈratsɨjə]), is a country in Eurasia.[13]

AFTER CHANGE:

Russia (Listeni/ˈrʌʃə/; Russian: Россия, tr. Rossiya; IPA: [rɐˈsʲijə]), also officially the Russian Federation[12] (Russian: Российская Федерация, tr. Rossiyskaya Federatsiya; IPA: [rɐˈsʲijskəjə fʲɪdʲɪˈratsɨjə]), is a transcontinental country in Asia and Europe.[13] Costhee (talk) 23:26, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: The "Change" is not an improvement but just an another way to say it. regards, DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 03:56, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
 Not done - Eurasia is linked so anyone not understanding it can click and read the explanation - Arjayay (talk) 12:17, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Eurasia is a russian political group comprised of former members of Alexandr Dugin's dissolved parties - of soviet communist affect. It's not a continent. Costhee (talk) 03:21, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Not done: According to the page's protection level you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. —MRD2014 📞 contribs 01:17, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 April 2017

Ref. 13 URL link text - SOURCE BEFORE:

cite web |url=http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/513251/Russia |title=Russia |publisher=Encyclopædia Britannica |accessdate=January 31, 2008


Ref. 13 URL link text - SOURCE AFTER: cite web |url=https://www.britannica.com/place/Russia |title=Russia |publisher=Encyclopædia Britannica |accessdate=April 06, 2017

Not done for now: we WP:Assume good faith that in 2008 the source stated what our article says it did - we can probably check with the Wayback machine - but as noted in the post below, the current version does not support some of the claims - we need to resolve that first. - Arjayay (talk) 12:27, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Here you go: https://web.archive.org/web/20080426065826/http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/513251/Russia There are no 160 ethnic groups in the text! Costhee (talk) 03:56, 29 April 2017 (UTC) (talk • contribs) 03:35, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Not done: According to the page's protection level you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. —MRD2014 📞 contribs 01:17, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 April 2017

BEFORE: Russia's 160 ethnic groups speak some 100 languages.[13]

AFTER: Russia's 140 ethnic groups speak some 100 languages.[13] Costhee (talk) 23:45, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Not done for now: The Britannica article states "Most are ethnic Russians, but there also are more than 120 other ethnic groups present, speaking many languages" so there are over 121 ethnic groups, but there is no source for 100 languages. - can you provide such a source? - Arjayay (talk) 12:23, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

The history (Mar 04, 2008) of the Britannica article has this text "Although ethnic Russians comprise more than four-fifths of the country’s total population, Russia is a diverse, multiethnic society. More than 120 ethnic groups, many with their own national territories, speaking some 100 languages live within Russia’s borders." Also, there is no link with that URL text. Costhee (talk) 03:29, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Here is a source for "100 languages": https://books.google.com/books?id=XbacAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA23&dq=%22speaking+some+100+languages%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwik146G38jTAhVDsxQKHZnTBNUQ6AEIPjAF#v=onepage&q=%22speaking%20some%20100%20languages%22&f=false (page 23) Page 13 has the "speaking more languages" quote with "more than 120 other ethnic groups", referring to more than the "russian" ethnic group. Seems to be a Britannica edition published in 2009. Costhee (talk) 03:44, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

As a comment, the "People and Society" section ine here https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/rs.html, says "nearly 200 national and/or ethnic groups are represented in Russia's 2010 census", but it adds immigrants to the ethnic groups.

The "160 ethnic groups" text can only be found on a 2007 local sponsored tabloid ((https://sputniknews.com/photo/2007041263414973/) Costhee (talk) 03:55, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

If Britannica is to be quoted then it's "120 ethnic groups". It can only be based on the 2002 census and expectations/ projections. The 2010 Russia census (http://www.gks.ru/free_doc/new_site/perepis2010/croc/perepis_itogi1612.htm) has a table with about 146 ethnic groups (some of those have mixed subgroups for a total yield of 210), but some of them have less than 500 individuals. A good number to be used throughout the page should be "140 ethnic groups" prefixed with "more than". Here is the link http://www.gks.ru/free_doc/new_site/perepis2010/croc/Documents/Vol4/pub-04-01.pdf Costhee (talk) 02:31, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

On languages: https://www.ethnologue.com/country/RU/languages https://www.ethnologue.com/country/RU/languages Costhee (talk) 17:51, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Not done: According to the page's protection level you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. —MRD2014 📞 contribs 01:17, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Democracy Index data should be updated

The same rule of law. Xx236 (talk) 08:23, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Afghanistan

I have removed lies at the request of the new regime. Xx236 (talk) 09:47, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Newer figures required

Some newer figures may be needed, some are old, such as spending on education using a 2004 figure, whereas articles on these topics, such as Education in Russia already have newer figures. Mellk (talk) 15:47, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

gdp is listed as $14.56 trillion, higher than china's $11.8 trillion ... surely that's wrong ... off by a factor of 10 ? per capita looks wrong too, although perhaps less wrong. google says 1.326 trillion USD (2015) for gdp — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jfmxl (talk • contribs) 08:04, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Russia. 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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:39, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Religion

Hello since i am new here i thought it would be sensible to ask before writing. I would suggest a rewrite of this section "Bolsheviks consisted of many people with non-Russian, Communist Russians and influential Jewish backgrounds such as Vladimir Lenin, Leon Trotsky, Grigory Zinoviev, Lev Kamenev, Grigori Sokolnikov who were indifferent towards Christianity and based on the writings of Jewish philosopher Karl Marx with Marxism–Leninism as an ideology went on to form the Communist party.[328]"

I think it is well established that the origin of marxism lies not in Judaism but French- and German materialism and also German idealism. Also most Marxists with a Christian background were also indiferrent towards Christianity (and still are) and most with a Jewish background were indifferent towards Judaism (and still are). Citation should be found in the article about marxism. Are there objections to rewriting this section?

Icarusatthesun (talk) 13:26, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

POV

2014 Winter Olympics - false image

Russian athletes are banned because of doping.
The success included giant corruption.
Concerns and controversies at the 2014 Winter OlympicsXx236 (talk) 11:23, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
I have removed the POV description. If you want more details, please write a neutral text.Xx236 (talk) 06:14, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
Concerns and controversies at the 2014 Winter Olympics lists 21 points and quotes 176 sources. Please present your critics of the page in the talk page.Xx236 (talk) 08:34, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
approximately 50 percent or more of the building costs went to corruption - the success?Xx236 (talk) 09:22, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
I admit, I'm trying to delete sourced long lasting content. The content proves that it's possible to criticize the same facts in one page and to prize them in another one.Xx236 (talk) 09:24, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
The Russian team potentially could be stripped of up to 12 Olympic medals. - I don't know the current situation, but if someone prizes Russian athleets, should also mention the basis of their successes, [1]Xx236 (talk) 09:27, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/sochi-olympics-postscript-%E2%80%93-the-whole-thing-was-a-fake-224125394.html Xx236 (talk) 08:14, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
Phrase proposed at Reliable sources - The games, called a success by some, were marred by a doping scandal among Russian athletes.Xx236 (talk) 08:21, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

most economically developed republic ?

Sources please. Xx236 (talk) 06:16, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

  • I have made two totally different edits, which were reverted together. Please be more specific. Which source supports the story about the Russian economy?Xx236 (talk) 08:05, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
The Russian economy ranks as the twelfth largest by nominal GDP and sixth largest by purchasing power parity in 2015 quotes April 2015 source. It's the time to correct the statement or to refresh the source. Xx236 (talk) 08:08, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
Soviet Union had the world's second largest economy - this page is about Russia. How is it possible that a 1979 book describes 1990? Xx236 (talk) 09:01, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

The Soviet Union played a decisive role in the Allied victory in World War II

The same SU played a decisive role in starting the war inviting Nazis Germany into Poland and creating poorly defended long border with the Nazis.Xx236 (talk) 05:49, 28 March 2017 (UTC) Communism perfectly solves problem created by himself. (probably Stefan Kisielewski)Xx236 (talk) 06:09, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Can you define a communist vs. a capitalist border for me?--Planetjanet (talk) 13:08, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

a major industrial powerhouse

The powerhouse produced mostly weapons. Level of life under Stalin was very low. Soviet soldiers robbed watches, bicicles and shoes during WWII. Xx236 (talk) 06:06, 28 March 2017 (UTC)


So instead, you reckon it should have a POV you favor? Stop trying to purposely miss the goals of WP. Mellk (talk) 15:15, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
See above:
Assume good faith
Avoid personal attacks
As far you have removed the critics of Sochi doping scandal. Sooner or later some medails will be stripped, there is no reason to quote the 33 ones before doping research. I admit that the Sochi doping was perfect, but let's prize the quality of the doping, not its criminal results. Xx236 (talk) 05:56, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Dependent socialist governments were installed

The word socialist should be explained. It means here total censorship, total nationalization, terror, preparation of war, forced atheization.dependent means killing not only of non-Communist but also of Communists.Xx236 (talk) 11:33, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

  • No, clearly you're pushing an agenda. And why should this be on the Russia article? There are already articles for this, there is no need to do it here. Mellk (talk) 18:48, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Your are clearly pushing your agenda. My agenda is wrong, your one is O.K.?Xx236 (talk) 07:12, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Don't be stupid, please. I've removed your edits that are also riddled with grammar/spelling mistakes, I've not added anything, keeping it to where it has been for a long time, so my 'agenda' is not being pushed. Clearly what you want to do on this article is something that shouldn't be tolerated. Mellk (talk) 15:28, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Dominant party?

Should the government type section on the infobox include "dominant party"? Personally, I believe that it shouldn't because Russia doesn't officially have a dominant party system. While it can be accused of being a dominant party system, unless it's officially stated (and even belongs there, as a dominant party system is not a type of government) and is objective information, it shouldn't be there. The dominant party is, as another user pointed out, an effect of election results, and while it can be argued whether those results are genuine, that is neither here nor there.

If you put in some information in the politics section of the page about Russia being accused of being a dominant party system, that belongs there. But if you're putting in information that is making objective claims about this status, I believe that goes against what Wikipedia is about. And going around on pages for other countries and doing the same doesn't make it more legitimate. Even then, a dominant party system is usually de facto. Unless it's de jure, it doesn't really belong there, except for extreme cases such as Thailand.

So, I believe it doesn't belong there in its current form, and that a consensus should be reached before making any such changes to the page.

AndreyKva (talk) 21:53, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

I disagree, why would you officially have a dominant party system? If it was official, then it would be a one-party state. The content was referenced by a reliable source, and I am sure more can be found if that is your issue with it. Absolutelypuremilk (talk) 16:56, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Sports

Some edits I made to the Sports section removing some material were reverted by Mellk. The material on amateurism is probably too much detail for this article and definitely doesn't belong in the middle of a paragraph on ice hockey, as it applies to many sports.

The material about volleyball also doesn't belong in a paragraph about ice hockey and there is no need to mention this one gold medal in this article.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 22:27, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Russia. 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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:06, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

masqt

chebubloodyshtka is NOT bloody masqotte , change it . -~ aentej — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.57.168.140 (talk) 06:36, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Russia. 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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:46, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 December 2017

The Varangians were not only Vikings from Scandinavia they were mostly and primarily Baltic Wends from the Northern coast of the Baltic sea so I suggest you change this in the part of Kievan Rus history. 70.80.47.10 (talk) 00:02, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Also, please provide reliable sources for this change. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 00:04, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Clarification request(s)

The area of "Russia" is given, but it is unclear that this excludes the Crimean Oblast and Sevastopol City. I don't want a pointless debate about whether those two Federal subject should or should not be included, just wanted to know whether the Area stated includes or excludes them. It takes too much hunting (though it's not all that difficult) to find out. But surely the point of Wikipedia is to inform, not to take sides. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.3.129.8 (talk) 12:49, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Romanisation of the country's name

The current transliteration of "Российская Федерация" used on this Wikipedia page as well as many others is "Rossiyskaya Federatsiya". Now at first, this may seem very intuitive for English speakers, as it uses the BGN/PCGN system for Romanisation. However, this does not correspond with Wikipedia's own system of Russian transliteration. In the latter the chart states that -ий endings must be transliterated as a lone -y rather than as -iy. Unless of course, the word is a noun of Russian origin, which the word "Российская" is not; it is an adjective. So should the word "Российская" not be Romanised as "Rossiyskaya" but much rather as "Rossyskaya"? If there is an official English transliteration, I wish to be informed. Otherwise, is it not more suitable to do what I have explained above? Sammimack (talk) 06:00, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

The "iy" in "Rossiyskaya" is not an ending. It's smack in the middle of the word :)—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 13, 2018; 14:33 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 March 2018

The name russian federation should not be with an accent on the "a" and should be written Российская Федерация NOT Росси́йская Федера́ция Dtisseyre (talk) 14:26, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

 Done Per the Russian text of the Federation's Constitution. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 17:37, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Who started WWII?

In 1940, the Soviet Union invaded Romania at Bukovina, thereby dissolving the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. This disagreement led to the death of 40,000,000 Europeans and countless uncounted lives. Romania was a staunch ally of Nazi Germany in WWII, supplying more troops to the Nazi war effort than other Nazi allies combined.

From the Wikipedia page for Russia: " On June 22, 1941, Nazi Germany broke the non-aggression treaty and invaded the Soviet Union with the largest and most powerful invasion force in human history,[83] opening the largest theater of World War II. " — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:5CC:8200:2510:41BB:5E28:DE18:AF1A (talk) 17:35, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 March 2018

Additional request for the lead section to add (unless amended):

The country's president, led by Vladimir Putin since 2000, has been criticized by Human Rights Watch for its poor human rights record such as suppression of political opposition, discrimination of LGBT rights, and authoritarian corruption.

Source: [https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2018/country-chapters/russia --2607:FEA8:A75F:F823:A02A:4CD8:C8B2:9A44 (talk) 21:12, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: The article you are looking for is probably LGBT rights in Russia or possibly the Russian gay propaganda law that crystalized the downward trend in LGBT rights. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 19:27, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Grammar

In the following sentence, window should be lowercase. There should also be a comma after Baltic Sea. "On the Baltic Sea Peter founded a new capital called Saint Petersburg, later known as Russia's "Window to Europe"." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.110.241.177 (talk) 09:50, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Crimea wrong

"Crimea under Russian administation" isn't correct, it's a Russian state or republic. The time 1954-2014 is a hyphen only. 81.230.36.59 (talk) 14:18, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

administration means that Russia rules there. It is in fact actually slightly more in favor of "incorporation terminology" than merely "controlled by", however I've amended footnote - just in case it wasn't clear enough that according to Ru. laws Crimea is Russian territory. As for "1954-2014" "necessary but absent" hyphen — nevermind where this article has or should have one (probably History of Crimea? But it has that hyphen). And as for area in this article, what I've done was correction of strange 17,075,200 km2 "non-Crimea area" cited to About.com (where they got that number? Maybe by undue exclusion of not only Crimea but also some other territory, much less disputed internationally?) with UN-cited 17,098,246 km2 and addition of previously-non-present Crimea figure — in short, my edits were a sort of "overdue response" to archived (but still justified) request. "Primacy" of non-Crimea figures over "plus Crimea" figures is because the fact, that looong before my intervention there was consensus in favor of placing non-Crimea infobox figures first and then follow them with Crimea-inclusive figures, so I was, completly regardless of my views on the subject, simply not in position to unilaterally alter that order, nor do I have much time to "argue and argue to change that to opposite way". And yes, within Russian framework, Crimea is not an all-encompassing republic, but two federal subjects, Republic of Crimea and Sevastopol. Bests, --Seryo93 (talk) 20:06, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Russia GDP

IMF April 2018 dates GDP Nominal Russia $1.72 trillion http://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/NGDPD@WEO/OEMDC/ADVEC/WEOWORLD/RUS — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.32.18.185 (talk) 11:12, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 June 2018

RUSSIA Is in World Cup 2018 will win 2018 World Cup 65.175.135.221 (talk) 14:03, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: per WP:CRYSTALBALL .spintendo  16:17, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 June 2018

Could you please add the fact that Russia won the first match of the World Cup over Saudi Arabia on June 14, which was their first ever victory in the tournament. Thanks. 2607:FEA8:3420:E7B:0:0:0:C (talk) 02:05, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: Already mentioned in Russia national football team#2018 FIFA World Cup (permalink) and a few other places. Sam Sailor 17:05, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Religion

I guess no one cared about my previous post a year ago, since I did not request an edit. So lets try anew and I please you to change

"Bolsheviks consisted of many people with non-Russian, Communist Russians and influential Jewish backgrounds such as Vladimir Lenin, Leon Trotsky, Grigory Zinoviev, Lev Kamenev, Grigori Sokolnikov who were indifferent towards Christianity and based on the writings of Jewish philosopher Karl Marx with Marxism–Leninism as an ideology went on to form the Communist party.[328]"

to something like

"Bolsheviks consisted of many people with non-Russian or Jewish backgrounds such as Vladimir Lenin, Leon Trotsky, Grigory Zinoviev, Lev Kamenev, Grigori Sokolnikov who were indifferent towards religion and based on the writings of German materialist philosopher Karl Marx rejected religion.[328]"

Or maybe delete it altogether.

To paraphrase myself I think it is well established that the origin of Marxism lies not in Judaism but French- and German materialism and also German idealism. Also most Marxists with a Christian background were also indiferrent towards Christianity (and still are) and most with a Jewish background were indifferent towards Judaism (and still are). Marx Jewish legacy played only a minor role in his upbringing since his family converted to Protestantism in 1818 the year Marx was born and his father was indifferent towards religion as well. Citation should be found in the article about Marxism and Marx himself. Icarusatthesun (talk) 13:54, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

1. Marxism is explicitly atheist. 2. The Soviet regime tightly restricted, controlled and even persecuted religious people and organizations. 3. To even by juxtaposition hint at or imply any connection between Judaism and Marxism is OR and POV. 'Nuff said. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:38, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
2. That was kind of my point my dear friend. The article right now implies some sort of relationship between Judaism and Marxism, which evidence does not back up, if at all then by Judaism as a minority promoting the idea of secularism to avoid discrimination. This is why this section badly needs correction. Icarusatthesun (talk) 11:53, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
 Not done: I'd suggest you discuss this first and gain a consensus. I do agree with Dodger67, there is WP:OR and WP:POV in the content mentioned in this request. — LeoFrank  Talk 17:23, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
I dont want to put words in other mouths but I am confident that Dodger67 and me agree more or less on this one. If you carefully read my request I just want to implement what has already been concluded in [2]. Also the current version fulfills WP:POV more so than my suggestion. Thank you for your attention :) Icarusatthesun (talk) 19:09, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:37, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Links to Russian Fairy Tales , Russian fairy tales etc should be directed to Russian fairy tale due to book titles interfering with main topic.5.198.10.236 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:28, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Why there is no mention of Ugro-Finnic and Turkic ancestors of Russians? That's racism!

Please add this important fact. Kremówczak (talk) 09:37, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

If you have sources i guess you should forward them with your suggestion to the article about the ethnic group Russians here [3]. The article there by the way states "Russians in northern European Russia share moderate genetic similarities with Uralic peoples", covering at least the Finno-Ugric group Icarusatthesun (talk) 16:31, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 September 2018 (Science and technology part)

The end of the section "Science and technology" can be more specific. For example, particular people (or inventions) can be mentioned. Instead of the

In the 2000s, on the wave of a new economic boom, the situation in the Russian science and technology has improved, and the government launched a campaign aimed into modernisation and innovation. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev formulated top priorities for the country's technological development:

  • Efficient energy use
  • Information technology, including both common products and the products combined with space technology
  • Nuclear energy
  • Pharmaceuticals[270]

A new possible text:

Russian engineers made many contributions in the Computer Science and software development areas. Vitalik Buterin is a co-founder of Ethereum. Alexander Stepanov is a primary designer and implementer of the C++ Standard Template Library. Stepan Pachikov is a co-founder of ParaGraph Intl., Parascript, Evernote Corp. among other software companies which contributed heavily to the development of Handwriting recognition and VRML technologies. Igor Sysoev created Nginx - one of the most popular web servers in the world. Igor Pavlov created 7-zip (free and open-source file archiver) and 7z (a compressed archive file format). Eugene Roshal created RAR file format (1993), WinRAR file archiver (1995), FAR file manager (1996). Alexey Pajitnov made Tetris. Georgy Adelson-Velsky along with Evgenii Landis invented AVL tree - the first known balanced binary search tree data structure.

Kotlin (programming language) has primary development team of JetBrains programmers based in Saint Petersburg. JetBrains company was founded by three Russian software developers: Sergey Dmitriev, Valentin Kipiatkov and Eugene Belyaev. Excelsior JET is a proprietary Java SE technology implementation built around an ahead-of-time (AOT) Java to native code compiler, Excelsior JET is developed by Excelsior LLC, headquartered in Novosibirsk.

Russian IT entrepreneurs created several well-known European companies. Pavel Durov and Nikolai Durov founded Telegram instant messaging and voice over IP service. Ilya Segalovich and Arkady Volozh created Yandex search engine. Andrey Andreev founded Badoo dating website, as well as Bumble (together with an American entrepreneur Whitney Wolfe Herd) a location-based social and dating application.

Yuri Milner a Russian IT venture capitalist co-founded Breakthrough Prize - a set of international awards for outstanding contributions in Life Sciences, Fundamental Physics, and Mathematics in 2012. Laureates receive $3 million each in prize money. 109.79.8.31 (talk) 15:12, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. — Newslinger talk 11:13, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
I like the proposed changes overall. Still needs sources and maybe to be shortened a little and I would keep the old segment as an intro. Icarusatthesun (talk) 00:59, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Incorrect Russian GDP PPP: requesting edit from those able to

No basis for current published Russian GDP PPP in the sidebox.

Suggest use of worldbank statistics putting Russian GDP at 3.817 trillion in 2017: http://databank.worldbank.org/data/download/GDP_PPP.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prabay (talk • contribs) 18:39, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:22, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Incorrectly the national composition of Russia

Incorrectly indicated the national composition of Russia. So, according to the 2010 census, the ethnic groups is as follows: 80.9% Russian, 3.9% Tatar, 1.4% Ukrainian, 1.2% Bashkir, 1.1% Chuvash, 1.0% Chechen, 10.5% others/unspecified

Semi-protected edit request on 12 October 2018

2003:E0:670F:4DC7:281F:7C54:AD:58CF (talk) 17:19, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

--2003:E0:670F:4DC7:281F:7C54:AD:58CF (talk) 17:20, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

 Not done is it nuclear unclear what you want? Flooded with them hundreds 17:25, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 January 2019

I suggest opening this page because everyone has the right to fix it even if he or she is in another language wikipedia. Marie Gulleya (talk) 04:38, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone will add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. DannyS712 (talk) 05:09, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 January 2019

Open Open Open!!! Marie Gulleya (talk) 13:46, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. DannyS712 (talk) 15:56, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Russian Federation

Dear Administration! Why have you added Ukrainian Crimea to Russian Federation? The next question is the following: The Kingdom of Rus was founded in 1253, and its first king was Danylo Halytskyi (Daniel of Galicia), according to your article "Daniel of Galicia". Of course, the Kingdom of Rus had nothing in common with a Mongolo-Tatar colony of Moscovy which was not called as Rus or Russia at that time. In addition, nobody went to Zalesie - the area beyond the forest, as the Ruthenians called the Moscow region for centuries. Why should they have gone to the Mongol occupied territory from their native land? Of course, this statement was invented by the Soviet agitprop in the last century and became a wide known fiction like a fairy tale about Simpleton Ivanushka. Would you be so kind, please, fix the abovementioned article about Russian Federation (by the way, there is no a subject of that federation by the name Russia)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.170.48.90 (talk) 14:30, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Claims of superpower status

The foreign relations section currently contains the following text:

As the successor to a former superpower, Russia's geopolitical status has often been debated, particularly in relation to unipolar and multipolar views on the global political system. While Russia is commonly accepted to be a great power, in recent years it has been characterized by a number of world leaders,[1][2] scholars,[3] commentators and politicians[4] as a currently reinstating or potential superpower.[5][6][7]

At the very least, this is all fairly out of date. There are a number of dead links, even to sites that haven't moved. I don't see anything from after 2011. Some of the citations used to support it are also fairly questionable in their applicability. The final citation for instance, explicitly states that Russia is only a great power, but is being used to support it being a "potential superpower". The article by Ronald Steel, used to support the notion that scholars think Russia is a superpower, is an opinion piece that is titled "A Superpower is Reborn" (by the editors no doubt) but in fact argues that Russia is a great power and never once uses the word superpower in the text. The "number of world leaders" who have characterized Russia as a superpower is limited to Hugo Chavez, who has been dead for a while now, and Benjamin Netanyahu. I could go on. While I can accept that some people think Russia is still a superpower, the fact that this is a fairly minority opinion needs to be made clearer.--Ermenrich (talk) 03:45, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

I might also note that Russia's status as a great power is often portrayed as a recent development. See this Atlantic article (which I found while trying to find the "Atlantic Review" article cited to a dead link in the article text quoted above): Russia is a Great Power Once Again. This is more in line with what most of these sources actually seem to be saying.--Ermenrich (talk) 14:50, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Given the state of the sources (dead links and sources not actually claiming Russia is a superpower) I'm proposing changing the text to "Russia is generally accepted as a great power" and placing it at the beginning of in the paragraph discussing its role in the security council.--Ermenrich (talk) 14:21, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Venezuela's President Hugo Chávez recognizes independence of breakaway Georgia republics by Megan K. Stack. September 9, 2009
  2. ^ Netanyahu declares Russia as superpower Russia Today News February 15, 2010
  3. ^ Superpower Reborn Archived April 27, 2011, at the Wayback Machine by Ronald Steel. New York Times, August 24, 2008
  4. ^ "Russia is a Superpower CNN, US Senators telling the truth". CNN News. August 30, 2008.
  5. ^ Rosefielde, Steven (2005). Russia in the 21st Century The Prodigal Superpower. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-83678-4.
  6. ^ Atwell, Kyle (August 25, 2008). "Is Russia a Superpower? Cold War II?". Atlantic Review. Retrieved October 20, 2016.
  7. ^ "What's Looming in Ukraine Is more Threatening than Georgia". Der Spiegel. October 16, 2008. Retrieved October 20, 2016. Nikonov: Russia is not a superpower and won't be one for the foreseeable future. But Russia is a great power. It was one, it is one and it will continue to be one.

Political divisions

International law recognises Crimea ONLY as integral part of Ukraine, see UN resolutions: [1]

So it is important that Wiki in full reflects international law, and every map of Russian Federation should exclude Crimea. Crimea is integral part of Ukraine.

Correct map of Ukraine according to UN:

Correct map of Russia, according to UN:

If Wiki stops reflecting International Law, it will stop being a credible source of information. 

Igorsova (talk) 12:55, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
Wikipedia is does not take a point of view. Stating the status of Crimea one way or another (beyond actually stating that international organizations and many countries do not recognize the annexation) is POV. It may de jure be part of Ukraine, but it is de facto part of Russia now.--Ermenrich (talk) 13:11, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Eastern European country expanding into North Asia

Wouldnt “is a transcontinental country in Eastern Europe expanding into North Asia.” Sound better than “Eastern Europe “and” North Asia.” That makes it sound like there are two diffent countries called russia. --2601:3C5:8200:B79:7C65:2548:AE44:F45C (talk) 09:49, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

I don't think it implies that at all, whereas your suggestion could imply that Russia is still gobbling up Siberia on its quest to reach the Pacific. Better to leave as is.--Ermenrich (talk) 13:13, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
This cannot make sense. Russia already has two parts in Europe and Asia and is not a expansionist country. SeifED23 (talk) 13:27, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Russia is located in Central Europe too

I propose to change the statement that Russia is located in "Eastern Europe and North Asia to the statement that it is located in "Central Europe, Eastern Europe and North Asia". Because Kaliningrad region (oblast) of Russia is located in Central Europe, probably. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.222.146.79 (talk) 15:59, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. RhinosF1(chat)(status)(contribs) 14:24, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
This is the same person complaining over at Talk:Ukraine about Ukraine not being in Central Europe/that some countries are listed as in multiple "zones" of Europe.--Ermenrich (talk) 14:32, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Ermenrich, I'll let you take any WP:SOCK related action bit I'll remove the templates and help me Request. RhinosF1(chat)(status)(contribs) 3:02 pm, Today (UTC+0) RhinosF1(chat)(status)(contribs) 15:04, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
So, how exactly I need to establish a consensus and with whom? I do not see any objections to my proposal on this talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.222.146.79 (talk) 20:44, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
You have to find editors to agree with you; nobody does. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:34, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Disinformation

International law recognises Crimea ONLY as integral part of Ukraine, see UN resolutions: [2]

So it is important that Wiki in full reflects international law, and every map of Russian Federation should exclude Crimea. Crimea is integral part of Ukraine.

Correct map of Ukraine according to UN:

Correct map of Russia, according to UN:

If Wiki stops reflecting International Law, it will stop being a credible source of information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrey91.07 (talk • contribs) 22:52, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

The concerns raised are addressed above, repeating the same question over and over again from multiple accounts won't help at all. --Seryo93 (talk) 07:04, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/68/262
  2. ^ http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/68/262

Semi-protected edit request on 27 May 2019

Add word "dystopian" to first paragraph: "Russia (Russian: Росси́я, tr. Rossiya, IPA: [rɐˈsʲijə]), or the Russian Federation (Russian: Росси́йская Федера́ция, tr. Rossiyskaya Federatsiya, IPA: [rɐˈsʲijskəjə fʲɪdʲɪˈratsɨjə]), is a dystopian transcontinental country in Eastern Europe and North Asia." Delfin211 (talk) 13:38, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. NiciVampireHeart 15:48, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Map is incorrect

The map that attached to this article https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/File:Russia_1533-1896.gif#file does not reflect the following facts: 1. Finland became a part of Russia in 1807. 2. Eastern and central Poland became a part of Russia in 1815. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 001nemo (talk • contribs) 10:29, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

РОССИЯ listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect РОССИЯ. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. signed, Rosguill talk 15:38, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Wrong economic numbers

The economic numbers (total GDP/GDP per capita, nominal/PPP) given in the summary box of Russia are much higher than the numbers given in the cited source indicate [1]. This should be corrected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Infty1000 0110 (talk • contribs) 09:19, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Some of the numbers were corrected in the menatime, but the nominal GDP per capita is still exagerated and does not reflect the number given in the source[2]. I corrected it. --Infty1000 0110 (talk) 20:07, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2018/02/weodata/weorept.aspx?pr.x=24&pr.y=17&sy=2016&ey=2020&scsm=1&ssd=1&sort=country&ds=.&br=1&c=922&s=NGDPD%2CPPPGDP%2CNGDPDPC%2CPPPPC&grp=0&a=
  2. ^ https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2018/02/weodata/weorept.aspx?pr.x=24&pr.y=17&sy=2016&ey=2020&scsm=1&ssd=1&sort=country&ds=.&br=1&c=922&s=NGDPD%2CPPPGDP%2CNGDPDPC%2CPPPPC&grp=0&a=

This was raised in April. Ehy has no one corrected this? CoolHandLuke12 (talk) 23:09, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Ppp per capita is a not official 2019 projection... Surprised me CoolHandLuke12 (talk) 23:11, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Rossijskaja Federacija listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Rossijskaja Federacija. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. signed, Rosguill talk 18:07, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Russia is located in Central Europe too.

I propose to change the statement that Russia is located in Eastern Europe and Northern Asia to the more correct statement it is located in Central Europe, Eastern Europe and Asia, because Kaliningrad region (which is part of Russia) is located in Central Europe.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.222.146.79 (talk) 14:58, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 August 2019

I would like to edit this article because there are some things that need to be updated, and also I should be able to edit semi-protected pages by now because my account is over 4 days old and I have already made more than 10 edits. TheHistoryBuff101 (talk) 18:33, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Nothing to do here, since the requester is now in fact autoconfirmed and has started editing the article. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 18:53, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Removal of 'disputed' status for Crimea in the infobox

Could someone please point to reliable sources stating that Crimea is no longer a disputed region? This salient fact seems to have been removed from the infobox without any discussion, and has been subject to a slow edit war over the past couple of months.

If any contributors can produce the relevant RS, and explain why a well hidden note covers the international perspective regarding the legality of the annexation is deemed to be WP:NPOV, I think the arguments should be presented here on the article's talk page, not by means of edit warring behind the scenes. Iryna Harpy (talk) 06:33, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

@Iryna Harpy: Not sure why you'd revert to a map showing Crimea as belonging to Russia when the previous map showed it as disputed? KREOH (talk) 20:45, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
Hi, KREOH. Thanks for clarifying the issue properly here. This particular edit summary wasn't very clear, illustrating why edit summaries should be as concise as possible. Crimea is so tiny on these maps that it's not exactly glaringly obvious that one depicts the status of the peninsula as being internationally disputed, while the other does not. What stood out in the change was the text rather than the map, and the version of the text reverted to was a changed one not discussed, and contrary to MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE. The 'disputed' status had been removed: that is, essentially, hidden in the note. Given that there has been no change in official global positions regarding the annexation of Crimea, not mentioning it in the caption for the map is a bit of a WP:POV omission. This issue has been discussed with regards to this article, and at length on a multitude of other articles dealing with the the events of a few years ago, with broader scope consensus being in favour of expressing the international position of multiple governments and regulatory bodies as perceiving the de facto governance as an illegal occupation. Until the broader Wikipedia community is consulted on the matter, I see no indication that consensus has changed as to what does and doesn't constitute the nation-state known as "Russia". Iryna Harpy (talk) 05:17, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Яма могильная. Для пенсионера.

Предлагаю ставить Новогоднюю Ёлку комлем вверх. Штоб как Кремль ! ;)

85.140.24.167 (talk) 23:03, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

₢₢₢₢₢₢ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.47.3.203 (talk) 00:21, 19 October 2019 (UTC)


"Russia [...] has been characterised as a potential superpower"

By whom? / [by whom?]

--2A02:8070:A1A2:1A00:44DA:6B18:7AE0:8825 (talk) 01:49, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Moscow is not second-largest city in Europe?

It is the largest one according to this.

It is the 2nd largest city, after Istanbul FluffSquad (talk) 04:36, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

yellow flag

Each and every household has an COMMUNICATIONS AND BASIC

1. electricity connection

2. Water supply

3. Fix phone connection

4. mobile phone

5. Cable/TV connection

6. Internet Modem conection


:Then it have

1. Heating
2. News paper delivery
3. Milk Delivery
4. Postal Delivery


::Then it has to

1. Procure FOOD
2. Procure BATHROOM MATERIAL
3. Procure MISCELLANEOUS


:::Then it uses

1. Personal cycle
2. Personal motorcycle
3. Personal small car
4. Personal wagon car
5. Personal big car
6. Personal small an big trucks
7. Public car or taxi
8. Public buss transport
9. Tram or underground railway — Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.48.64.35 (talk) 02:15, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Intro is so biased

Intro si so biased beyond belief. It's like to put Yellow vest protests in intro of France. It's not that important. Or that War in Iraq is neo imperialist policy of the US. This is ridiculous. I am not Russian I am not pro Russian but this is a disgrace for Wikipedia. Opinions of 20% of White Western liberals don't represent reality... --Pp (talk) 12:37, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

@Pp: Can you be more specific? KREOH (talk) 18:03, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
@KREOH: Characterisation of government under President Putin shouldn't be part of intro. A lot of countries have a lot of problems but when you on some huge country like Russia where there should be a lot of objective informations on the country insert that, that is matter of opinion, it is bias. Not that we don't have alot of those on Wikipedia but still. (Pp (talk) 13:04, 21 December 2019 (UTC))
observers are quite unanimous that Putin dominates the Russian system--there is no controversy. Rjensen (talk) 14:34, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Russia/Archive_11&oldid=939147907"