Talk:Severodvinsk

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Severodvinsk article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

Russia: Military / Human geography C‑class High‑importance

	Russia portal This article 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.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Russian, Soviet, and CIS military history task force.
	This article is supported by the human geography of Russia task force.

Comments

Severodvinsk (ru)-It Here is nearly complete Quadro86 (talk) 19:04, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:HollyDvinsk.jpg

I shall work with page too Quadro86 (talk) 07:12, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Date format

User:Ezhiki would like this article (about a Russian city) to use the US format for dates. I am well aware of the WP:DATERET guideline, where it reads: "If an article has evolved using predominantly one format, the whole article should conform to it, unless there are reasons for changing it based on strong national ties to the topic or consensus on article talk" (italics are mine). I think a very strong case can be made that this article has, by definition, "strong national ties" for using the non-US format (i.e., the one used by just about every other country on the planet). Namely, the logical day-month-year series/sequence (small-to-large). E.g., 5 February 2013. --Thorwald (talk) 23:33, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you carefully read the definition of "strong national ties", you will see that they only apply to English-speaking nations, not to "format varieties". Articles covering the US topics use American spelling/format, Canadian topics use Canadian spelling/format, Australian topics use Australian spelling/format, and so on. Topics with no relation to these countries, however, are free game. We have DATERET in place precisely for the purpose of preventing pointless bickering about spelling/date format choice in articles with no ties to US/UK/Canada/etc.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); February 6, 2013; 13:12 (UTC)