Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:22, 1 October 2011

Russia Project‑class

This page is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Misplaced Pages. 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 Project This page does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.

Russia articles by quality and importance Quality Importance Top High Mid Low NA ??? Total FA 9 17 29 31 1 87 FL 2 4 6 2 14 FM 96 96 A 2 3 12 12 29 GA 28 39 117 226 3 413 B 220 297 522 771 248 2,058 C 359 634 1,290 3,014 823 6,120 Start 436 1,529 6,443 14,654 1 2,523 25,586 Stub 12 231 4,105 45,227 49 3,607 53,231 List 70 96 437 3,290 36 246 4,175 Category 18,337 18,337 Disambig 178 178 File 460 460 Portal 21 21 Project 134 134 Redirect 2 518 1,789 2,309 Template 3,909 3,909 NA 21 3,885 3,906 Other 120 120 Assessed 1,138 2,850 12,963 67,766 29,015 7,451 121,183 Unassessed 370 1,365 1,735 Total 1,138 2,850 12,963 68,136 29,015 8,816 122,918 WikiWork factors (?) ω = 478,182 Ω = 5.47

Template:Outline of knowledge coverage WPT

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 1 section is present.

Category Split could use some help!

cross-posted to Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Russia and Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Soviet Union.

Hello all, There were a few categories that came up at Categories for discussion. According to the desicon reached here, the following cats are supposed to be split:

• Category:Russian and Soviet military vehicles into Category:Military vehicles of Russia and Category:Military vehicles of the Soviet Union
• Category:Soviet and Russian air defence vehicles into Category:Air defence vehicles of Russia and Category:Air defence vehicles of the Soviet Union
• Category:Russian and Soviet Anti-aircraft weapons into Category:Anti-aircraft weapons of Russia and Category:Anti-aircraft weapons of the Soviet Union

This discussion closed a month ago, and as you can see, there is still some work to be done. I don't feel that I know enough to help with this split, so I'm reaching out. :) If anyone can spare a few moments to help get this done, it would be appreciated. Спасибо! _ennasis @ 18:54, 1 Adar II 5771 / 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Kaliningrad Oblast

There is currently an argument at Talk:Kaliningrad Oblast#Foundation date as to when Kaliningrad Oblast is established. I postulate that the oblast was established in April 1946 and given its present name in July 1946. An anonymous editor interprets the April date as the date the territory of the oblast "joined the USSR" (whatever that means), and that the oblast was actually established in July. The source in the article does not support that point of view, and neither does the Charter of Kaliningrad Oblast (a link to which I posted on the talk page). Additional input would be appreciated, as the anon is obviously not going to stop with the reverts to restore his/her opinion.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); April 27, 2011; 14:43 (UTC)

OK, never mind. Hopefully this is now resolved.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); April 27, 2011; 15:45 (UTC)

Romanization of Russian guidelines

A discussion is currently underway about the fate of the romanization of Russian guideline, which is one of the main guidelines in the scope of this WikiProject. The former WP:RUS guideline has been split into WP:ROMRUS (romanization) and WP:NCRUS (naming conventions), but there are several finer points on both pages that are still under debate. There are several threads open on both talk pages and additional input will be very welcome.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); July 1, 2011; 15:15 (UTC)

Novaya Zemlya and Solovetsky District

Now I am finalizing my work on Arkhangelsk Oblast articles (about two more weeks needed), and I have run into a point which I do not undertand. Municipally, the law lists 19 districts and 7 urban okrugs (Arkhangelsk, Koryazhma, Kotlas, Mirny, Novaya Zemlya, Novodvinsk, and Severodvinsk). Administratively, the OKATO classification lists 20 districts (the extra one is Solovetsky District), Novaya Zemlya territory subordinate to the oblast, and 6 towns of the oblast significance (Arkhangelsk, Koryazhma, Kotlas, Onega, Novodvinsk, and Severodvinsk). Mirny is the town of the federal significance. Our page Administrative divisions of Arkhangelsk Oblast lists Solovetsky district, as well as Franz Joseph Land (which are municipally both part of the Primorsky District), and does not list Novaya Zemlya at all, like if it does not exist. The template {{Arkhangelsk Oblast}} lists Solovetsky District but does not list Novaya Zemlya. (It also lists Naryan Mar, but this is ok as soon as Nenets AO is part of Arkhangelsk Oblast). Then I have the following questions,

• Should we remove the Solovetsky District from the template and the administrative division page (it was merged into Primorsky District in 2006)? Or does it still exist administratively? Note that there is currently no page on the district anyway, it is redirected to Solovetsky Islands. If there should be a page, I will create the page.
• Should we add Novaya Zemlya to the template and the page? To which place? It is not a city and not a district. Should it be a separate line in the template?
• In the intro on the districts of Arkhangels Oblast I write smth like "XXX District is one of the YY districts of Arkhangelsk Oblast" (one can check, I have these intros for all districts but Onezhsky, which I will do in several days). Is YY=19 (if we do not count Solovetsky District not Novaya Zemlya), YY=21 (if we count both), or YY=20 (if we only count one of them)?
• Should it be a page on the urban okrug of Novaya Zemlya, or are we just fine with the redirect to the archipelago page?
• Additionally, I may have created some mess with municipal vs administrative in the templates in the articles on Vychegodsky and Kotlas, I would appreciate somebody having a look.

Thanks in advance,--Ymblanter (talk) 14:05, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

The municipal and administrative divisions of the federal subjects are not required by law to match, even though they mostly do, because it's convenient. Arkhangelsk Oblast in particular is one federal subject where the differences are very noticeable and present on the higher levels of the hierarchy. Another problem is that the OKATO is very inaccurate when it comes to Arkhangelsk Oblast; in no small part because Arkhangelsk Oblast is one of the few federal subjects which does not yet have an official registry of the administrative-territorial divisions, so OKATO uses outdated data (the registry is planned to be released around 2012 or 2013; I don't quite remember the date but can check). Our "administrative divisions of Arkhangelsk Oblast" page, however, is only sourced to OKATO, and badly needs to be updated (I myself was waiting for the release of the registry, but the upper divisions can be updated now based just on the law on the administrative-territorial division). So, while municipally there are indeed nineteen districts and seven urban okrugs, administratively there are in fact twenty-one district, seven cities/towns of oblast significance, and two island territories. Here are the main differences between the two aspects:

• Novaya Zemlya Administrative District is municipally incorporated as Novaya Zemlya Urban Okrug;
• Solovetsky Administrative District was never merged; it is municipally incorporated as Solovetskoye Rural Settlement of Primorsky Municipal District, but retains its administrative district status nevertheless;
• Onega is administratively incorporated as a town of oblast significance, but municipally it is organized as Onezhskoye Urban Settlement of Onezhsky Municipal District;
• Franz-Joseph Land and Victoria Island are considered to be island territories administratively; they are not a part of any other administrative-territorial entity. "Island territories" is a concept unique to Arkhangelsk Oblast. Municipally, they are a part of Primorsky Municipal District (organized as inter-settlement territories; i.e., they are not a part of any lower-level municipal division).
• The rest of the administrative districts match the municipal districts, and the rest of the cities/towns of oblast significance match the urban okrugs.

As far as organizing the information, our articles follow the following chain: physical geography entity, administrative-territorial entity, municipal entity. What this means is that the article about the physical geography entity (when applicable) is created first, and that the article about an administrative division takes priority over the article about a municipal division. For example, Novaya Zemlya is an article about the physical geography entity (archipelago), which should mention the fact that it is administratively organized as a district (the statement about the island territory currently there is outdated), and should mention that it is municipally organized as an urban okrug. The articles about the island territory and the urban okrug can be created, too, once there is enough information to warrant splitting that information out. With Solovki, again, we have an article about the islands, to which "Solovetsky District" is a redirect and where the rural settlement status should be mentioned. If there is enough to say about the district which pertains to the administrative concept but not to the islands, then yes, of course the article should be created under "Solovetsky District". Same goes for "Solovetskoye Rural Settlement"—if enough can be said about this municipal division which doesn't really belong in the administrative district article, then it can be created, too.

With the intros, the articles about the administrative districts should say "one of twenty-one" (and the municipal incorporation status and details would follow later). The articles about the municipal districts should not be created when the municipal districts match the administrative districts; the municipal aspect information goes into the article about the administrative district, which is always primary.

Does this help? I think I've given enough information to answer all your questions, but if I missed anything, it'll be my pleasure to follow-up. Best,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); August 8, 2011; 15:02 (UTC)

Yes, this definitely helps, thanks. I will try to sort all this mess out.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:32, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

IrAero Flight 103

Many English language sources are reporting that 12 people were injured in the accident that befell IrAero Flight 103. However, Rostransnadzor appears to be saying 12 killed. Can I please have some confirmation that this is the case? Mjroots (talk) 12:14, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

The Rostransnadzor link says nobody was killed. Perhaps there was a mistake and they fixed it. GreyHood 12:34, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

"На борту находились 36 человек, в том числе трое детей. В результате авиационного события пострадали 12 человек, погибших нет. Воздушное судно получило значительные повреждения." ==> (raw Google translate) On board were 36 people, including three children. As a result, aviation event affected 12 people who died there. The aircraft received substantial damage. Mjroots (talk) 12:37, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

No, Google just translates incorrectly. The correct translation is that 12 (out of 36) were injured, nobody was killed. It might be also some confusion with the recent air crash in Magadan Oblast, where indeed 12 people died (everybody on board).--Ymblanter (talk) 13:38, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Russian Foursquare merge

The articles Russian foursquare and Russian Foursquare should be merged (either way), and could do with some editing as well. Hugo999 (talk) 05:18, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Barma - Regalia of the Russian tsars

Can anyone help out with some specialist knowledge? I've been doing some cleanup on Regalia of the Russian tsars and come across the heading 'Barmas of Old Ryazan'. Barma isn't a word in the OED, nor in Britannica, nor in a specialised art dictionary I've consulted. WP:RU has an corresponding article ru:Бармы which Google translates (my Russian is rudimentary) as 'barma' or 'barmah' = 'shoulder mantle', which fits the description, but the pictures in the article show jewellery rather than a mantle (perhaps the jewellery was sewn onto the mantle?) And is this word singular or plural? It seems to be always used in the plural even when referring to just one item. Is there an English equivalent word? Also, Google is unable to translate "дробница" in:

Бармы из круглых металлических щитков-дробниц, скреплённых шнурами и украшенных драгоценными камнями и эмалями, появились в Визант, где входили в парадную одежду императов.

Online dictionaries suggest that this is a misspelling for гробница (tomb, sepulchre) but that doesn't make much sense in the context, as far as I can tell. Any suggestions? Colonies Chris (talk) 13:20, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

ru:Бармы is plural, and yes, it denotes the jewelery sewn onto the mantle. The jewelry is composed of small metal discs/shields called "дробница". I think that ru:Бармы could be worn both sewn onto the mantle or without it. GreyHood 14:17, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

I have never heard of such words before, even so I am a native russian speaker. Words "barma" or "дробница" are not used in modern Russian language and I never seen them in the common history books. Please do not invent new words in our language. Russians mostly use word "бусы" for the beads, no matter what is the beads made of. Word "дробница" would be rather associated with lead shot ball, since "дробь" means "lead shot". I think the author simply spelled in Russian letters some byzantine word (in the sentence quoted above), since he talked about decorations of the byzantine emperors. Innab (talk) 20:00, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

ru:Бармы, ru:Дробница. GreyHood 08:17, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Open page move discussions

• (Discuss) –Maria Vladimirovna, Grand Duchess of Russia → Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna
• (Discuss) – Nagatinsky zaton District → Nagatinsky Zaton District Kauffner (talk) 14:05, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Question about Moscow districts

The Korean Air CIS office is at Bolshoy Gnezdnykovsky Pereulok D1/2, Moscow, Russia What part of Moscow is this in? Thanks, WhisperToMe (talk) 18:19, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

• Pretty much in the center, inside the Boulevard Ring: 55°45'42" N, 37° 36' 17" E.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:35, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Yup, that's in Tverskoy District.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); August 30, 2011; 18:47 (UTC)
    • Thank you so much! WhisperToMe (talk) 01:48, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Now, would it be alright if I learned the districts for the following too:

• Aeroflot HQ: 10, Arbat street, 119002 Moscow
  • Arbat District
• All Nippon Airways Moscow Sales Office: World Trade Center (WTC) Room 606, Mezhdunarodnaya-2 Building, 12 Krasnopresnenskaya Nab, 123610, Moscow, Russia
  • Presnensky District
• Interstate Aviation Committee HQ: 119017, Moscow, Russia Bolshaya Ordynka str. 22/2/1
  • Yakimanka District
• Ilyushin HQ: 45 "G" Leningradsky Avenue, Moscow, 125190, Russian Federation
  • Aeroport District
• Irkut HQ: bldg. 1, 68, Leningradsky prospect, Moscow, 125315, Russia
  • Aeroport District
• Mikoyan HQ: 125284, Russian Federation, Moscow, 1-st Botkinsky drive, 7
  • Begovoy District
• S7 Airlines Moscow office: Russia 109012 Moscow 8/2, Novaya Square, Floors 4, 6
  • Tverskoy District
• Sukhoi HQ: 23B, Polikarpov str., Moscow, 125284, Russia, p/b 604
  • Begovoy District
• Tupolev HQ: Russia, Moscow, Academician Tupolev Embankment 17
  • Basmanny District
• United Aircraft Corporation HQ: Ulansky side-street, bld.1, 22 Moscow 101000, Russia
  • Krasnoselsky District
• Yakovlev HQ: 125315 Russia, Moscow, Leningradskiy prospect, 68
  • Aeroport District
• Sheremetyevo Airport (Nordwind Airlines HQ is located here)
  • Molzhaninovsky District

Thanks, WhisperToMe (talk) 01:48, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

I've added the districts to the list above.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); August 31, 2011; 13:28 (UTC)

Thank you very much! It was especially helpful regarding the Northern Administrative Okrug since that one has many aviation related businesses, and it is explicitly stated as having them by the official English page WhisperToMe (talk) 16:28, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Any time.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); August 31, 2011; 16:40 (UTC)

FAR

I have nominated Polish–Soviet War 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. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • 03:19, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Romanization of Russian guideline, cont'd

A straw poll is currently being conducted at Misplaced Pages talk:Romanization of Russian#Closing straw poll regarding the future fate of the romanization of Russian guideline. The administrator handling the closure would like to determine whether the page needs further work, can be marked as WikiProject Style Advice right away, or should be sent for further consideration by the community to mark it as a full guideline. Your opinion on this matter would be greatly appreciated. There is also a comment section should you be inclined to elaborate on your selection. Thanks.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); September 9, 2011; 13:47 (UTC)

More district questions (Moscow and St. Petersburg)

Hi! Which Moscow district is this located in?

• Sevastopolsky prospekt, 28/1, Moscow, Russia 117209 (Aero Rent head office)

And which St. Petersburg district are these located in?

• Nevsky pr., 61 (Rossiya headquarters)
• 18/4 Pilotov str., St.Petersburg, 196210, Russia (former Pulkovo Aviation Enterprise headquarters)

Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 16:35, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Aero Rent is in Cheryomushki District. Rossiya is in Vladimirsky Municipal Okrug of Tsentralny District, and Pulkovo Aviation's headquarters are in Moskovsky District.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); September 9, 2011; 17:28 (UTC)

Thank you so much! WhisperToMe (talk) 20:26, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Alexander Misharin

The aricle is under hard long-time COI attack, that poured here from Russian Misplaced Pages. Needs mediation, can someone help please? --ssr (talk) 07:00, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Moon landing

This redirect is up for discussion. Please see WP:RFD#Misplaced Pages:Moon landing. Simply south...... creating lakes for 5 years 20:01, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Gazprom HQ

This is in Moscow:

• Location:

16 Nametkina St., Moscow, Russian Federation

Which district is it in? Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 00:59, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Cheryomushki District. Are you going to request many more? :)—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); September 12, 2011; 13:43 (UTC)

Not at the moment, Ezhiki - They come by when I encounter them. Currently I'm focusing on Hong Kong, so I may not get to more Russian stuff till later. Thank you so much for your help :) WhisperToMe (talk) 21:27, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

No problem; it's just easier for me to look them up in batches than one by one. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); September 12, 2011; 21:33 (UTC)

WP:COI on Alexander Misharin

Hello! I'm an editor who spends a lot of time at WP:COIN and would like to request the help of anyone who is able to read Russian. Recently, this case has been brought to WP:COIN regarding a user who claims to be the secretary (translation of "секретарь" on Google Translate) of Alexander Misharin. A controversy has been brought over from ru.wp regarding the content of the subject's article, which appears to be highly referenced, but is being whitewashed by user:Ssr who claims that the content is not true. If you speak Russian, can you assist the COI case by reading through the references and letting us know how reliable they are? If Ssr's goals are not contrary to WP's, there doesn't appear to be a COI. If they're whitewashing bad press from the article, we'll take immediate action but that's all hinging on references that I can't read as someone who doesn't know Russian. OlYeller 17:07, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

The first paragraph ("Misharin regularly pushes for a project of high-speed train line...") is sourced to a railway fans website, which, in turn, attributes its article to 66.ru—a regional online publication which bids itself as a "modern portal of Yekaterinburg". Another source (RBC) is a well-known and reputable media company. The trainclub article, however, does not say that Misharin "regularly pushes for a high-speed train project"; it merely states that building such a road is one of the goals the governor aims to achieve. The RBC reference confirms the costs of the project given in our article (although it converts euros to dollars); however, the sentence starting with "due to vast distances..." is written with an obvious negative POV. The RBC article simply states the costs but does not draw any conclusions as to whether the costs are too high or whether air travel should be a more economical way to solve the transportation problem (indeed, it says that a trip in a high-speed train would take ~7 hours as opposed to ~30 hours in a regular train; an obvious contrast to the high-speed train vs. air travel comparison ssr removed). The last 66.ru ref in that paragraph says that the costs of the project are too high to expect it completed any time before 2020, but does label Misharin as an overspender or somesuch. All in all, I'd say that while the facts in this paragraph are right, there is an obvious spin to make the governor look as an opportunistic schemer; a spin which is present in none of the cited sources. I'd say it is a BLP problem, although not one a good re-write wouldn't fix.

Did my best to address the issue. Now 12 sources, changed tone, checked for citedness of claims. Please tell if not good enough. Gritzko (talk) 17:44, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Please do'nt add content to tha article any more, see Misplaced Pages:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Alexander_Misharin for details. --ssr (talk) 04:44, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

That is the complaint I filed. What's wrong with it? I see absolutely no reason to stop editing. Albeit, I've done everything I was going to do. And please stop blanking the section, I will undo that anyway. Gritzko (talk) 07:05, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

The second paragraph ("In July 2010...") is sourced to Kommersant—a reputable Russian business newspaper—as well as to RBC. The billboard campaign is the subject of the article in Kommersant, but it is mainly about the controversy regarding the funding for the campaign itself. There is a short note about the opposition parties commenting that the United Russia party could not have allocated 1.3 billion roubles for roads construction because that's the money of the taxpayers, not the party's own funds, but that's just usual politicking (the text on the billboard says the money was "attracted", not "paid" by the party). The RBC article is about the government of Russia allocating money for roads construction, and is not related to Misharin in any way. The two sentences in the second paragraph thus amount to little more than original research and a coatrack.

Removed Gritzko (talk) 04:58, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

The third paragraph (Misharin ran a campaign for cancellation of city mayor elections...) is unreferenced, and that, coupled with its accusative tone makes it a ripe candidate for removal as a BLP violation.

I added a nice ref to a Kommersant article. If you need more, I may find more. Gritzko (talk) 04:58, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

I did not research the rest of the paragraphs with the similar level of detail, but a cursory glance confirms the same pattern as in the first three. The sources themselves are mostly of adequate quality, but are either used in a way to present the information in a negative light or are synthesized, producing an outcome neither source would independently confirm otherwise.

That is a matter of wording. I did my best to follow original wordings closely. If not OK please tell. Gritzko (talk) 04:58, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

That said, I do not believe there is no place for a "controversy" section in that article at all. While ssr's removal of the section seems to be more or less in line with our BLP guidelines, I do have my doubts he has the interests of Misplaced Pages above his job duties. When properly re-written and sourced, a "controversy" section would be a good addition to the article; but in the state ssr removed it, it is indeed mostly (but not completely) a BLP violation. This section should be written by someone who is capable of writing it from a neutral standpoint, and sadly I don't think either Gritzko or ssr qualify. Until a person willing to do that job appears, I would recommend the complete removal of that section.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); September 12, 2011; 18:22 (UTC)

This is a great write-up. It's very helpful. Thank you for taking the time to address this issue. OlYeller 20:04, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Glad to be of service. Best of luck with the case.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); September 12, 2011; 20:08 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments, but I don't think such a third person would ever appear (requirements: acceptable level of English, familiarity with the rules of Misplaced Pages, knowledge of the topic, sufficient motivation). Hence, let's try to improve the text we have. Gritzko (talk) 04:58, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi there

Are you guys sure you are not overstretching the scope of your project somewhat? It is of course up to you to decide how you play with your toys, but you might consider that tagging everything pretty much amounts to tagging nothing. Colchicum (talk) 15:57, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

I agree that tagging all those butterflies might be a bit overstretching, but does no harm. As for the British scholar studying Soviet history, this seems perfectly relevant to the project. GreyHood 17:20, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

I've reverted the moth assessments and will try to assess only endemic ones in the future. GreyHood 17:29, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Help requested: unaccompanied minor in Russia

See Talk:Unaccompanied_minor. Is it true? Are there sources for this? If so, can somebody please try to add it to the article unaccompanied minor? I know some Russian, but it would be extremely tedious to do this myself. Thanks in advance. Andries (talk) 11:58, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Berezovsky article

As this project is clearly within scope, I'd appreciate some uninvolved input over at Talk:Boris_Berezovsky_(businessman)#Use_of_libel_tourism.2Fterrorism. Thanks, Russavia 20:00, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Portal:Moscow

I've created a new portal at Portal:Moscow. All help is appreciated. Thanks, Buggie111 (talk) 20:22, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

• Project-Class Russia pages
• NA-importance Russia pages
• NA-importance Project-Class Russia articles
• WikiProject Russia articles
• Misplaced Pages pages with to-do lists