Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by LokiiT (talk | contribs) at 05:51, 17 October 2009. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archive 86

Removing of Reuters content

You have failed to explain why Russia handing over passports to a majority of south ossetians is the same as South Ossetia receiving a majority of its budget from Russia. Please restore the Reuters content you deleted. --Xeeron (talk) 16:05, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I did explain it. Please see this comment. Like I said, if you feel it necessary to reinsert some details I won't object to it. LokiiT (talk) 18:55, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

On second thought I'll do it. LokiiT (talk) 19:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Gazprom

Do you have an opinion of the article Gazprom? I've been trying to do major improvements on it for a while, but each time I ask for outside opinion on the talk page or at WP:RUSSIA, no one replies. I think the main problem is that the history chapter is messy. Obsolete / irrelevant stuff should be removed. Perhaps materials on gas price disputes with Ukraine and Belarus should be moved to a separate chapter called "Pricing" (which I will create shortly; it will discuss material such as the diffence between domestic and intra-CIS gas prices and world market prices, as well as price reform efforts by the Russian government.) Basically, I'd like the article to focus more on the present and less on the history and chronology of events. For example, the info about being given export monopoly should be moved from the history chapter to a separate chapter "exports" and stated as a fact instead of as a chronology item. Does this make sense to you? Do you have any suggestions on how to improve the article? Offliner (talk) 05:23, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm also probably going to edit other articles related to Russian energy sector soon as well. I'm thinking of creating Gas industry of Russia, but perhaps this would overlap too much with Gazprom? Also, about the Russia-Ukraine gas price dispute: everyone seems to assume that Russia used gas as a political weapon (whatever that means), but I recently came across a comprehensive article by big-name researchers of the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies, which comes to the clear conclusion that this was not the case. I will probably add some info to Russia-Ukraine gas dispute of 2009 soon. What do you think? Offliner (talk) 05:32, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

The Gazprom article isn't bad overall in its current form. The bulk of the article sans the History section is well written and well sourced. But I agree with you on the History section, the quality seems to take a nosedive there. It's all over the place and hard to follow, and it just seems too bloated and unorganized. The first half of it is almost entirely unsourced up to and including the 1993-1997 section as well. Do you have any idea where that info came from? That would be one of my main concerns for improving the article since it takes up such a huge chunk of space, and a lot of that info does seem worth keeping. But I would say get rid of all those subsections in the 2005-2006 section completely and either incorporate the info into the main timeperiod's subsection, put it in a better spot in the article or delete it if it's not important enough.

Regarding the disputes, it's indeed confusing and ugly the way they're are all split up like that so I like your idea of moving them to a new section specific to pricing. One idea if you want to cut down on the size is to just mention them all (or the situation of these ongoing disputes in general) in one or two summary paragraph, rather than each individual dispute being given its own section with a bunch of details, and just direct to the main articles via wikilinks for those who are interested in the details.

As for a Gas industry of Russia article, well there's the Petroleum industry in Russia article which is very undeveloped. Maybe that article could have separate sections for the gas and oil industries if there's not enough relevant content on gas alone to warrant its own article.

If there's anything you can think of that would be good in chart form, let me know. I made a few gas industry related charts some months ago, though they're not Gazprom specific.

Also, I just skimmed through that Oxford paper and it looks like it could add some real value to that dispute's article, which is mostly based on non-academic media sources. I'll have to read the whole thing when I have more time (bit of a busy weekend) and see how to make good use of it. That article needs some cleaning up in general.LokiiT (talk) 12:03, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the great and helpful answer. I agree with you about Gazprom, and I will working on it to improve these issues in the near future. About gas industry, I think I will first add material to Petroleum industry in Russia and then split it off to a separate article if there is enough material. Yes, I think it would be great to have charts in Gazprom, and I will have to think which figure would be most useful to have in chart form, and I will come back to you after I've thought it over. Thanks for the offer. By the way, I think we desperately need a map of Gazprom's production fields in Russia (especially those in Yamalo-Nenets okrug, since they are discussed in text in various articles) -- do you know what would be the best way to create such maps? I don't think there are any in public domain. Page 3 of is an example of what I mean. Offliner (talk) 05:30, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I'm not really sure how to make maps like that, but I can try and see if I can come up with a hand-made copy in photoshop (no promises though). I agree that such a map would be of good use. I'm assuming you've already looked in Commons? I saw a few maps showing pipelines there, but perhaps not specifically what you need. LokiiT (talk) 12:00, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

What do you think of this: European dependence on Russian energy? It was created by a POV pusher. Offliner (talk) 21:29, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Looks like a POV fork of Energy policy of the European Union. The issue of European dependency on Russian energy could easily be summed up in a subsection of that article without being given undue weight. LokiiT (talk) 22:23, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. User:Gazpr ("Gaz PR"?) appears to be an agenda-based account. A question: do you think material about the gas industry should go to Petroleum industry in Russia? (Some might claim that petroleum means only oil.) Also, should it be moved to Petroleum industry of Russia (this title sounds better)? Offliner (talk) 10:24, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah good point, a gas section might be deemed somewhat off topic in the petro article. A new article for gas couldn't hurt. You could even rename the petro industry of Russia article to Energy Industry of Russia and develop them both under that name, then split them up like suggested earlier if there's enough content. But theoretically there should be enough content for two different articles, so its up to you. Also I agree that "of" sounds better than "in".

By the way I've started to do some restructuring of the 2009 Russia-Ukraine gas dispute article. If you have any suggestions I'd like to hear 'em.LokiiT (talk) 12:48, 16 October 2009 (UTC)