Knowledge

:Good article reassessment/Russia/1 - Knowledge

Source 📝

355:"Government Federal semi-presidential constitutional republic" which is obviously not true. And also later on: "Russia is an asymmetric federation, and semi-presidential republic, wherein the president is the head of state, and the prime minister is the head of government. It is fundamentally structured as a multi-party representative ****democracy****, with the federal government composed of three branches:". The associated German article is much more neutral: "De jure semi-presidential republic (federal republic), de facto defective democracy with autocratic to despotic features". Furthermore, the part criticizing the Russian government is a very short section in this article. Ukraine gets a lot of support nowadays but not from the English Knowledge that sides too much with Putin's view. 758:
powers that arose from a referendum should have better sources than the Deutsche Welle or Radio Free Europe. There is very likely to be found a scholar at JSTOR who wrote about it. And this is just after a short review of the article. It's my second one, and if I really go through the article I might find more as well. The discussion is going on for quite some time now and I if terrorist attacks still remain unsourced after weeks, I guess delist is the correct vote.
99:: No consensus to delist. There were issues identified around neutrality, source quality, unsourced statements, and summary style/recentism. These issues have largely been addressed over the course of the GAR by various editors: all inline tags have been addressed, the Putin section has been trimmed, and the economy section updated. There is no consensus that the remaining issues (mostly verifiability and summary style) warrant delisting. 930:, as others have noted (and following my initial comment), this article is very long. All this going through various individual sources and statements pales in comparison to that challenge (and indeed the size issue makes checking the individual sources very much harder). No user, not even the blocked nominator, has shown a willingness to address this issue, and while unaddressed it makes all other checks greater timesinks. 522:"below average" and "very bad", give some examples, and they could be modified, or even removed entirely. This is not even a big issue. As I said before, this could easily be fixed. How does a "very bad" article even pass the GA review, without a lot of hesitation? But most people, even in here, just complain and do nothing. Its been almost a month since this reassessment started, and literally nothing came out of it. 1009:. This is an overview of the whole country throughout history, so asking for continuous updates is not compatible (especially given one complaint is the length). Also the nominator being blocked doesn't automatically make his work bad. I agree the Putin section is a but recentism so trimmed that back. The other issues seem to be a bit on the harsh side for a Good Article (maybe if Featured) 733:, and the only person willing to fix it is the nominator (via sockpuppetry), it looks to me like the valid and disqualifying issues here aren't going to be solved. I don't the Thesickreservoir is up to it at the moment; if they ever do come back to fix it, they can renominate. In the meantime, let's not waste more weeks on this. 484:
The vast majority of the changes are simply source changes. The article has almost 600 reliable sources, and well-written suitably divided sections. It doesn't exactly get updated very frequently, but vandalised a lot. Which is why it got extended protected. This article is definitely more up-to-date
822:
And then there is a comment: I have also noticed that there are several sources with page ranges of more than 10 pages. I have checked on other GA's and seen that this seems to be accepted, much also at older GA's, but I also saw GA's (mostly newer ones) with sources that have page ranges of 1 or 2.
569:
You're wrong. Why would an article written by someone from the Russian government mention extensive human rights abuses and corruption; while noting that the country is currently going through a demographic collapse? And why would he write about the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, and about how the Soviets
521:
Below average? Have you seen most country articles in Knowledge? What would you call them? Stop the exaggeration. First of all, you have just about 10 edits on the English Knowledge. Second of all, have you even read the article itself? Maybe besides cherry-picking some sentences, and declaring it
858:
Hi, well good. None of the points I raised above over 10 days ago, have been addressed. For Leninism and Trotskyism I brought a source myself. Since, the article became less stable as some discussion about the lead was going on. What's the difference between a Superpower, great power and regional
599:
That's just the truth. The sentence about the "ground force" seems dubious however, and could be replaced with the fact that Russia has the world's largest tank fleet. However, the fact that it has the second-most powerful navy and air force is backed by multiple reliable sources. You are the one
979:
In a couple of days your user-id will have been around long enough, but you don't have enough edits to have access to update this article. Do you think you will have time, health and willpower to fix the issues mentioned above? If so as I suggested above I again suggest you prepare the ground by
782:
Then the whole section on the Putin era is probably recentism and a lot of it might be undue compared to the other leaders. 1 section and 3 paragraphs for Putin and none for either Breshnev or Khuruchtchev and not even Lenin or Stalin get their own paragraph. I'd just make a phrase or two on the
757:
As I looked through the article I also found some uncited info about thousands! of killed Russian civilians in terrorist! attacks by Chechen separatists! and other kind info of sourced like Deutsche Welle and Radio Free Europe. That Yeltsin was backed by western powers and the more presidential
584:
Here another example: "It has the world's most powerful ground force, and the second-most powerful air force and navy fleet." This really sounds as being written by Putin's staff members. Knowledge should be committed to the truth and not to the propaganda, especially for "good" articles.
894:
date. I fixed the date as the reason given for CN was actually not about citation, but unclear significance of the number. I don't really like working on articles this large that doesn't use shortened footnotes, so I don't think I'll do any further work myself.
1062: 171:
Statista obscures the source (impossible to view without logging in) and general methodology for any graphs. If they are cited, it should only be cited by an editor with a Statista account who notes where the data is from in the wiki reference.
204:
In the food section there are several meals/dishes unsourced. Beef Stroganoff seems obvious, but it's unsourced. And if a pancake is with meat I am a bit in doubt, unsourced, I'd prefer to see the Pirozhki in another phrase than the one with
859:
power? At least source it, so the reader can verify what is meant. Then neither the membership in the APEC nor the OSCE are sourced. For now I am not interested enough in the article Russia to edit it enough in order to keep it a GA, sorry.
157:
I'm yet to see an actual discussion on the usage of Statisa, so would really recommend that being discussed before a GAR. I don't feel like the article is unnecessarily long, especially as everything is already suitably split. Best Wishes,
554:
No need to get angry. I just gave my opinion. For me it looks like a guy from the Russian government has written it. I dont say it cannot be fixed. By the way, I am not allowed to edit anything here, because the article is semi-protected.
889:
Other editors than the blocked account has worked on this. I fixed two quick citation needed tags just now (also added two tags per discussion above). One of those tags I fixed was a citation needed added to an unclear
948:
Most of the issues got fixed. None of the issues are very serious anyway, and not enough for a demotion. Article might be large in size, but its well divided into sections, and can be easily read throughout.
450:
Most of the article's data isn't in fact old. Plus, the article is not of "poor" quality for GA. Most of its problems could be fixed in a jiffy. Not even anything close to bring about a talk of demotion.
465:
Okay, I see your point of view but with everything that's happening right now it really isn't a stable article. Just look at how much has been changed in the past two months since its approval
653:
seems keen to update but won't have access for a couple of weeks. Also by that time we will hopefully have better sources on how badly the economy and military have been hit. Meanwhile
116:
Looks like fifteen "better source needed" tags have been added—I don't think the article meets GA status with those still there, so those will have to be resolved one way or another.
681:
Since the article was listed as good the economy has changed a lot but the economy section has not been updated enough - so that section at least is way below "good" standard.
844:
I found a source about the Chechen terrorist attacks, which mentions the exact deaths from them. This can be used to back the sentence, and you can add it if you want to.
911:
I think enough time has passed without improvement for me to lean delist. A more extensive GA review is probably needed if this is going to be promoted in the future.
980:
editing more detailed Russia articles. As others have mentioned above it looks like it would be a lot of work, so I don't blame you if you prefer to do easier stuff.
1029:
My thoughts reflect what Aircorn stated. There are only 2 inline templates left and the Putin section needs some work; I don't think delisting is necessary.
661:
I really suggest you bring the more detailed pages up to date. People who disagree with your sources will perhaps duke it out there rather in this article.
272: 1001:
At the moment there are no citation needed tags and at 70k prose it is long, but not excessive (especially for country articles). It falls within the
817:
might need an update on Council of Europe and some sources and clarifications on what a potential superpower, great power or regional power is.
742: 335: 249: 125: 469:! Something that needs to be updated this frequently really should not be considered a GA, because then it would need constant re-reviewing. 349:
This is not a good article at all. It is far too Putin-friendly and not neutral. The arcticle suggests that Russia is a democracy (infobox):
431:
This article doubtlessly has numerous issues, is of poor quality for a GA, and is way out of date. It needs to be stripped of status ASAP.
373: 779:
there is a uncited "collective rule" which follows Khuruchchews leadership, then under Breshnev there is an uncited "era of stagnation".
17: 507:
For me, this article is below average and really not good because it contains too many untrue , biased, and questionable statements.
811:
Leninism and Trotskyism both could need a source, too. A whole ideology might have a volume on it which could be used as a source.
69: 139:
In addition to those tags, it is difficult to see how an article with one section long enough to be its own article meets
864: 828: 763: 477: 439: 210: 65: 416:
2021 GDP has a source from well before the end of 2021 - have the official 2021 GDP figures not been published yet?
954: 849: 738: 605: 575: 527: 498: 456: 331: 245: 121: 50: 570:
joined the Nazis in invading Poland? By the way, the article isn't "semi" protected, its extended protected.
935: 860: 839: 824: 759: 470: 432: 397:? The CIA and United States government isn't on great terms with Russia, so biased source isn't applicable. 308: 222: 206: 148: 42: 1002: 916: 900: 402: 318: 280: 232: 195: 177: 1057:
Sinai, Joshua (2015). "The Terrorist Threats Against Russia and its Counterterrorism Response Measures".
1077: 1038: 1034: 1021: 989: 969: 950: 939: 920: 904: 868: 853: 845: 832: 767: 734: 711: 690: 670: 656: 648: 623: 609: 601: 594: 579: 571: 564: 531: 523: 516: 502: 494: 479: 460: 452: 441: 425: 406: 384: 364: 343: 327: 292: 284: 257: 241: 214: 199: 181: 166: 152: 133: 117: 109: 105: 374:
https://www.economist.com/briefing/2021/11/13/vladimir-putin-has-shifted-from-autocracy-to-dictatorship
960: 324: 238: 1066: 931: 144: 615: 586: 556: 508: 356: 493:- but their content does not get challenged as much because they simply do not get many views. 1018: 985: 912: 896: 707: 686: 666: 421: 398: 380: 314: 300: 276: 228: 191: 173: 160: 1030: 101: 1111: 1090: 619: 590: 560: 512: 360: 140: 90: 1006: 1105: 1063:
Partnership for Peace Consortium of Defense Academies and Security Studies Institutes
746: 339: 253: 187: 129: 1010: 981: 964: 703: 682: 662: 417: 376: 486: 58: 702:
Thanks everyone who made improvements - I think now back up to good standard.
490: 891: 1069: 814: 808: 801: 794: 787: 776: 35: 790:
the troika is also unsourced, also a clarification would be nice.
614:
The article looks better now, my main points have been resolved.
485:
and in a better shape than some other GA class articles such as
313:
I have fixed all of the unreliable sources across the article.
730: 1005:
guidelines. I am not seeing a lot else here relating to the
466: 85: 77: 46: 600:pushing a POV here, and you even admitted to that. 772:After a bit a thorough review, I bring some more. 227:I added book sources to back all of the dishes. 8: 783:Ukraine, other suggestions are welcome here. 729:: Since the principal author of this GA was 273:Knowledge talk:WikiProject Military history 1049: 1086: 1075: 7: 393:article more authoritative than the 18:Knowledge:Good article reassessment 797:there is better source needed tag. 24: 321:) 11:26, 16 February 2022 (UTC) 235:) 11:33, 16 February 2022 (UTC) 86:Watch article reassessment page 1: 344:06:02, 17 February 2022 (UTC) 285:21:55, 12 February 2022 (UTC) 258:06:02, 17 February 2022 (UTC) 215:07:30, 11 February 2022 (UTC) 957:) 13:12, 13 March 2022 (UTC) 200:23:48, 9 February 2022 (UTC) 182:22:59, 9 February 2022 (UTC) 167:22:14, 9 February 2022 (UTC) 153:22:01, 9 February 2022 (UTC) 134:21:36, 9 February 2022 (UTC) 804:there are also some issues. 749:) 22:31, 10 March 2022 (UTC 1128: 1039:23:09, 11 April 2022 (UTC) 990:18:22, 27 March 2022 (UTC) 940:07:25, 12 March 2022 (UTC) 905:20:38, 11 March 2022 (UTC) 869:20:39, 27 March 2022 (UTC) 854:15:58, 12 March 2022 (UTC) 833:23:58, 11 March 2022 (UTC) 768:22:44, 11 March 2022 (UTC) 712:10:29, 12 April 2022 (UTC) 691:18:16, 30 March 2022 (UTC) 671:15:57, 10 March 2022 (UTC) 624:23:20, 12 March 2022 (UTC) 610:13:40, 11 March 2022 (UTC) 595:21:41, 10 March 2022 (UTC) 372:Dictatorship according to 186:I started a discussion at 110:19:45, 30 April 2022 (UTC) 1022:06:48, 9 April 2022 (UTC) 970:23:20, 6 April 2022 (UTC) 921:13:58, 1 April 2022 (UTC) 809:Literature and philosophy 580:08:26, 8 March 2022 (UTC) 565:10:59, 5 March 2022 (UTC) 532:09:31, 5 March 2022 (UTC) 517:09:14, 5 March 2022 (UTC) 503:08:19, 5 March 2022 (UTC) 480:22:58, 4 March 2022 (UTC) 461:13:02, 4 March 2022 (UTC) 442:21:43, 3 March 2022 (UTC) 426:17:00, 3 March 2022 (UTC) 407:22:49, 4 March 2022 (UTC) 385:17:36, 3 March 2022 (UTC) 365:06:56, 1 March 2022 (UTC) 275:for better refs for WW2. 1085:Cite journal requires 1003:Knowledge:Article size 883:Wait, maybe delist 861:Paradise Chronicle 840:Paradise Chronicle 825:Paradise Chronicle 760:Paradise Chronicle 473:JediMasterMacaroni 435:JediMasterMacaroni 395:The World Factbook 309:Paradise Chronicle 223:Paradise Chronicle 207:Paradise Chronicle 91:Most recent review 972: 815:Foreign relations 731:blocked in action 346: 260: 1119: 1095: 1094: 1088: 1083: 1081: 1073: 1054: 967: 959: 951:Thesickreservoir 846:Thesickreservoir 843: 735:theleekycauldron 660: 657:Thesickreservoir 652: 649:Thesickreservoir 602:Thesickreservoir 572:Thesickreservoir 524:Thesickreservoir 495:Thesickreservoir 475: 453:Thesickreservoir 437: 328:theleekycauldron 323: 312: 304: 296: 293:Theleekycauldron 242:theleekycauldron 237: 226: 190:about Statista. 163: 118:theleekycauldron 100: 88: 82: 73: 54: 1127: 1126: 1122: 1121: 1120: 1118: 1117: 1116: 1102: 1101: 1100: 1099: 1098: 1084: 1074: 1056: 1055: 1051: 965: 837: 654: 646: 471: 433: 306: 298: 290: 220: 161: 95: 84: 63: 40: 34: 31: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 1125: 1123: 1115: 1114: 1104: 1103: 1097: 1096: 1048: 1047: 1043: 1042: 1041: 1024: 995: 994: 993: 992: 974: 973: 942: 924: 923: 908: 907: 878: 877: 876: 875: 874: 873: 872: 871: 820: 819: 818: 812: 805: 798: 791: 784: 780: 751: 750: 723: 722: 721: 720: 719: 718: 717: 716: 715: 714: 641: 640: 639: 638: 637: 636: 635: 634: 633: 632: 631: 630: 629: 628: 627: 626: 612: 543: 542: 541: 540: 539: 538: 537: 536: 535: 534: 505: 445: 444: 414: 413: 412: 411: 410: 409: 353: 352: 351: 350: 347: 269: 268: 267: 266: 265: 264: 263: 262: 261: 184: 114: 113: 112: 93: 30: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1124: 1113: 1110: 1109: 1107: 1092: 1079: 1071: 1068: 1064: 1060: 1053: 1050: 1046: 1040: 1036: 1032: 1028: 1025: 1023: 1020: 1017: 1016: 1015: 1008: 1004: 1000: 997: 996: 991: 987: 983: 978: 977: 976: 975: 971: 968: 962: 958: 956: 952: 947: 943: 941: 937: 933: 929: 926: 925: 922: 918: 914: 910: 909: 906: 902: 898: 893: 888: 885: 884: 880: 879: 870: 866: 862: 857: 856: 855: 851: 847: 841: 836: 835: 834: 830: 826: 821: 816: 813: 810: 806: 803: 799: 796: 792: 789: 785: 781: 778: 774: 773: 771: 770: 769: 765: 761: 756: 753: 752: 748: 744: 740: 736: 732: 728: 725: 724: 713: 709: 705: 701: 698: 697: 696: 695: 694: 693: 692: 688: 684: 680: 677: 676: 675: 674: 673: 672: 668: 664: 658: 650: 645: 625: 621: 617: 613: 611: 607: 603: 598: 597: 596: 592: 588: 583: 582: 581: 577: 573: 568: 567: 566: 562: 558: 553: 552: 551: 550: 549: 548: 547: 546: 545: 544: 533: 529: 525: 520: 519: 518: 514: 510: 506: 504: 500: 496: 492: 488: 483: 482: 481: 478: 476: 474: 468: 464: 463: 462: 458: 454: 449: 448: 447: 446: 443: 440: 438: 436: 430: 429: 428: 427: 423: 419: 408: 404: 400: 396: 392: 391:The Economist 388: 387: 386: 382: 378: 375: 371: 370: 369: 368: 367: 366: 362: 358: 348: 345: 341: 337: 333: 329: 326: 325:WP:SOCKSTRIKE 322: 320: 316: 310: 302: 294: 288: 287: 286: 282: 278: 274: 270: 259: 255: 251: 247: 243: 240: 239:WP:SOCKSTRIKE 236: 234: 230: 224: 218: 217: 216: 212: 208: 203: 202: 201: 197: 193: 189: 185: 183: 179: 175: 170: 169: 168: 165: 164: 156: 155: 154: 150: 146: 142: 138: 137: 136: 135: 131: 127: 123: 119: 111: 107: 103: 98: 94: 92: 87: 81: 80: 76: 71: 67: 62: 61: 57: 52: 48: 44: 39: 38: 33: 32: 29: 26: 19: 1078:cite journal 1058: 1052: 1044: 1026: 1013: 1012: 998: 961:Blocked sock 945: 944: 927: 913:RoseCherry64 897:RoseCherry64 886: 882: 881: 788:Soviet Union 754: 726: 699: 678: 643: 642: 472: 434: 415: 399:RoseCherry64 394: 390: 389:Why is that 354: 315:Thelastcheck 301:RoseCherry64 289: 277:RoseCherry64 229:Thelastcheck 219: 192:RoseCherry64 174:RoseCherry64 162:Lee Vilenski 159: 115: 96: 78: 74: 60:Article talk 59: 55: 36: 27: 1031:Wretchskull 775:At section 487:Philippines 47:visual edit 1065:: 95–102. 1045:References 491:Azerbaijan 1087:|journal= 271:Asked on 205:pancakes. 1106:Category 1070:26326421 1007:criteria 892:MOS:OSNS 802:Military 777:Cold War 743:contribs 336:contribs 250:contribs 126:contribs 982:Chidgk1 795:Tourism 745:) (she/ 704:Chidgk1 683:Chidgk1 663:Chidgk1 418:Chidgk1 377:Chidgk1 338:) (she/ 252:) (she/ 128:) (she/ 70:history 51:history 37:Article 1112:GAR/67 1019:(talk) 928:Delist 887:Delist 755:Delist 727:Delist 679:Delist 188:WP:RSN 97:Result 28:Russia 1067:JSTOR 1061:(4). 966:Renat 616:Nulli 587:Nulli 557:Nulli 509:Nulli 467:alone 357:Nulli 102:Femke 79:Watch 16:< 1091:help 1035:talk 1027:Keep 1014:corn 999:Keep 986:talk 955:talk 946:Keep 936:talk 917:talk 901:talk 865:talk 850:talk 829:talk 764:talk 747:they 739:talk 708:talk 700:Keep 687:talk 667:talk 644:Wait 620:talk 606:talk 591:talk 576:talk 561:talk 528:talk 513:talk 499:talk 457:talk 422:talk 403:talk 381:talk 361:talk 340:they 332:talk 319:talk 305:and 281:talk 254:they 246:talk 233:talk 211:talk 196:talk 178:talk 149:talk 130:they 122:talk 106:talk 66:edit 43:edit 1011:Air 932:CMD 807:In 800:In 793:In 786:in 489:or 145:CMD 1108:: 1082:: 1080:}} 1076:{{ 1059:14 1037:) 988:) 963:. 938:) 919:) 903:) 867:) 852:) 831:) 766:) 741:• 710:) 689:) 669:) 622:) 608:) 593:) 578:) 563:) 530:) 515:) 501:) 459:) 424:) 405:) 383:) 363:) 342:) 334:• 297:, 283:) 256:) 248:• 213:) 198:) 180:) 151:) 143:. 141:3b 132:) 124:• 108:) 89:• 83:• 68:| 49:| 45:| 1093:) 1089:( 1072:. 1033:( 984:( 953:( 934:( 915:( 899:( 863:( 848:( 842:: 838:@ 827:( 762:( 737:( 706:( 685:( 665:( 659:: 655:@ 651:: 647:@ 618:( 604:( 589:( 574:( 559:( 526:( 511:( 497:( 455:( 420:( 401:( 379:( 359:( 330:( 317:( 311:: 307:@ 303:: 299:@ 295:: 291:@ 279:( 244:( 231:( 225:: 221:@ 209:( 194:( 176:( 147:( 120:( 104:( 75:· 72:) 64:( 56:· 53:) 41:(

Index

Knowledge:Good article reassessment
Russia
Article
edit
visual edit
history
Article talk
edit
history
Watch
Watch article reassessment page
Most recent review
Femke
talk
19:45, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
theleekycauldron
talk
contribs
they
21:36, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
3b
CMD
talk
22:01, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
Lee Vilenski
22:14, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
RoseCherry64
talk
22:59, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
WP:RSN

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.