Talk:Sinegorye

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This page is within the scope of WikiProject Russia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the Project's quality scale. (comments)

[edit] Cargo ship

The news is very recent, the most information is in russian (for sources in russian see russian interwiki page). When I'll find a news in english, I'll add it here. (By the by, you know, the whole page about the settlement was translated in this case of a Sinegorye ship...) --Yuriy Lapitskiy 09:45, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion about the recent "copyed/expa" edit

The edit, made by User:Ezhiki on 23:10, 7 December 2006, created the hidden comment with a notion "make a dab page, move the following accordingly". The question is, do we actually need a page about this ship? It's a mere cargo ship with a significantly lower importance then, for example, any historical ship like Novik. The presumed Sinegorye (cargo ship) (Sinegorye (ship)) page will be a candidate for "Afd" since it's inception.

The hidden text as follows:

Sinegorye was also a cargo ship of Transit-Sever-Vostok Company sank at 04:00 p.m. local time on October 23, 2006 in the Sea of Japan, not far from the east South Korean border. The vessel was shipping 2,794 tons of timber (including 1,289 tons of deck cargo) from Plastun, Russia to Hong Shu, China. 11 of 18 men saved from the water. ([1], [2])

My idea is to leave it in this article. Any objections?

Also, there was a section of Trivia deleted, that said that the russian name "Sinegorye" translates as "blue" ("Sine") and "montain region" ("gorye"), in a similar way as Montenegro (Chernogoriya).

--Yuriy Lapitskiy 15:04, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Yuriy. Thanks for your comments. Here are my responses:

1. If you consider that the standalone article on the cargo ship would not stand a chance of remaining and would be deleted for non-notability, then there really is no good reason to keep this information elsewhere. This article (about the settlement) is an especially poor place for this information because other than the name the two subjects have nothing in common (at least I don't see the commonality from the passage that I commented out). My recommendation would thus be to either go with a separate article about the ship (one subject—one article), and if it is later AfD'd, then so be it, or to remove this passage altogether.
2. Regarding the "trivia" section. I may agree that preserving the translation ("blue mountain region") might be useful (in which case it should be in the lead line, not in the add-on section way below), but the parallel with Montenegro, in my view, is useless. It is not at all uncommon for the settlements to be called after geographical features; the fact and analogies in themselves are really not all that interesting to merit a separate section.

Hope this helps. Please let me know if you have further questions.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:30, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

P.S. I solicited comments regarding the cargo ship in question at WP:SHIP#Notability criteria as I myself don't know nearly enough about the subject to present an accurate judgement.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:43, 8 December 2006 (UTC)