User talk:Berkunt

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This user is a recent changes patroller.

Contents

[edit] Template:Russia topics

Hi. "(Major) topics in" is an awkward phrase -- see here for some recent opinion -- so suggest the title is returned to "Russia topics". Also, the sizes of the coat-of-arms and flag currently look out of proportion here, so how about moving the flag back before the title text (English is read from left to right) and passing the coat-of-arms image to Navbox's image parameter? Sardanaphalus (talk) 15:22, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I changed the title per your suggestion. I tried your suggestion of putting the coat-of-arms in the image parameter, however it does not look good - the coat of arms becomes rather awkwardly stuck out to the side and looks far too small for the space, while increasing its size would make it dominate the template.--Berkunt (talk) 15:48, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
  • How about combining the flag and coat-of-arms as the image? I've tried this in the current version. Sardanaphalus (talk) 13:25, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Conscription in Russia

Hi Berkunt (is that like Berkut, eagle, by the way?). Understand that you might feel the need to revert my changes on the basis of length, but I'm annoyed that you describe my additions of Golt's data as hearsay. I try to be as factual as possible when adding material to wikipedia, and use my academic training, which included my Master's thesis on reform of the Russian armed forces. I can reference several places apart from Golts that describes a call-up rate during the 1990s of around 10-15%. For example, [1], page 6, [2], and [3]. Furthermore, Golts was writing in a peer reviewed scholarly journal, the gold standard for what we're supposed to rely on!! Thus you can understand why I feel the term 'hearsay' is inaccurate and denigrates my effort. Buckshot06(prof) 23:58, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[4]

Hello Buckshot. The reason I called it hearsay is because that is what it is, by definition. It is quite an awkward statement, effectively saying that "according to this person, according to this person". For all Golts' personal credibility (I'll add, he's not exactly a fan of the Russian military or leadership. I wouldn't call him an impartial observer of the Russian military due to his strong anti-government stance), a much more credible statement would be if you have the military officials themselves saying that.--Berkunt (talk) 04:59, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm sure there are CSRC reports quoting senior people in the Organisation-Mobilisation Directorate saying just that. I'll have to dig them out. Buckshot06(prof) 13:57, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Found one. Sergei Ivanov, quoted in Gazeta, June 3, 2004: 'I hope that more young men will serve in the Armed Forces this way, and not just 10% like now.' (Ivan Yegorov, 'Conscription will never be abolished,' Gazeta, June 3, 2004, pp. 1,3 via Lexis-Nexis) What do you think? Buckshot06(prof) 04:20, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Russia: it's a big article

You saw my initial attempt to trim a tiny bit of what I deemed non-essential detail away from the article. Any objections to me continuing to do so? Ideas on where to concentrate? Also, one place where I could not do so would be the lists of notable Russian writers, composers etc - they could be reduced to a list of the most notable four or five each - but someone who knows something about it would have to do it, and I'm not that person(!) Best regards Buckshot06(prof) 13:57, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Possibly unfree Image:Big202115.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Big202115.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 13:48, 5 June 2008 (UTC) --J Milburn (talk) 13:48, 5 June 2008 (UTC)