Talk:History of Russia

message: I think this Wikipedia article needs to be locked for vandalism prevention. The article itself is not an appropriate place to argue for or against controversial, political, points of view. 71.175.80.169 (talk) 11:58, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I would like to get the official Russian history told by the official Russians. 2620:135:F000:3:A1F9:F470:D95E:FD16 (talk) 18:16, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: Ronaldo is a trillion times better than messi 84.64.125.220 (talk) 13:15, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suiiiiii 

message: History of Russia#Mongol invasion and vassalage (1223–1480) and History of Russia#Grand Duchy of Moscow (1283–1547) narratively overlap 4 centuries, containing a lot of duplicate information. I think this is because this article, , is trying to do two things simultaneously: 
# tell the , from Kievan Rus' to Vladimir-Suzdal to Muscovy to the Tsardom, Empire, Soviet Union and Federation; and
# tell the  as a geographical area in Eastern Europe and all of Northern Asia (as covered by the Russian Federation since 1991). 
For #1, it makes sense to take a Muscovite perspective. For #2, that perspective is way too narrow, and it makes sense to talk extensively about not just all the other Rus' principalities like Novgorod Republic, Novgorod-Suzdal, Tver, Ryazan, Rostov etc. but also all those non-Rus' states such as khanates, emirates, empires, kingdoms etc. that existed on the Eurasian steppe and Siberia before Moscow conquered them.
We can't really do both simultaneously without creating the massive overlap that the article is currently showing. I'd like to improve this article, but perhaps we should reach agreement about this first.
A third alternative to a state-based or geography-based narrative would be to just make things chronological, by century for example. Instead of looking at events only through the eyes of the Mongols / Golden Horde (which also has its problems, as e.g. the Novgorod Republic was never subjected by it), or only through the eyes of Muscovy, we can explain relevant events that happened in, say, the 15th century under the heading . This prevents overlap and duplication of information. I'm curious what other editors think, but if nobody responds, I think I'm gonna introduce century-based sections to solve the issues. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 15:06, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:OVERLAP]] 13th to 16th century 

message: The amount of things factually incorrect in this article is mind boggling! 
Such an article should not be based on myths and falsehoods propagated by the Russian Empire in the 18th to 20th century. Valdazleifr (talk) 14:19, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: You need to be more specific Marcelus (talk) 21:32, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  article’s historic infidelity  

message: To say that prehistory of Siberia has to do with the prehistory of Russia is in my opinion not correct. This would be the same as to say that prehistory of Denmark has to do with prehistory of Greenland. Just because Greenland is under Denmark rule the prehistories have nothing in common. Kinna (talk) 21:54, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I aggree! This is nonsense. And the complete paragraph of prehistory is very, very poor. E.G. the Mesolitic an AC/C-Neolithic periods are completely missing!HJJHolm (talk) 11:23, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prehistory