Talk:Konstantin Pobedonostsev

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article incorporates text from the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition, now in the public domain.
Russia Portal
Konstantin Pobedonostsev is part of the WikiProject Russian history, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Russian history. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.
Socrates
Philosophy Portal
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.

The article gives two conflicting versions of his patronymic. It is correctly 'Petrovich.'

I don't see any mention Pobedonostsev was the offical censor. Burning of books, etc., etc.... Peters 05:44, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Came across some more good information in doing other research, incorporated. —  Pēters J. Vecrumba 02:04, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Married? Children? Holy Orders?

Did he receive Holy Orders? Was he married? Did he have any children? -- 217.190.205.250 19:10, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] English grammatical usage in the text

As so often in articles composed in or translated into English principally by speakers of Slavic languages this Wiki-entry is riddled with errors in the usage of the definite and indefinite (and especially the 'omitted' plural indefinite) article, to the point where, in a number of instances, the sense of the text is obscured. In the past I've attempted clean-ups in such circumstances, but have found the procedure so tedious and time-consuming that I have frequently given up. Why are East European speakers and writers of English, who in other respects appear to have good competence in English, apparently so unaware of this very fundamental aspect of the grammar of the English language? As a language teacher myself, I find these lapses so annoying: it is basic to correct English usage, something I would teach, and din by rote into a foreign learner of English from day1! 86.137.148.195 (talk) 09:37, 21 January 2008 (UTC)