Talk:Sino-Russian relations

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject China, a project to improve all China-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other China-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (add comments)
More information about this article... High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

	Russia Portal 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.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, an attempt to provide information in a consistent format for articles about international organizations, diplomats, international meetings, and relations between states. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
???	This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.

Contents 1 Mongols and Yuan Dynasty? 2 Edits by user:Alanmak 3 Ties between Taipei and Moscow 4 A Lot of Information Missing 5 Name 6 Russia owned

[edit] Mongols and Yuan Dynasty?

What about the Mongol control of Russia during the 12th-13th cents and the Yuan Dynasty of Kublai Khan? 69.251.176.72 02:32, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edits by user:Alanmak

Re: [1] [2] [3] [4] - User:Alanmak advocates the use of infobox style to replace the inline style, and has applied the infobox style to many articles across Wikipedia despite many users have demonstrated their reservations. Anyhow, such testings should be conducted within personal namespace or at the sandbox. Even if he wants community feedback by applying his preference on articles in the main namespace, it should be done in a limited scale, discussion should have taken place - with his participation. — Instantnood 20:08, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Re: " Again, revert unilateral deletion of the material that is already in the article. " (user:Alanmak's edit summary for [5]) - It was actually user:Alanmak who replaced inline-style with his preference, the infobox-style [6], unilaterally without any discussion, despite he already knew some users have shown their reservations towards the box-style. The information first appeared in the inline style [7], contrary to his claim that box-style was how the article was like ([8] [9] edit summaries). He has also disregarded edits unrelated to what he disagrees, and reverted everything [10] [11]. — Instantnood 18:39, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

---

I announce my support for Alanmak. The box is useful.--Fox Mccloud 22:39, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

The infobox- and inline-style are conveying the same useful information. It's just a matter of layout. Meanwhile, is the title in foreign languages necessary for topical articles? — Instantnood 17:19, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

In truth the various translations of "Sino-Russian" relations shouldn't exist in either inline or infobox styles. This isn't a dictionary. It's one thing to offer the translation of official names like "European Union" or "Shanghai Cooperation Organization", and it's another thing entirely to offer translation of commonplace words that we use to describe concepts. This crosses the boundary between encyclopedia and dictionary, and should be removed. Aris Katsaris 06:19, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

I'd concur. This is a topical article, instead of an article on a person or an organisation. Nevertheless it doesn't change the fact that Wikipedia MOS suggests inline- to infobox-style. — Instantnood 11:47, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ties between Taipei and Moscow

How is the tie between the ROC and the Soviet Union like, after relocation of the government of the former to Taipei? — Instantnood 11:47, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A Lot of Information Missing

What about the Sino-Soviet Split and the boder skirmishes during the Cold War?

The present day migration from China into bordering Russian area are also conspicously absent.

The article here is biased toward the positive aspect of the relationship, instead of a disinterested review of the relationship.

[edit] Name

I have restored this article to the long-standing "Sino-Russian relations" after an undiscussed pagemove by Superzohar in November. Compareing Google Scholar hits for the phrase "Sino-Russian relations" (714) with "Russia-China relations" (164) is just one way to demonstrate how the current name is more widely accepted. Picaroon (t) 03:58, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Russia owned

russia was owned by chinese first time they met in your face white supremacits162.83.137.157 (talk) 19:50, 19 January 2008 (UTC)