Talk:Igor Spassky: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 13:24, 17 March 2010

Biography Start‑class

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Military history: Maritime / Russian & Soviet Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force

A fact from Igor Spassky appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 27 September 2005. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Igor Spassky, the head of the Russian Rubin Design Bureau, was the chief designer of 187 submarines (91 diesel-electric and 96 nuclear) as well as Halliburton oil platforms and the marine part of the Sea Launch complex?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2005/September.

Wikipedia

Copyedit

I copyedited this article a bit, but it strikes me that there may be some POV issues: the discussion of the Kursk disaster is full of vague statements about who said what. Are there some references to both sides of the argument that could be linked??

I will try to dig it out abakharev 21:51, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I gave it another once-over, removing the unnecessary multiple links to the Rubin site (clutter, and Wikipedia is not a collection of links), fixed the overuse of bold and italic, and made the odd comma or semicolon change. I agree that the Kursk section is a bit of a problem because of all the hand-waving "some said this, but others said that" without references -- I know they will be difficult to find, probably mostly in Russian. But we should find cites for criticism and rebuttal with that serious a result (i.e. people killed, which doesn't happen in band articles, and people demand citations there!). --Dhartung | Talk 02:27, 27 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for the editing to all of you, the article is much better now.
Some of the links inside of Rubin site are kind of difficult to find from the root, e.g. the Oil and Gas English link is unreachle from the menu (bug of the site), the only way to reach it, is to find the Russian link, and the substitute rus into eng in the address string.
The criticism of Kursk section is right - I partially restored the discussions about Kursk from memory, but it was five years ago. I would try to find the links to original, but tey would look like "Journalist SomeNameoff in Novaya Gazeta leaked the following information ", "Internet blog YYY.ru alleged that the information of Journalist SomeNameoff originated from Malakhit, the main competitor of Rubin", "Engineer SomeOtherNameff from Rubin in his open letter to Novaya Gazeta stated that..", No high ranking officials participated in public discussions. abakharev 12:05, 27 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I have put two anti-Spassky references and one pro-Spassky (by his own employees), all are from Novaya Gazeta, references to internet forums and blogs are probably not that interesting

Boris Spassky

I doubt they're related, but should we put it in the article that they definitively are not? --Dhartung | Talk 02:28, 27 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

And, I think, we need to link to the other one, since very notable too. And rare last name may have others confused. I did just that. --Irpen 03:30, 27 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK, we also have a dab article Spassky abakharev 03:59, 27 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Typhoon/Akula

There is a mistake in the listing of the submarine classes designed by mr. Spassky: Typhoon and Akula types are mentioned in the same line, whereas these are completely different models belonging to different types. Typhoon submarines are SSBN (strategic ones, capable of launching ballistic missiles) and Akula class are SSN (hunter/killer submarines). Much information can be found on the following pages: [1] - Typhoon [2] - Akula

The best source would be "Janes World Fighting Ships", but i have no access to it.

Furthermore, the above submarines are said to be "the biggest and deadliest nuclear submarines in the world". There is no argument about Typhoon being the biggest submarines ever built, but the word "deadliest" is clearly out of its place since this is not an objective information. Many experts would not agree to this claim.

Akula (aka project 941) is the Russian classification correspondent to NATO Typhoon. There is also NATO Akula (Russian classification project 971 or Schuka) see Typhoon class submarine. I do not know which classification to use NATO or Russian and end up using both. Site of Rubin uses Russian names in Historic section, but NATO names in the modern section. I understand that NATO names were always open but Russian were classified, so to avoid problem with KGB they were trying to use NATO classification for modern submarines. abakharev 11:41, 27 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"Hero of Capitalist Labor"

Definitely a funny heading, but unfortunately not encyclopedia-esque Kestasjk (talk) 13:24, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 44: / Line 44: @@
 *Akula (aka project 941) is the Russian classification correspondent to NATO Typhoon. There is also NATO Akula (Russian classification project 971 or Schuka) see [[Typhoon class submarine]]. I do not know which classification to use NATO or Russian and end up using both. Site of Rubin uses Russian names in Historic section, but NATO names in the modern section. I understand that NATO names were always open but Russian were classified, so to avoid problem with KGB they were trying to use NATO classification for modern submarines. [[User:Alex Bakharev|abakharev]] 11:41, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
+== "Hero of Capitalist Labor" ==
+Definitely a funny heading, but unfortunately not encyclopedia-esque [[User:Kestasjk|Kestasjk]] ([[User talk:Kestasjk|talk]]) 13:24, 17 March 2010 (UTC)