User talk:Mike Novikoff

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Mike Novikoff. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Mike Novikoff. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Mike Novikoff. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi Mr. Novikoff!

Hi! I don't know quite what went wrong there. I think it was because I was using the visual edit mode, but thought I was doing the source editing. I'm glad the content wasn't lost. I would like to add to the signs and symptoms section, if that's okay. Also, would it make sense to move the "...x% cases ... multiple system atrophy" the the section below, "causes"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CaptiainSparkles (talk • contribs) 01:09, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Hello, I guess you're talking about this. Of course you can try to expand the article, just take care not to remove the existing content by accident, and make sure that your additions are based on reliable sources as described in WP:VERIFY, WP:RELIABLE and WP:MEDRS. I'd rather not give specific advices on that article's content since I've just been doing general maintenance on articles and don't know much about that particular topic; such things are better discussed on article's talk page or maybe at WikiProject Medicine. And remember to sign your posts on talk pages. Good luck! — Mike Novikoff 03:25, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

July 2019 lunar eclipse

Sorry for writing in Russian. Спасибо за спасибо! =) Что же касается [1] — забавно, но у меня тоже 9 этаж. Я как раз заранее подготовился, хотя условия очень плохие были. Но я правда уже третий раз попадаю в такую ситуацию (после июля 2018 и января 2019), поэтому выработалось терпение. Ждал, потому что до сентября 2025 "приличных" затмений не будет (будет в октябре 2023 года, но это так, меньше чем это). Использую сайт timeanddate.com для солнечных и лунных затмений — он мало того, что все затмения по конкретному городу показывает за любой период, большое оно будет или мелкое, но и, например, по той же Москве можно даже конкретное место выбрать (очень показателен пример с солнечным затмением августа 2026 — на северо-западе Москвы ещё как-то можно застать, а на юго-востоке практически нет). Так что готовьтесь и желаю успеха в съёмке будущих затмений! А то чего-то мало фотографий по России в последнее время. --Brateevsky ^{(talk to me)} 06:29, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Фотография получилась прекрасная, гораздо лучше, чем я мог бы сделать моей нынешней мыльницей. А я в этот раз даже и не знал о предстоящем, просто случайно выглянул в окно и удивился: не затмение ли это, не прогуглить ли? :) Пока гуглил, уже тучи набежали. Да, в другой раз надо заранее готовиться. Но хорошо, что этот вид всё-таки не упущен, спасибо на самом деле! :) — Mike Novikoff 07:19, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Crosswiki

@Michgrig: Thanks for still remembering me, but I don't feel eligible for ruwiki anymore. Your chat mates wanted to prevent something, didn't they? Well, they've quite succeed at that: they have effectively prevented all my future contributions there. To the point that I won't do any edit, not even reply to a message. Owing to our WP:BLANKING (which your ВП:ЛСО doesn't allow) I can reply here instead. Anyway, I don't have much to say except that of course I'm on your side in that discussion, but, on the other hand, I don't think that ruwiki can be significantly improved at all (and that's the main reason why I've abandoned it). It's a victim of a long-standing genocide, you know, and it's too late to try and change it. Much like the Brezhnev's Soviet Union. I'd be glad to see you in the more pleasant places – at Wikidata, for instance (unless you would import the unsourced stuff from WP infoboxes and categories, which is a real problem there). SY WBR [sincerely yours, with best regards]. — Mike Novikoff 23:50, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

@Wikisaurus: a reply to your ping. (Basically the same as above.) Do you really think that ruwiki is so precious that you can be "thrice indeffed" there and still go on? I see you can, but let me remind you that most decent people have much lower limits, they don't even need to be blocked at all to realize that nothing can be accomplished there and that they just have to leave. Indeed, there's plenty of such, most of them never to be publicly noticed. Not to mention what these bandits have done to my log, and now I'm really afraid of them. Long story short, I won't ever go back (even though I deeply regret that ruwiki will never be improved), so you can do whatever you want without asking me.

@Sealle: I won't do any personal NPA either, just see what you (and some of your friends) have done. — Mike Novikoff 01:50, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:15, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to [email protected], so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at [email protected].

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Rollback granted

Hi Mike Novikoff. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits. See also: Hanlon's razor.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war. Especially keep the three-revert rule in mind.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:31, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Tobias, I'm really impressed by your careful investigation of my crosswiki contribs which is a right thing to do. A great contrast to my similar request in ruwiki two years ago (that was granted too, but an admin your age wanted me to plead rather than to study my contribs himself, and it took much public support to successfully close it). And yes, Hanlon's razor is my favorite topic since early 2000s when I learned it from /usr/games/fortune placed in my ~/.bash_profile. :) — Mike Novikoff 01:30, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Hey Mike Novikoff, sorry for the late response. I only saw your message today, and smiled. Perhaps it was /usr/games/fortune for me too; I'm not sure, but I once had a look at its huge text database. Thank you very much for the kind feedback. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:38, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Test edit at Verizon Wireless?

Hi Mike Novikoff, I see you left a message on an IP's Talk page concerning a potential test edit of theirs that you reverted. That same IP made a confusing edit to the Verizon Wireless page (see this edit).

Could you take a look at my Verizon Wireless Talk page request and revert the potential test edit from User:75.168.82.113 if you also think it was done in error? I work for Verizon (and have openly disclosed my conflict of interest wherever I ask for assistance) so I ask others to make edits on my behalf. Thank you, VZEric (talk) 19:34, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes, this IP's edits are weird. The edit in question is undone already, and I've also reverted two other similar edits by this IP, as I've said on Talk:Verizon Wireless. — Mike Novikoff 20:00, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Write-up on QR code marked as promotional

Hi, you marked my article

"In 2010, Glassco in India began to sell Volumetric Flasks with QR codes. Here QR Codes is being used on Laboratory Glassware specifically on volumetric glassware to enable the user to retrieve the calibration certificate that is given by the manufacturers gets lost during the usage and this certificate is needed to re-verify the lab glass. With the help of QR Code it has become easy to just scan the QR Code printed on the each glassware and retrieve the certificate that belongs to the glassware resp. This helps to save a lot of time to retrieve the certificates and also helps to save the paper. "

As promotional, can you please let me know how to make it non-promotional as I wrote it for educational purpose and dont have much knowledge regarding the same.

Thanks n Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ertarunz7 (talk • contribs) 04:28, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

@Ertarunz7: I'll agree with this reply to you. Essentially, it's a matter of a weight of your subject (a particular company's equipment) in the context of the general topic (QR codes as such). Some subjects should not be included at all, some may be only briefly mentioned without a detailed description, and very few deserve an external link to the company's website. And determining subject's weight is all about providing the citations to the sources that are both reliable and independent. The latter – making sure that the source is third-party – is most important since it shows whether somebody else besides the company itself cares about it, and to what extent. — Mike Novikoff 22:35, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Stress marks in Russian

Hey, you removed the cyrillic spelling with stress marks from Vladimir Lenin page. I actually think that it's very beneficial to keep at least some. English speakers often have trouble placing the stress correctly in foreign names. So why not keep it? Berehinia (talk) 03:42, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

"People, when will you stop using the damned Ruwikian instead of Russian? Stress marks are not part of any Russian word and should be removed at sight (and even in the doomed ruwiki there wasn't ever a consensus to use them); see also WP:RUROM and WP:OVERLINKING"

The correct way to show the pronunciation in any language, including the stresses, is IPA which is already present there. (The stress mark goes just before the stressed syllable). I'm just shocked by the number of Russians who don't know that. — Mike Novikoff 04:20, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Maybe you should add a little tutorial on your user page for them ;) Berehinia (talk) 17:38, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes, that might be a good idea, as I do this kind of edits rather often, so that a shortcut might be useful for an edit summary. (In fact, my summaries are usually still shorter than the discussed one, like this). For a starting point, users may just read the present discussion. :)

BTW, I had often removed some redundant stress marks even in ruwiki, even though they don't use the IPA, and my edit summaries then referred to "ВП:УДАР, point five". Note that the IPA is mentioned on that page, and it's really a pity that a wiki in my native language is driven by the wrong people, so that they ultimately can't ever get anything right. Anyway, I hope we'll do it right in the Wikipedia here. — Mike Novikoff 20:10, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

At last, I've created WP:RUSTRESS for the purpose. — Mike Novikoff 00:50, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Question on another Verizon request

Hi Mike Novikoff, you helped me with a question last month. I am seeking help or guidance with an unrelated question. If you have a chance, can you take a peek?

Here is the issue. The Verizon Communications article contains a Finances section with an introductory paragraph discussing 2017 financials. I sought to have this edited to reflect the most recently reporter financial figures from 2019. A reviewing editor, User:Spintendo, declined to do so because the 2017 figures are correct for 2017. I pinged the editor who originally added the Finances section, User:Afus199620, to get their input on how to proceed. It has been a month and I have not heard back from those editors. Would you mind taking a peek at Talk:Verizon_Communications#Financial_information? I work for Verizon (and have openly disclosed my conflict of interest wherever I ask for assistance) so I ask others to make edits on my behalf. Thank you, VZEric (talk) 11:34, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Following up to let you know you can ignore this. The issue is resolved. Thanks. VZEric (talk) 21:19, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Template:Languages of Russia

Hello. You made this edit following to WP:DECOR but you violated the unification with the other similar templates Template:Languages of Guinea, Template:Languages of Canada etc. If you want delete the flag from Template:Languages of Russia, you must do the same in all the similar templates. It's desirable to open the discussion rather tnan you make so massive changes. In any case we must have either all the templates with the flags or all without. So I revert you edit--Unikalinho (talk) 16:38, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

The quote from WP:DECOR: "Human geographic articles – for example settlements and administrative subdivisions – may have flags of the country and first-level administrative subdivision in infoboxes.". This means that in our case may be the flagicon, because the term "language" relates to human geography--Unikalinho (talk) 16:43, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

@Unikalinho: Of course all the flag icons within the navbox headings are subject to WP:DECOR and should be removed. I may not spot all of them at once, but I'm aiming to this. (Meanwhile, please note that we don't have ВП:МНОГОЕ here at enwiki, and furthermore we do have WP:ICON § Consistency is not paramount regarding these flag icons specifically, so there's nothing wrong with removing either "too many" or "too few".)

The sentence that you are quoting comes from WP:INFOBOXFLAG, and there are several points to note. First, please note the difference between a navbox and an infobox. We are now talking about the former, not the latter. Second, the paragraph heading reads "Avoid flag icons in infoboxes". Third, languages are by no means equivalent to "settlements and administrative subdivisions". The most important is certainly that a navbox is not an infobox, and WP:ICON does not approve the use of flag icons (or any other images) in headings of the navboxes at all. — Mike Novikoff 20:20, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

I remain in my opinion. We can go to WP:3O and resolve the problem. But the situation in whitch the one template has the other decor among many similar, violates WP:POINT--Unikalinho (talk) 10:13, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

@Unikalinho: I'm not sure what you mean by referring to WP:POINT. Did you even read it (esp. WP:NOTPOINTy), are you accusing me of being disruptive? Have you read my explanations above, should I repeat them? In short: (1) WP:ICON does not approve the use of any icons within the headings of navboxes; (2) I usually remove them when I see them, per WP:DECOR; (3) I have no obligation to act as a bot and to watch all the WP's navboxes at once, that's beyond my limits.

Surely you are free to ask for other editors' opinions. For instance, you may start with WT:Manual of Style/Icons to make clear what WP:ICON really prescribes. — Mike Novikoff 12:30, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

""Human geographic articles – for example settlements and administrative subdivisions – may have flags of the country and first-level administrative subdivision in infoboxes." -- clear written. And you cannot object the fact that the term "language" relates to human geography. This is firstly. And secondly: the similar pages in wikipedia must appearance similarly -- is one the main principles of the any encyclopedia. So, either all ttle language templates with the flag or all without. But the massive edits must have consensus, whereas your edits don't have it--Unikalinho (talk) 06:41, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

> articles ... may have flags ... in infoboxes
In infoboxes. Not in navboxes. See the difference?

As for consistency and uniformity, let me assure you that I've always been supporting it (and Manual of Style is indeed my most favorite of all the WP guidelines). So, if you care that much, we might just go ahead and fix the rest of the language templates. Some of them don't have these flags already, and I've fixed Guinea and Canada that you've mentioned earlier. Consensus is almost never a concern when implementing various parts of MoS (since MoS itself is clearly a consensus thing), just be sure to put the relevant shortcut(s) in the edit summaries. — Mike Novikoff 09:50, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

 Done removing flag icons and tidying for category:Europe language templates. — Mike Novikoff 01:49, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

 Ditto for category:Asia language templates. — Mike Novikoff 06:40, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

 Ditto for category:North America language templates and its subcats. — Mike Novikoff 03:20, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

 Ditto for category:South America language templates. — Mike Novikoff 04:32, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

 Ditto for category:Africa language templates. — Mike Novikoff 06:20, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@Unikalinho: For the record, you've posted this at WP:3O without even notifying me. Anyway, it was corrected and finally dismissed altogether later on, and none of my abovementioned edits were reverted or even amended by anyone, so I can safely say there is a silent consensus for them. (The best way of achieving a consensus that I'm enjoying ever since registering my account here at WP in 2012). I can even thank you for inspiring my tedious job, since it makes all these templates comply with MoS now. — Mike Novikoff 06:20, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Я Вам тогда тоже отвечу на русском, как Вы это сделали другому коллеге. Итак, Вы утверждаете, что я не сообщил Вам о своём намерении обратиться на WP:3O, но Ваше утверждение не соответствует действительности (пруф). Вы в ответ сказали, что я могу спросить других пользователей. Так что Вы отлично знали о моём намерении, и был консенсус за моё обращение на WP:3O. И в таком случае Вы должны были подождать на решение по этому вопросу, и тогда можно было бы, в случае удовлетворительного ответа, сделать массовые изменения ботом. Вы же, не дождавшись решения, самовольно сделали массовые изменения, а это есть неконсенсусные действия. На мой запрос, возможно, рано или поздно будет дан ответ, но я не исключаю того, что обращусь на WP:RAA. Насчёт ВП:МНОГОЕ, Вам коллега уже всё обьяснил--Unikalinho (talk) 09:45, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

It's getting rather boring. No extra approval is required to implement the established guidelines (if it wasn't the case, we'd just never get anywhere), and WP:CONSENSUS "does not mean unanimity" (so you can't stonewall the MoS). Your request at WP:3O is already removed, and you definitely should remind yourself of WP:OTHERPARENT before you consider any other steps.

Please also note that my conversation with Abiyoyo below wasn't targeted at you, and you are taking it completely wrong. Just in case you don't know, he habitually removes these flag decorations and unusual navbox colors just like me, particularly in ruwiki, so it's simply a kind of a crosswiki "experience exchange". — Mike Novikoff 23:50, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

@Abiyoyo: We don't have the infamous ВП:МНОГОЕ here at the WP, do we? ;) — Mike Novikoff 06:20, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

I don't know, but it seems that WP:BOLD does not contain it as an imperative, but warns to be careful. Quite more relaxed than in ruwiki as it seems.--Abiyoyo (talk) 06:47, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Exactly. I just wanted to remind you of discussions like this (which ultimately made me leave ruwiki: "The sooner you get out of Oz altogether, the safer you sleep, my dear"). I'm really sorry that we coulnd't make ВП:ДЕКОР there as strong as WP:DECOR. — Mike Novikoff 07:56, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

The one who wants to change something in a quite a conservative milieu has to be patient. And has to be there also.--Abiyoyo (talk) 09:19, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

После того, как я "утратил доверие ОнВамНеДимон'а", прямо как тот Лужков, они ж меня теперь обессрочат вообще за любую реплику, и это испортит мне SUL, который я создавал совсем не у них и не для них. Мои реплики там, разумеется, не будут вежливыми, я скорее сам себе отрежу яйца и съем их на завтрак, чем стану употреблять слова типа "коллега" по отношению к получившему трояк по русскому языку второкласснику, называющему себя "доцентом МГТУ". Нет, не смогу никак, увы. Лучше быть в ВП, где правила реально работают (и даже можно в любимом MoS вылизать каждый байтик до блеска). — Mike Novikoff 11:11, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

WP:Stress marks in Russian words

I would like to inform you that I have userfied your essay. I think your point of view is unconventional and your reasoning is flawed. In any case such a serious matter as removing stress marks from everywhere requires a serious, thorough discussion. --Moscow Connection (talk) 16:35, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

@Moscow Connection: In fact, it's a matter of presenting the correct verifiable spelling instead of a misleading original research. (How many reliable sources use these stress marks at all?) Yet you haven't given a single reason why a distorted spelling should be preferred to the correct one. It's not much helpful for indicating the pronunciation (we have IPA for that, so it's at best redundant), and it's just plain wrong representation of the spelling as such. Do you have any reason other than the traditional ruwikian "stress marks are needed because they are needed"?

Please also note that your action is rather aggressive. An essay simply states some facts and opinions, it does not pretend to be a policy, so you shouldn't start with moving it away just like that. — Mike Novikoff 11:11, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

1. It is common practice for Russian encyclopedias to mark stresses.
2. Are you saying it's impossible to find the correct stress for "Lenin" [2]? The Great Russian Encyclopedia has the stress marked:[3]. And the Great Soviet Encyclopedia: [4].
3. See Wikipedia:You don't need to cite that the sky is blue. Irrefutable, well-known facts don't need explicit sources. If you are unsure if the stress is marked correctly, you can just find an online recording of a Russuan-language news show, a recording of an interview with the person in question or something like that. And, by the way, in your essay you are suggesting to replace the current notation with IPA transcriptions, but the IPA transcriptions would be equally unsourced.
4. You used your essay in an edit war. A user said to me [5] that you reverted her and directed her to the rule (or essay, or whatever it is). And it wasn't all, she even started making edits based on your newly-written and nonconsensual rule. I had to stop her and explain that your page was just a personal essay, not a rule. So your essay had already done some harm. --Moscow Connection (talk) 19:35, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

@Moscow Connection:

1. Yes, and my essay even says this explicitly. But enwiki is not a Russian encyclopedia. It's a place where most readers and editors don't know Russian at all, they don't even know what a Russian stress mark is. They expect to see the correct sample of a Russian spelling, and they find a distorted one instead. Worst of all is that it's the only sample they find, and they might don't even realize the pitfall. They'll just think that Russian is something like Czech or Spanish and that they've got the correct spelling already. Have you ever seen these stréssed námes imported into Wikidata as P1559 ("name in native language") or P1477 ("birth name"), and do you think it's right? That's what I'd call a real harm in the end!

2. It's trivial to find whatever you want about Lenin, esp. in Soviet Encyclopedia. Now what about Poklonskaya, Navalny and thousands of such? And do you know a slightest hint for a pronunciation of "Евгения Куйда"? :-) That's what I've always said: in 95% of the cases it's trivial (for us Russians) and thus redundant, and in the remaining 5% it's an awful WP:OR.

3. It's great that you mention WP:BLUE, it's one of my favorites for some six years. I've always appreciated an excellent photo of a blue sky there, yet a real fun has always been to look at both blue and red, as shown in WP:NOTBLUE.
But yes, it's essential that IPA is used while a Russian spelling remains clean. Don't you agree that it's the only way we can show both correct pronunciation and correct spelling? And, as my essay says, IPA is already present in most of the articles that need it.

4. Please be careful with such wording, you definitely should know what constitutes WP:EDITWAR and what doesn't. Thanks for reminding me of Abbyjjjj96, I guess it will be fair to invite her (are you sure about the gender?) to the discussion.

And let me quote Ozzy: "Slow down! You're moving way too fast...". Really, you shouldn't act in such a rage. — Mike Novikoff 02:30, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for inviting me to the discussion (and yes, I'm a woman), but I'm afraid I don't speak Russian and thus wouldn't have anything of use to contribute. Best wishes. Abbyjjjj96 (talk) 06:42, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't have time to read this now. I'll look at it later.
But could you please not start edit warring at "Natalia Poklonskaya"? This was not only impolite, but didn't comply to WP:BRD. I simply reverted to the old long-standing (and therefore consensual) version, that's all. --Moscow Connection (talk) 17:42, 28 October 2020 (UTC)