Talk:Economy of the Russian Empire
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
This page is nonsensical word salad. It was written by a bot or by a person who doesn't speak English well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:5B0:210D:8CC8:AB23:A05E:FD53:5982 (talk) 10:31, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
A question about data
[edit]@Thenightaway I do not understand what your criticism is, I am adding relatively relevant information that is still being quoted in a leading Russian university; What makes you think that Andrei Borisyuk is an unknown person? His works appear in many places, he gives lectures and visits official TV channels, and even if he is unknown, I do not think that this somehow prevents him from quoting authoritative primary sources. For the rest, I add old sources like Oldenburg only when it is necessary to indicate an actual fact, for example, about the welfare of peasants, where the author refers to an English scientist who studied the life of peasants. In any case, the article clearly needs revision, it consists of torn-out and short quotations, which do not contradict my data. Dushnilkin (talk) 19:15, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Can you provide more info on Andrei Borisyuk? I find no economist or historian by that name, either on Google Scholar or elsewhere. There's a ton of peer-reviewed research in top journals and academic presses about the economic history of Russia. It makes absolutely no sense to rely on ancient and obscure sources, in particular when those sources contradict a 2024 review of existing research published in a leading economics journal. Thenightaway (talk) 19:23, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- [1] - some data about Borisyuk. These sources are clearly not little-known, Sergei Oldenburg's book is one of the most popular in Russia about Nicholas 2. As for Paul Gregory, as I said, we still quote many, including Mironov, I think you will not say that he is little-known. Besides, where are the contradictions with your magazine? All the information I have added either fills in the gaps in the article, or combines information from it. It should be noted that there is practically nothing in the article about the reign of Nicholas 2, this clearly creates a huge unnecessary gap in information. Dushnilkin (talk) 19:31, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- From what I can tell, Borisyuk is a PhD student at a Russian university who self-publishes books. We should not cite his works unless they are published in reputable academic outlets. We should absolutely not use his works to rebut leading peer-reviewed research. You are wrong in saying there's nothing on the reign of Nicholas II. Half of the top is devoted to his reign!: "Steady economic growth began in the 1890s, alongside a structural transformation of the Russian economy.[1] By the time World War I started, more than half the Russian economy was still devoted to agriculture.[1][2] By the early 20th century, the Russian economy had fallen further behind the American and British economies.[1] From the late 19th century to the early 20th century, the economy grew at a similar pace as the Japanese economy and faster than the Brazilian, Indian and Chinese economies.[1]" Thenightaway (talk) 20:06, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Borisyuk is not a graduate student - he has an academic degree, isn't this one of the indicators of authority? As for this information, it is too concise and does not contradict my data in any way, there is too little information about the growth of the welfare of the population and its final assessment,Borisyuk is not a graduate student - he has an academic degree, isn't this one of the indicators of authority? As for this informaAlso, why did you remove information from Mikhail Davydov's book? He is one of Russia's leading economists, whose books are published by the popular publication What is Russia Also, why did you remove information from Mikhail Davydov's book? He is one of Russia's leading economists, whose books are published by the popular publication «What is Russia» Dushnilkin (talk) 22:48, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- And again, Borisyuk recognizes the actual backwardness of the empire from the leading capitalist powers, his book is a collection of actual growth from 1894 to 1917 Dushnilkin (talk) 22:54, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- From what I can tell, Borisyuk is a PhD student at a Russian university who self-publishes books. We should not cite his works unless they are published in reputable academic outlets. We should absolutely not use his works to rebut leading peer-reviewed research. You are wrong in saying there's nothing on the reign of Nicholas II. Half of the top is devoted to his reign!: "Steady economic growth began in the 1890s, alongside a structural transformation of the Russian economy.[1] By the time World War I started, more than half the Russian economy was still devoted to agriculture.[1][2] By the early 20th century, the Russian economy had fallen further behind the American and British economies.[1] From the late 19th century to the early 20th century, the economy grew at a similar pace as the Japanese economy and faster than the Brazilian, Indian and Chinese economies.[1]" Thenightaway (talk) 20:06, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- [1] - some data about Borisyuk. These sources are clearly not little-known, Sergei Oldenburg's book is one of the most popular in Russia about Nicholas 2. As for Paul Gregory, as I said, we still quote many, including Mironov, I think you will not say that he is little-known. Besides, where are the contradictions with your magazine? All the information I have added either fills in the gaps in the article, or combines information from it. It should be noted that there is practically nothing in the article about the reign of Nicholas 2, this clearly creates a huge unnecessary gap in information. Dushnilkin (talk) 19:31, 1 September 2024 (UTC)