Talk:Saint Petersburg/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2

Renaming of the City

"On January 24, 1924, three days after Lenin's death, Petrograd was renamed Leningrad in his honor. The central committee's reason for renaming the city again was that Lenin had led the October revolution. Deeper reasons existed at the level of political symbolism: Saint Petersburg had stood as the head of the Tsarist empire. After Moscow it was the largest city and the change gave great prestige to Lenin. The renaming to Leningrad emphatically symbolised the upheaval that had occurred to the social and political system."

I think we should mention that at the founding of many new nations places were named after their founders. (eg. Washington in America). As it is this paragraph allows people to believe that the renaming was done purely for cult of personality reasons and that this is something exclusive to the USSR.

The paragraph was edited as the whole article was updated with accurate account from both English and Russian academic sources (see the article and references).Steveshelokhonov 22:20, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Unused Image

Waterfront from across the Neva: a classic image not yet being used

Automatic Translation Cleanup

The recent addition by 62.78.138.226 from May 3, 2003 is the automatically translated text from Russian Wikipedia. Meanwhile I shall not attempt merging it with the original text of the article, only rewrite it in more or less readable English. Iorsh 22:08 23 May 2003 (UTC)

United States - Russia Naming Issues

I think this page should, like Rome, Paris and Athens, be mainly about the Russian city. jheijmans

But Rome, Paris, and Athens are not in Russia. =) JIP | Talk 14:49, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree - in fact the "link" to the Russian Saint Petersburg doesn't even work

It is not all that obvious that "Saint Petersburg" means the one in Russia to most people. The one in Florida is probably nearly as commonly meant, or even MORE commonly meant.

How perfectly ridiculous. I don't think anyone outside the US would so mean unless they had a vacation home in Florida. The one in Russia is a great home of the arts, seat of the Hermitage and longtime capital of Imperial Russia. As well say that the most famous Frankfurt is in Kentucky. (Yes, I know it's spelt differently.) user:Montrealais

Also, the most famous Cairo is in Georgia, and you say it KAY-row.
An aside: I live in Florida, and I've always seen Saint Petersburg, Florida written St. Petersburg, Florida instead.

I for one was not particularly aware there was a S(ain)t Petersburg in Florida. (The only non-Russian one that comes to mind is the one in Missouri, which is fictional.) --Brion

If you're talking to me, I was being heavily ironic.  :-)
For 70 Years, the Russian city wasn't even called "St. Petersburg." It was "Leningrad"! I just did a Google search on "Saint Petersburg" and of the first 10 hits (thus the most popular ones) 5 referred to the one in Florida and 5 to the one in Russia. We should note that the audience for Wikipedia is English-speakers, and in the English speaking world there are far more Americans and Canadians (yes, a lot of Canadians vacation in Florida) than Europeans. (I'm not sure what "St. Petersburg" unmodified would mean to Australians, the only other major English-speaking group in the world!) To consider St. Petersburg in Russia as THE "St. Petersburg" is about of a piece as considering Boston, England or Memphis, Egypt as THE "Boston" or "Memphis" (How many people even know there ARE such places as Boston in England or Memphis in Egypt? But yes, they were there first!) -- BRG
>>the audience for Wikipedia is English-speakers>> What? Are you serious? And remember that the whole world consider americans not so smart people who knows only about what is under their noses. I hope this stereotype doesn't correspond reality, but your "point of view" can't help to destroy this opinion.

Clearly we need some way to distinguish between:

The question is: is one of these usages of such primacy that it should get the best spot? Or should Saint Petersburg be a disambiguation page that shows the differences and requires the reader to click again for the one they wanted? --Ed Poor

Americans are not the only people in the world, BRG. Saint Petersburg in Russia is simply of greater historical and international significance than St. Petersburg, FL. - user:Montrealais

I honestly hope North Americans aren't as ignorant of geography and history as BRG suggests, but if they are, well, shouldn't an encyclopedia attempt to educate them instead of reinforcing their regionalism? I think Saint Petersburg, Russia should get the lead spot, due to both historical and current international significance. Wesley

I am an American, and I have absolutely no idea why anyone would want a raw link to Saint Petersburg to go to some town in Florida whose sole claim to fame appears to be a Salvador Dali museum. Russia it is. --Brion 18:16 Sep 13, 2002 (UTC)

It seems to be common for USAns to think anything in the USA is automatically better known throughout the world than anything outside the USA. For example, someone claimed a single street in Columbus, Ohio was better known throughout the world than Gaston Lagaffe. JIP | Talk 11:13, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

A Proposed Solution to the Naming Issues

ALC Washington suggests:

First, why St. Petersburg, Florida is more important than the above discussion would lead us to believe:
  • While I agree that Saint Petersburg, Russia, is the more historically important "St./Saint Petersburg, Florida" I think that St. Petersburg, Florida is has sufficient political significance and conspicuity to merit some changes. For those unfamiliar with the American St. Petersburg, the city is one of the most politically important locations in the United States, because it is known to be a very crucial "battleground" in the swing state of Florida-- hence making congressional and legislative elections there more competitive, and prompting U.S. Presidential candidates to make multiple visits there during campaigns. Furthermore, the St. Petersburg Times is the newspaper with the largest circulation in large state of Florida (over 333,000, twenty-third in the United States overall). Combined again with the political significance of the area, this has generated widespread acknowledgement that the St. Petersburg Times has influence which outsizes even its circulation. Beyond that, there are major league sports teams and the Salvador Dali museum, and it is of course a very popular vacation destination for American, British, and German tourists. Easy dismissal of these facts would be just as regionalist as BRG's dismissal above of the significance of the Russian city.
  • In a search of the English-language Google for "St. Petersburg", the first fifty-three results yielded three pages that related to neither city (one about the St. Petersburg Paradox, and two about a board game), and an even twenty-five related to both the Russian and American city. So the first fifty relevant results were evenly split between the two towns.
  • In a similar search of the English-language Google for "Saint Petersburg", the first fifty relevant references produced forty-four related to the Russian city and sixteen related to the American city.
A Proposed Solution
  • The two cities do in fact have different official names. Saint Petersburg, Russia may occasionally be abbreviated as "St. Petersburg," but its proper name uses the full spelling, and this full spelling is still frequently used.
  • On the other hand, the official and formal name of St. Petersburg, Florida is and has been "St. Petersburg," rarely and incorrectly spelled out.
  • In Wikipedia, writing out "Saint Petersburg" and pressing "go" should continue to automatically lead directly to the article on the Russian city, still with a link to the current disambiguation page at the top of the page. The current disambiguation page would give the Russian page sole "above the fold" ("Saint Petersburg is a city in Russia. It may also refer to...")
  • However, writing out "St. Petersburg" and pressing "go" should instead lead directly to a new, second disambiguation page, which would read "St. Petersburg" may refer to two cities..." giving both "above the fold" prominence.
If you have any questions about the idea, please feel free to ask me on my talk page. Otherwise, please respond below. ALC Washington 20:18, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Responses and Discussion of the Proposal

Reply here.
  • I have created a disambiguation page at St. Petersburg, with redirect at St Petersburg. Re the title of this article, I can only recall occasions when I've seen "St. Petersburg". I find that "Saint Petersburg" interrupts my reading, even if it is the official/formal name. Imagine reading a letter where "Mr.", "Mrs.", "Dr.", etc. are written in full. Regards, David Kernow 11:48, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
  • No, ALC Washington's proposal makes perfect sense.

Call a spade a bloody spade: it is SAINT PETERSBURG, the Russian city. At least the link on the Mariinsky Theatre page today takes one to the correctly-spelled Russian city.... Haven't looked at where else it appears.

Vivaverdi 01:39, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

  • respectfully object. It is the blooper of nostalgic fathers-founders of American Odessa, Athens, Moscow, &c., &c. Unlike founders of New York, they chose to ignore the issue that these names will always be secondary, a reflected light. So deal with it, without robbing the original city. As for "On the other hand, the official and formal name of St. Petersburg, Florida is and has been "St. Petersburg," rarely and incorrectly spelled out.", try google ["saint petersburg" + florida], and you will see that you are somewhat wrong: over 6,000,000 hits is hardly "rarely and incorrectly". mikka (t) 21:24, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
  • object per mikka. --Ghirla -трёп- 13:41, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
  • OBJECT! this is ridiculous. both 'st. p' and 'saint p' shall point to the ex-capital city of 5 million, not a sweaty resort town of 250 thousand. the.crazy.russian (T) (C) (E) 15:35, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

I have added a second link to St. Petersburg, Florida to the top, similar to what has been done with Birmingham. When you have a use that is the most common worldwide, a use that is by far the second most common, and several minor uses, it makes sense to use this convention. Kirjtc2 02:25, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Object per mikka. MaxSem 08:19, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Map and administrative regions

It seems I have got incomplete information about St. Petersburg administrative regions (raions). Many places state that St. Petersburg has 21 administrative regions and those 13 are just the urban ones, for instance here: http://nw.priroda.ru/spb/img/map_big.gif http://www.galenfrysinger.com/saint_petersburg_russia.htm

I used tourist maps and tourist guide information and drew a map with administrative districts on it, similar to my Shanghai map. If someone has a definite knowledge about administrative regions in StPb, please let me know. Otherwise I will visit local library this week and complete the maps and fill up the rest of the districts using the information I have available. I apology for the incomplete data, but lets hope I get it corrected very soon.

I will add a new link clarifying (problemizing) the administrative districts in St. Petersburg: http://www.leontief.ru/rnsc/eng/nwregions/nwr4.htm -- this says 21 "raions" (or independent settlements) and 111 administrative municipalities. The administrative system gets complicated. I am going to focus on those 21 "raions", since I have no information source for those 111 municipalities whatsoever.
Per OKATO, there are 20 administrative districts in the city. I made the corrections to the article. If you need information on lesser municipalities, leave me a note on my talk page. Or, I can write the Administrative divisions of Saint Petersburg modeled after similar articles (e.g., Administrative divisions of Dagestan). Let me know if you need assistance. Thanks.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 16:45, Nov 18, 2004 (UTC)
St. Petersburg district map is now in the Administrative divisions of Saint Petersburg article.

On Notable/Famous people

The section should be dropped or moved off to a separate page. Pretty much every notable Russian, who lived in 18th and 19th century is related to SPb. SPb was a capital. It's a city now with nearly 5 million people, like a small country. There are way too many notable/famous residents. Such lists can work for small towns but for large cities/capitals they simply pollute the artile with a list nearly the same as the List of Russians. --Gene s 06:12, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC) Besides, the Category system can address such lists much cleaner than the "lists". --Gene s 06:14, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Translation_into_English#German-to-English

I've just taken on a request to translate and merge in extra information from the German article into the English Saint Petersburg, and have started the first paragraph where there's nothing to add (I will soon translate and merge in the second paragraph though) except I'm puzzled by the differing population figures. The German article states a population almost 700 thousand lower, while as far as I can make out from Babelising (I can't read Russian) the :ru: article: 

Population of 4436,7 thousand inhabitants (5003,8 thousand inhabitants,
including the populated areas, subordinated to city hall)

but no date is given.

Other sources give:

Even the historical population charts in both languages vary for 2002: 4,700,000 versus 4,159,635 in the German article. Could the larger number be including the suburbs? -Wikibob | Talk 23:54, 2005 Feb 13 (UTC)

According to 2002 Census, the population of St. Petersburg is 4,661,219. This includes the population of all of the administrative districts under the city jurisdiction. The "suburbs" population (by which, I believe, you mean the population of Leningrad Oblast) is not included. I woul recommend using Census data as they are used across all of the Russian federal subjects to create a basis for proper stats comparison.
If you need detailed stats by administrative districts, let me know.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 21:41, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for that, I've used the 2002 census data as you suggest.

I've also added some more images, and translated and merged in a couple of paragraphs. A rough summary and details can be seen in User:Wikibob/Saint Petersburg if anyone cares to check and improve. My translating is slow and somewhat weak in places.

The German article structure is somewhat different from that of this article, here is an English translation of the German one: 

1 The Name of the City
2 Geography
3 History
 3.1 The city in the swamp
 3.2 The blooming of the city
 3.3 Rebellions, assassination attempts, revolutions  
 3.4 Leningrad
 3.5 After the fall of the Soviet Union
4 Politics
5 Population
 5.1 Population growth
6 Culture
 6.1 Literature
  6.1.1 The "Petersburger Text"
 6.2 The Hermitage
 6.3 Architecture
  6.3.1 Building and monument conservation
  6.3.2 Building style
  6.3.3 Tour of the city
 6.4 Petersburg in Film
7 Education
8 Economy (Industry?) and Transportation
 8.1 Economy
 8.2 Transportation
9 Twin towns
10 Personages
11 Literature
 11.1 English
 11.2 Literature by Petersburgers
12 Weblinks

Contrast this with the English article that starts like a tourist guide and is missing certain sections I would consider important. Before making such a drastic change, what are the views of others? Should we relocate the sections to mirror the German structure, or mirror one of these: London, Berlin, or leave it as it is? -Wikibob | Talk 03:33, 2005 Mar 6 (UTC)

Information that's present in the German article and missing from the English article is quite interesting and important. I do not see why anyone would complain if you translate it and add to the English article. I do not believe the article on St. Petersburg is a part of any series with a rigidly defined structure, so no matter in which (more or less logical) order you add sections, it should work fine. I would guess that eventually the articles on all Russian cities, St. Pete included, will conform to a standard template/layout, but currently it is not the case.
This is strictly my personal opinion, of course. If any one has any complaints, I assume they will voice them here.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 16:33, Mar 7, 2005 (UTC)

from the section Population

As for religions, 10 per cent of the inhabitants are atheist, Russian Orthodox.

This makes no sense. Does it mean 10 are athiest, the rest are russian orthodox, or that the two positions have 10% each? Sabine's Sunbird 03:58, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Was religious affiliation even asked in the 2002 census? This paragraph right below the census numbers at least gives the impression, but the first links I found with google make me believe it was not, like Russian census will not survey religious affiliation (at the bottom of page), "Both the patriarchate and the state committee agree that confessional identification is a private matter of the citizen and the inclusion of such a question in the census would constitute infringement on freedom of conscience."
Any numbers from after 1937 I found were vague and coming from religious communities. Considering this, and if I'm not interpreting the assumed percentages completely wrong, would it be safe to say, "Although there are no exact numbers from any census since 1937, a majority of inhabitants is believed to be Orthodox Christians, a significant percentage atheist, and (..)"? --Nikai 09:18, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Cultures of St. Petersburg

If possible, could you add some new cultures that have recently developed? Like architecture? These updates would be a big help for future readers. I got a little confused. Thanks. :-|

Is there not a better photograph of the Dostoevsky museum? I'm sure the graffiti on the side of the building have been removed by now. --willnotburn —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.20.60.133 (talk) 03:17, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

List of St Petersburg leaders

I moved the unprocessed list from the article space here. Please wikify and insert into a separate article:

Leningrad during the Russian S.F.S.R.(1918 -1991)

  • From 16 May 1703 -------------> Saint Petersburg
  • From 19 Jul 1914 -------------> Petrograd
  • From 26 Jan 1924 -------------> Leningrad
  • From 6 Sep 1991 -------------> Saint Petersburg

First Secretaries of the Communist Party:

  • Mar 1918 - Apr 1919:Pyotr Savelyevich Zaslavsky
  • Apr 1919 - Nov 1919:Moisey Markovich Kharitonov (b. 1887 - d. 1948)
  • Nov 1919 - Feb 1921:Sergey Semyonovich Zorin (b. 1891 - d. 1937)
  • 21 Feb 1921-14 Dec 1921:Nikolay Aleksandrovich Uglanov(b.1886-d.1937)
  • 15 Dec 1921 - Mar 1922:Ivan Nikitovich Smirnov (b. 1881 - d. 1936)
  • Mar 1922 - Dec 1925: Pyotr Antonovich Zalutsky (b. 1888 - d. 1937)
  • Dec 1925 - 7 Jan 1926:Grigory Yeremeyevich Yevdokimov(b.1884-d. 1936)
  • 8 Jan 1926 - 1 Dec 1934:Sergey Mironovich Kirov (b.1886 - d. 1934)
  • 15 Dec 1934-28 Dec 1944: Andrey Aleksandrovich Zhdanov(b.1896-d.1948)
  • 5 Jan 1945-8 Mar 1946:Aleksey Aleksandrovich Kuznetsov(b.1905-d.1950)
  • 9 Mar 1946 - 15 Feb 1949:Pyotr Sergeyevich Popkov (b.1903-d.1950)
  • 16 Feb 1949 -19 Jan 1950:Vasily Mikhaylovich Andrianov(b.1902-d.1978)
  • Jan 1950 - Jul 1952:Frol Romanovich Kozlov (b. 1908 - d. 1965)
  • Jul 1952 - Apr 1953:Aleksey Ivanovich Alekseyev (b. 1911)
  • Apr 1953 - Nov 1953: Nikolay Grigoryevich Ignatov (b. 1901 - d. 1966)
  • Nov 1953 - Jul 1956: Ivan Konstantinovich Zamchevsky(b. 1909-d. 1979)
  • Jul 1956 - Dec 1957: Ivan Vasilyevich Spiridonov (b. 1905 - d. 1991)
  • Dec 1957 - Jan 1960: Nikolay Nikolayevich Rodionov(b. 1915 - d. 1999)
  • Jan 1960 - Feb 1971: Georgy Ivanovich Popov (b. 1912)
  • Feb 1971 - Apr 1978: Boris Ivanovich Aristov (b. 1925)
  • Apr 1978 - Jan 1984: Yury Filippovich Solovyov (b. 1925)
  • Jan 1984 - Jan 1986: Anatoly Panteleyevich Dumachev (b. 1932)
  • Jan 1986 - Jul 1989: Anatoly Nikolayevich Gerasimov (b. 1931)
  • 12 Jul 1989 - 24 Aug 1991:Boris Veniaminovich Gidaspov (b. 1933)

Chairmen of the Executive Committee:

  • 25 Oct 1917 - 11 Dec 1917:Lev Davydovich Trotsky (b. 1879 - d. 1940)
  • 13 Dec 1917 - 12 Jul 1926:Grigory Yevseyevich Zinovyev(b.1883-d.1936)
  • 12Jul 1926 - 7 Jan 1930:Nikolay Pavlovich Komarov (b.1886-d.1937)
  • Apr 1930 - Jan 1937:Ivan Fyodorovich Kodatsky (b. 1893 - d. 1937)
  • Jan 1937 - Mar 1937:Vasily Ivanovich Shestakov (b. 1891 - d. 1956)
  • Sep 1937 - Oct 1938:Aleksey Nikolayevich Petrovsky (b. 1889- d. 1939)
  • Oct 1938 - 6 Jan 1939: Aleksey Nikolayevich Kosygin (b.1904-d. 1980)
  • 6 Jan 1939 - 9 Mar 1946:Pyotr Sergeyevich Popkov (s.a.)
  • 11 Mar 1946 - 22 Feb 1949:Pyotr Georgiyevich Lazutin (b.1905-d. 1949)
  • 2 Mar 1949 - Jun 1954:Pyotr Fyodorovich Ladanov (b. 1904 - d. 1989)
  • Jun 1954 - 17 Jun 1962:Nikolay Ivanovich Smirnov (b. 1906 - d. 1962)
  • Jun 1962 - Aug 1966:Vasily Yakovlevich Isayev (d. 1977)
  • Aug 1966 - Dec 1972:Aleksandr Aleksandrovich Sizov (b. 1913 -d. 1972)
  • Jan 1973 - Jun 1976:Vasily Ivanovich Kazakov (b. 1927)
  • Jun 1976 - 26 Apr 1983:Lev Nikolayevich Zaykov (b. 1923 - d. 2002)
  • 26 Apr 1983 - 23 May 1990:Vladimir Yakovlevich Khodyrev (b. 1930)
  • 23 May 1990 -12 Jun 1991:Aleksandr Aleksandrovich Schelkanov(b. 1939)

Mayor:

  • Jun 1991 -25 Dec 1991:Anatoly Aleksandrovich Sobchak (b.1937-d. 2000)

Saint Petersburg after 1991

  • From 26 Jan 1924 ----------> Leningrad
  • From 6 Sep 1991 -----------> Saint Petersburg

Mayor :

  • Jun 1991 -5 Jun 1996:Anatoly Aleksandrovich Sobchak (b. 1937 -d. 2000)

Governors :

  • 5 Jun 1996 - 16 Jun 2003:Vladimir Anatolyevich Yakovlev (b. 1944)
  • 16 Jun 2003-15 Oct 2003:Aleksandr Dmitriyevich Beglov(acting)(b.1956)
  • 15 Oct 2003 - present: Valentina Ivanovna Matvienko (f) (b. 1949)
I transferred it to List of heads of Saint Petersburg government Colchicum 10:44, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

False population statistics

I've romoved an image about population development, which wrongly stated that current population of Petersburg is only 4m. According to the official government site the current population of the city is around 4,6m.

...There´s a web page that provides a comprehensive set of population data and relative statistics:

http://www.world-gazetteer.com/wg.php?x=&men=gcis&lng=en&dat=32&srt=pnan&col=aohdq&geo=-4

Just see the first paragraph: "Europe's largest cities and towns and statistics of their population".

It's calculed for the current year, 2006: Saint Petersburg's population in the current year is 4 014 710, according to that website.

Do you really think that some strange website is a more reliable source than the government of the city? Moreover, at the top of the article in the main fact table we state that the population is actually 4,6 million. I think this is confusing and we should rely on the official governmental sources. (this was written by unknown user)

Not false, albeit confusing, because numbers are related to different administrative areas: city proper, city metro, federal subject, which are embracing each other, but remain different. Each one of those areas was changed in size and shape several times over recent decades, often changed were made not simultaneously, thus causing confusion even among Russian geographers and politicians.Steveshelokhonov 22:28, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

SanktPiterburh?

"The original name of SanktPiterburh was actually Dutch" Where does that statement come from? The Dutch name of the city is actually "St Petersburg", just like it is in English; perhaps in the 18th century Dutch it would have been Sint Pietersburgh or something like that. "Sankt" is German, not Dutch JDH 11:22PM, 2 February 2006

It was Sankht Peterburkh, which Peter the Great wanted to call it as he admired all things Dutch. He even wanted the Russians at the court to speak Dutch, for obvious reasons this was unpopular. After a time the city name was 'Russified', if you will, into "Sankt Peterburg", which is how they say it in Russia - James
no, it's pronounced in russian [sankt pyoterburk] Fixifex 05:21, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Oh no, it isn't! The stress is on the final syllable ("sanktpeterbúrk"). To be "sankt pyoterburk" the stress would have to be on the second syllable and the name be spelled Санкт-Пëтербург, which it isn't. It is true, on the other hand, that Peter the Great's original choice of name was Санкт-Питер-Бурхъ (sankt-piter-burkh}, based on a supposed Dutch "Sankt-Pieter-Burg" (although in genuine Dutch it would have been "Sint", not "Sankt"). The modern Dutch name for the city – Sint-Petersburg – is half-Dutch and half-German. -- Picapica 07:20, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes, most of what you say is correct except "Sint-Petersburg" is not felt as half-German by Dutch speakers - most Dutch-speaking people would not know that the German name for the city also contains an -s-. There is a Sint-Petersburg and a neighbouring Moskou village in the Netherlands, in the province of Frysland (where there is also an Anna Pawlowna Polder). Contrary to what you may think, both "Pieter" and "Peter" have been accepted Dutch names for centuries, but "Pieter" is indeed more typically Dutch than "Peter". Both "Pieterse" and "Pe(e)ters" exist as long established family names of patronymic origin. The saint at heaven's gate is usually called "Sint-Pieter" by Roman Catholics, except when mentioned in the company of Paul: eg officially the Ostend "Cathedral" is called "Sint-Petrus en Sint-Paulus", but everybody says "Sint-Peter en Paulus". However and even though there was a Dutch saint called "Sint-Peter" at Nijmegen, there are quite a number of villages called "Sint-Pieters" in the Netherlands and Flanders, but there are none called "Sint-Peter(s)" - except for that Frisian "Sint-Petersburg". Note that the last letter in Dutch "burg" is pronounced as a voiceless fricative (like Russian "x"), not as a plosive (like German "k") and that the "gh" spelling in older Romanizations of the name probably suggests the "x" as well . Many Germans pronounce it the same way, so the "k" in Russian may be "spelling pronunciation" and not German influence, just like the "s" in "sankt" is pronounced "s" and not "z" in Russian. As for that "-s-" in the middle, both in Dutch and German it indicates a genitive, and it is almost standard in Dutch place names, but there is indeed one official "Sint-Pieter" (yes, we actually got an article on it). OK, OK, I'll stop before I start on the etymology of the Dutch word "pierewaaien" (=fight and vandalize under the influence of alcohol, often quoted as the oldest word of Russian origin in the Dutch language).--Paul Pieniezny (talk) 16:23, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Infobox map

Why do we have a map of Leningrad in the infobox and not a map of modern Saint Petersburg? Can anyone please tell me the logic of that? Come on, Wikipedia can do better! I suggest Image:Leningrad area78.jpg is replaced with Image:Saint petersburg districts map.png. --Thorri 18:15, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Go ahead. --Ghirla | talk 08:00, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
I have changed Image:Leningrad area78.jpg to Image:Saint petersburg districts map.png. --Xeon 04:36, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Instrument manufacture

I'm doing a disambiguation link cleanup for "instrument", but I don't know what kind of instruments are appropriate here -- measuring instruments, musical instruments, industrial instruments? I'd appreciate it if someone with more knowledge would change the link for instrument as appropriate. Pimlottc 09:20, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Literature

St. Petersburg features extensively in the novels of Henri Troyat. Henri Troyat was the author of over 60 books and a member of the academie francaise. Unless someone can give good reasons why his novels are not important enough, I would suggest that User:Alex_Bakharev's deletion be undone. 139.165.200.31 22:10, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Saint or St.?

Personally I think this article should be at St. Petersburg as this is the usual English way of representing such names. Also using the 'Google test', a search for "St. Petersburg" Russia yields 26,000,000 hits while "Saint Petersburg" Russia gives only 4,950,000. — SteveRwanda 12:40, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree, St. Petersburg is the more common name for the city and according to the Wiki Naming Conventions that should be selected as the name. Vox Populi (TSO) 23:13, 6 June 2006 (UTC)


Would people please refer to the long discussions which took place way up at the top of the page. It looks pretty clear which way the majority feel about this issue.
Vivaverdi 23:17, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Fine. TSO1D 14:07, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Map

We can't see where this city is located. You better take the map on the German article.

I took the map from the Rusian article, it is clear and correct.Steveshelokhonov 22:12, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

its a rather limited article

it focuses FAR too much on the historic beauty of the city and does not describe the modern aspects of life in the city at all. clearly the reason for this is that the city is a world historical landmark but before this article can be moved to a FA or anything the modern life in the city has to be addressed.--Greg.loutsenko 13:17, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I would agree. Friends of mine on holiday reported back that "St. Petersberg is difficult to get to and they don't let you walk around the city unescorted." and "They are really picky, and don't yet understand about hospitality at all." Perhaps this could be put into context? --Hooperbloob 16:59, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
The article is more comprehensive today, than it was a year ago. We made hundreds of updates and corrections in 2007.Steveshelokhonov 22:14, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Notable People

In the list for notable politicians "John Quincy Adams" is listed and is linked to the page for the American president. Either this name doesn't belong (since President Adams was born in Massachusetts, as well as the US Constitution only allowing native born people to run for President) or the link needs to be directed to the correct "John Quincy Adams." I realize that the list also includes those people who lived in the city but could find no mention anywhere of Pres. Adams living there. UPDATE = he "served as minister to Russia from 1809 until 1814" - whatever that is (some sort of diplomat I guess).

Grand Duchess Olga Alexandrovna of Russia

Hello. The article on the last Grand Duchess of Imperial Russia, Olga Alexandrovna Romanova, is complete of facts, biographical information, and is furthermore packed with the needed information. Now the information and technical matters within the article must be resolved in order to promote the article to Featured Article status. Thank you for your time and please visit the article here (Grand Duchess Olga Alexandrovna of Russia) and make comments on how to improve the article at its Wikipedia: Peer Review page here: [1]. Thanks again. -- AJ24 23:54, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

St. Petersburg docks

The illustration of St. P's docks is not well chosen. Those 2 cranes could be from anywhere between Boston and Seattle. --72.60.10.20 21:06, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I assume going the longer way around the globe? TSO1D 21:09, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Population: More questions

The text has, "People are permitted to move to St. Petersburg only if they can show they have a room and a job or if they are married to an inhabitant of St. Petersburg."

Who are "People"? If a St Petersburg woman married someone from, say Peru, could that Peruvian come and live in St Petersburg?

And who is it who gives permission?

The text also has, "Officially the city is inhabited by 89.1% Russians. 2.1% Jews, 1.9% Ukrainians, 1.9% Belarusians ..."

This implies that Jews are not Russians. Is that so?

--Robert P. O'Shea 03:50, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the Jews & Russians. Listing Jews & Russians like that in the same demographic makes no sense to me - one is a religion, the other a nationality.
The other issue with the demographics is that they're wrong. They get listed twice, once in a paragraph, the other in a table. The former lists 1.9% Ukrainian, the other 3% - which is it?
"but the figures for 1959 to 2002 come from census returns" - someone want to link to said census returns? I've been able to find the 2002 Russian census (perepis2002.ru) - the demographics table uses 1989. Perhaps someone should update? All I can find on the Russian site is national demographic breakdown - not for St. Petersburg. Of course, it doesn't help that I don't speak Russian. Deathanatos 01:08, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
The finnish article for this page also includes the Jew/Ukrainian statistic, but all I can find is the 1.9% figure for Ukrainian. (So perhaps the 3% is the wrong one.) Again, I don't speak finnish either. Deathanatos 01:33, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Jews actually are recognized as a nationality; was that a joke, or what? The 2002 Census showed 36,570 Jews in St. Petersburg, or .78% of the city's population. I'll update the population and the demographics section to straighten out the inconsistencies.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:57, 14 August 2006 (UTC)


Bad Caption

The Caption on the image called "Rathause Petersburg" is incorrect. It mentions buildings in the art nouveau style. The building depicted is not an art nouveau building in any way, but rather an eclectic neo-baroque one.Fixifex 05:23, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

The caption was corrected.Steveshelokhonov 22:16, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Images

If you are unsure about the copyright status of an image please do not use it here. We have a lot of images already and if you put a copyvio image instead of the free one and then the copyvio is deleted, the quality of the page deteriorates. abakharev 02:44, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Articles naming

I am a little bit confused with naming of Saint Petersburg-related articles. I mean, a few of them are verbal transliterations from Russian (for instance, Nevsky Prospekt), some of them are literal translations (Ladoga Rail Terminal, Garden Street), and some of them are combination of these methods (Sennaya Square, Kamenny Island). What guideline should Wikipedia editor follow when naming new article?

  • Why Ladoga Rail Terminal instead of Ladozhsky Rail Terminal?
  • Why Garden Street, not Sadovaya Street?
  • From another side, why Sennaya Square instead Hay Square?

Sister City?

Twin towns are not known as Sister Cities in Europe and Asia, but only in the Americas. Since St. Petersburg is not an American city, I propose that the term used be changed to Twin Towns.222.165.183.244 06:40, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Copied information from link so the article can display sister cities jsut like other cities are displayed on Wikipedia. Kcuello (talk) 21:00, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

De-population mentioned in The Gulag Archipelago

The The Gulag Archipelago article currently mentions: "For instance, Solzhenitsyn claimed that the GULag system was so voracious that between 1930 and 1939, a quarter of the population of Leningrad (now St. Petersburg) was shipped to the GULag. Post-Soviet scholarship has confimed (see [1]) that the figure was even higher." I don't see a mention of this in the Saint Petersburg article and I don't consider myself knowledgable enough to add it. Can someone who is an "expert" comment on this and perhaps add it to the article? Thanks Dzubint 15:37, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Propaganda doesn't count in Wikipedia articles unless the page is about Propaganda.

-G —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 134.117.157.7 (talk) 07:38, 8 January 2007 (UTC).

History - sugestion

  According to some historians, Soviet ruler Joseph Stalin delayed the breaking of the siege and stymied the evacuation 
  of   the city with the intention of letting its intelligentsia perish at the hands of the Germans.

I wonder if it is correctly to put in Encyclopedia more than debatable statement? Without any links it looks as an allegation. Аt the very outside it could be opened to question, but than anoteher "historians" should be also listened to, shouldn't them? :) In the way it is done now it looks too preconceived. So my suggestion is to throw these phrases away.

The Band Leningrad

Does anyone else feel that the inclusion of the band Leningrad to the History section mars its overall presentation? I do understand that it shows how certain youth view the usage of the name Leningrad, but it seems to me that the section be better off without that piece. I'd like to see how everyone else sees it, though, rather than just nixing it on my own. Blinutne 17:20, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Mikhail Matiushin

The belief is that Matiushin’s colour theory was not given any consideration after its publication in 1932. The results of this study show, however, that his colour handbook has been and still is used in the colour design of St. Petersburg.[2] --Espoo 10:39, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Bigger Photos of the City

It would be great if you could post higher resolution photos of the city. Bosniak 00:06, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Good idea. I'll have this in mind on my next trip there. Thanks, Steveshelokhonov 22:50, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

English, German and Russian articles

Three good, and yet very different articles, different layout, different sources, different picture of this big city. Eventually most discrepancies between English, German and Russian articles may be edited. For people, who speak only Russian, English, or German, experiences may vary in any city and country and personal touch may spill into articles. Presidents, Prime ministers and other dignitaries who come to visit during big summits and forums, stay at such hotels as Astoria near the Mariinsky (Kirov) Opera (where Hitler planned to have his own residence) or at hotel Europa near the State Russian Museum and Bolshoi Philharmonic Hall. Such experience and impression of St. Petersburg is completely different from that of a tourist on a low budget. I was born in St. Petersburg and lived there for over 40 years, and still visit every year, albeit in the English article I do not see much of the real St. Petersburg, the city I know. This cosmopolitan city of about 5 million has strong relations with the world through business, culture, science, education, art and architecture, music and ballet, literature, films, festivals, tourism, student exchange and social ties through tens of thousands international families living and working there. Shipbuilding and submarine yards, space research and rocket science labs, world leading nuclear research center and chemical labs, advanced technologies and software developments, and all other interesting things are there, but not in the article. Besides Hermitage there are 120 other museums, many have international importance, such as the State Russian Museum with the Summer Gardens and the Marble Palace, St. Isaacs Cathedral with its golden dome - the largest golden dome in the world. There are five full size Symphony orchestras, three renown ballet companies, three opera houses, 70 drama and comedy theatres, high-end restaurants where Rasputin and other figures made history, highly entertaining nightlife with many jazz clubs, rock clubs and popular local and international DJs. There are newer streets, towers, shopping malls, new roads, bridges and tunnels, new subway lines and stations, waterfront developments, sports and entertainment, and much more going on in reality, that may help in updating articles in all three languages. Steveshelokhonov 20:27, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Steady erosion of the article

I have not seen the article since last year and I'm struck by the general erosion of the text and layout. If there are no objections, I will restore the last version as of 31 December 2006. --Ghirla-трёп- 20:14, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Ghirlandajo has a point, albeit some recent updates and additions are good and may stay. Steveshelokhonov 22:22, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
[3]? The layout sucks, I agree, but indiscriminate deletion of other people's contributions is a wrong way to deal with the problems. The version of 31 December 2006 contained a number of factual mistakes. The article is still bad, but I don't think that any of the previous versions was significantly better. There are now way too many pictures, often not characteristic of Saint Petersburg in general (e.g. Chesma palace church), which should go to other articles. Most old pictures look bad at this resolution and have no avantages over modern ones (all these buildings remained virtually intact). And something should be done with the template, which now distorts the layout. A picture of peripheral parts of Saint Petersburg should be added; the article is not only about the city center. I agree with Steveshelokhonov: I do not see much of the real St. Petersburg here. Colchicum 11:59, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
If you consider yourself a better expert than myself, you are welcome to remove my contributions, including the entire "Landmarks and tourist attractions" section and half the "History" section. I will never understand why a mediocre depiction of the mediocre Alexander Nevsky bridge should be in the article or why the fact that Lieutenant Schmidt Bridge was constructed in the 19th century should require citations. The fate of this article is another argument why we should never waste our time on high-traffic pages: they will be compromised and disfigured by reckless passerbys in a matter of several months, if not weeks. --Ghirla-трёп- 13:15, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
The more citations the better. As to the Alexander Nevsky Bridge, I agree, though it was probably aimed to illustrate the white nights. The section on landmarks and tourist attractions is ok, although I would add a separate subsection about museums and maybe gardens. Colchicum 13:36, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Article is gradually improving

1. The recent edits by Colchicum, such as film-like arrangement of pictures, improved the article. This eventually may lead to other beneficial edits and structural improvements within the article. More pictures may be added to further improve on the visual, I marked the repeating pictures and brought some more for testing them within the film-like continuity. Making the text intertwined with the visual is a creative challenge, albeit it may become a beautiful effort of group creativity, because the city has so much inspirational content. Let's make more takes in order to display and digest the ideas of others. We all love the city, albeit in a very individual way, for instance, I'd like the pictures of Chesma Church and Cast-iron grille of the Summer Garden, both are among the oldest and valuable landmarks by Yury Felten. The paragraph on St. Petersburg in films is also becoming better with variety of names and titles mentioned here, however film stills may become a bit of a problem. We may overcome this by bringing more images of landmarks that were filmed in such and such movie titles, from different angles (maybe).

2. St. Petersburg's history from 1703 on has been the essential part of Russian history, so prominent figures need to be weaven into the fabric of the article, such as Catherine II, Nicholas I, Suvorov, Kutuzov, Barclay, Kruzenstern, Pushkin, Lenin, Kirov etc.. (I tried Kirov, but this angle isn't the best). The idea is to llustrate some names in the narrative with thumb pictures of real statues or museum portraits.

3. Any pictures of the traditional symbols of St. Petersburg - the Ship on the Admiralty's spire and the Angel on the Sts. Peter and Pauls spire? Any classic pictures of open bridges with the view on the fortress?

4. I just called someone in Russia who took nice pictures of the Rolling Stones live at the Palace Square, just a few days ago, and he is willing to give a couple of his shots to public domain for this article (in the music section). The guy is a busy musician, not familiar with the Wikipedia and uploads, so I e-mailed him some instructions ... and let's wait and see.

5. This article has more room to grow, just compare with such articles as Propaganda, Paris, Berlin or London. A 360 degrees panorama from St. Isaac's Cathedral (like the panorama of London from St. Paul's, or Paris skyline from Montmartre) may be very cool here. Anyway, it is becoming interesting to fashion various visions and possibilities for editing this article.Steveshelokhonov 09:47, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

The article is now just 4kb smaller than London, which is 94 kilobytes long and listed as good article, so we have room to improve.Steveshelokhonov 10:54, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Steve, I agree that the article should be improved further. I am trying to organize the article along the lines of Boston, which is a featured article (I don't consider it ideal, but at least it is about a living city), but unfortunately in Wikipedia there are some limits as to article size, and such general articles are supposed to be sort of summaries. Therefore we probably cannot describe each bridge, each flood and each notable Petersburger (after all, Saint Petersburg was the capital of the largest country in the world for two centuries). I would suggest to split extra details into separate articles whenever possible. E.g. now we have a lot on bridges in this article, and we have List of bridges in Saint Petersburg. It would be reasonable to turn the list into the article Bridges in Saint Petersburg, adding that information there. Many particular Wikipedia articles about Saint Petersburg are in pitiful condition and also need attention. Colchicum 17:44, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Agree. We are editing simultaneously, sorry if my edit interfered with yours, and some of my info in =After the war= was messed up, so I'll yield now to give room for your creativity. And, of course feel free to correct my edits whenever you have a better offer. We still have room up to 94 - 96 kilobytes to see abigger picture, before we may start trimming it slightly. Boston is a good model too, albeit my experience in London and Toronto is more in synk with those articles, good size articles (94 and 88 kb). Regards,Steveshelokhonov 22:22, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Suggestions:

1. Europe location maps in templates for most Wikipedia geography articles look better than the current map for St. Petersburg. Maps in many other articles are more compact and neat. Shall we try a few versions of maps to find out which one may look better here?

Examples: , or , or , or

2. Demographics, government, economy, and transport paragraphs look and read better together in one logical sequence, so I moved these paragraphs closer to form a package on socio-economic information. Articles about other big cities are structured in a similar way, albeit every city has its own unique features, details, strengths and other qualities.

3. Crime paragraph is ok, although some of the mentioned groups were destroyed in the recent years and tens of their leaders are either dead or sentenced to life, still crime is a known problem in St. Petersburg. Other comparable cities, like Istanbul, Washington DC, Los Angeles, Chicago, Boston - these articles have paragraphs on crime with a variety of local specifics and tone. London, Paris, New York, Moscow, Montreal, Rome, Naples, Berlin articles do not have paragraphs on crime, and some even avoid mentioning crime. San Francisco article does not mention crime, but links to Alcatraz with rich information on crime. Article needs a paragraph about crime linked to an article about Kresty, which is somewhat comparable to Alcatraz, but very Russian in the context of history and politics.

4. People are telling me how much they enjoy looking at the film-like images of St. Peterburg in the article. Thanks, Colchicum, it is your idea, and it makes the article more informative and original. Well organized, long and colorful film-like sequences look much better than loosely scattered images. Paris, Edinbourgh, Prague, Los Angeles and some other articles also have short film-like sequences of images.

5. Famous people are essential for an article about every city, including St. Petersburg, because these are the people who built the city, developed its image, and made this city part of the big world, by making history in politics, culture, literature, arts and sciences. Tsars and historic figures, Nobel Prize laureats, writers and actors, composers, scientists and politicians are the core of St. Petersburg - that is why I placed the image of Pushkin with his hand pointing to the list of famous people, almost all of them have solid articles in Wikipedia. Many cities, such as Edinbourgh, Hamburg, Leipzig, Munich and others proudly show lists of their dignitaries, out of respect to people who put their city on the map.Steveshelokhonov 00:44, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

People I know from several sister-cities committees have agreed to watch this article. Some of those people are visiting St. Petersburg during this summer and fall, and they may start helping with the article after the end of their trips.Steveshelokhonov 21:54, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Removed the "Unreferenced" tag, because the article refers to over 70 sources, such as the official site of St. Petersburg, other sites, academic books, guides, and hundreds of links within Wikipedia.Steveshelokhonov 22:33, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Should we dispense with the section Landmarks and tourist attractions as unencyclopedic now and merge its content into other sections or split it into a separate article? Wikipedia is not a tourist guide, and no other article has a similar section. However, I think it is worth adding information on architecture (something less impressionistic and more systematic, possibly along the lines of [4]) to the history section. Now I consider such epithets as majestic, unique, striking, magnificent, imposing, illustrious, foremost, sumptuous, treasured quite useless here, uninformative, size-consuming, inherently POV and a sign of bad taste. Pictures do this much better. Don't oversize them, though. Colchicum 20:33, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
The siege of Leningrad is certainly very important, but we shouldn't go into finer details here as we have a separate article for it. I think that much of the subsection should be split into the Siege of Leningrad (except a very general description, demographic impact and some important points like Piskaryovskoye Memorial Cemetery, starvation and bread rationing, evacuation, Road of Life, Symphony No. 7 (Shostakovich)), and the subsection structure of the history section should be abolished.Colchicum 20:45, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

All cities are proudly showing their best. Articles on London, Istanbul, Paris and many other stately cities are not shy about using such nice words as "leading centre" "largest" "famous" "major" "renown" "royal" "distinctive" "fashionable" "tourist magnets" "excellent" "great" "giant" "flourishing" "preeminent" "extremely" "command center for the global economy" "top global supermodels" "famous Sherlok Holmes stories" "major studios" "prestigious schools" - and all that is fine. Such lines as "the biggest street carnival in the world" (about the Notting Hill carnival, which I like) are arguable, because Rio's carnivals are bigger, but it is a sweet and lovely tone of pride about the great city of London, so let it be.Steveshelokhonov 02:01, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Some of the original text was written before us, such as "majestic appearance" which is nice and true, so destruction may cause unhappiness of the original authors, as well as other users. We like to preserve peaceful cooperation here for better results in registering the big picture, which is unique to each city. Wikipedia is about collective expertise and experiences of many users. Attention to such gems as world known landmarks is a sign of certain intellectual finesse on behalf of users and readers alike. Every voice is unique and important in our mutual effort. Articles on many major cities show that the uniqueness of each city is the reason for a unique layout and content. We may learn from ideas of others, while presenting all that is unique and essential about St. Petersburg. Let's see if a chapter title "Built environment and landmarks" has a wider range than the term "architecture", while it may look like it is from articles on London, Paris, and other cities comparable to St. Petersburg. Steveshelokhonov 02:01, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
The updates and careful approach demonstrated by users here show substantial knowledge of St. Petersburg, as well as steady position focused on improvement of the article to the level and size of such articles as London, Paris, Istanbul and other important cities on the planet. It is a pleasure to be in a good company while working on this popular article. Regards, Steveshelokhonov 02:01, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi Steve. Can you please try to keep the history of the Siege of Leningrad to the aspects of military operation only. I would in fact suggest that for a city with a history like Saint Petersburg/Petrograd and Leningrad more then one article is required so the reader is not overwhelmed with information and that the page remains manageable. How about this approach:
  • Sanct Petersburg - building to 19th century
  • St Petersbourg - 19th Century to Revolution
  • Petrograd and Leningrad - city of the Revolution
  • Sanct Petersburg - the third century

This means that any post-liberation information needs to go either in the city article or elsewhere. The fact that Sanct Peterburg celebrated the 60th Anniversary of its liberation is irrelevant for the siege since the city was one of very many cities that celebrated 60th anniversary in 2004, and again in 2005. If you would like help with the articles, feel free to ask. However please to not adopt a siege mentalityby not talking about it. Cheers -- mrg3105mrg3105 12:35, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Photographs

Just wanna say, the photographs in this article are great. Very good work. Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim () 04:31, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, User:Deacon of Pndapetzim, your attention to this article is highly appreciated. Regards, Steveshelokhonov 00:12, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Deletions

Hi! Let's agree on this: I understand that the article is way too large, but no verifiable info should be deleted unless it is transferred to a more special article. Ok? Colchicum 19:50, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Let's work as a team and make a good article

Dear Mr. Colchicum,

1. I'd like to present myself in order to better cooperate with all users. My name is Steve. I am a native of St. Petersburg, worked there as a doctor, saw many parts of the city inside and outside (from Smolny to plants and prisons). Then I toured USSR and Europe with various concert programs as a pianist, including two years with ensemble "Druzhba" until Bronevitsky died, and then another two years as international manager for composer Viktor Reznikov doing various projects for his company. I did business tours for foreigners in St. Petersburg; then for Russians in London, Barcelona, Paris, Hamburg, Munich, West Berlin in 1989 - 1991, Rome - Florence - Venice, Singapore, India, Emirates. Then moved to New York, covered delegations in Phili, DC, Boston, Las Vegas, Seattle (1990 Goodwill Games), Toronto-Niagara, Vancouver-Victoria, and other places in the USA, Mexico and Canada. Lived in DC in the 90s, now live in LA, CA. Big cities are more different in culture, than in administration. I was at the second meeting of Mayors Tom Bradly and Anatoly Sobchak in 1991, when they signed the sister cities accord. I still frequently visit and stay at my old home in St. Petersburg. It is a bit different from what it was in the times of foodlines.

2. A big picture for this article is slowly emerging, before it may become comprehensive and balanced, then we'll do some fine tuning. My vision for this article seems to be compatible with yours, still I'd appreciate a better understanding of your culture, in order to work together as a team, and make a good article. St. Petersburg has very unique architecture, history, science and culture, and we are making a diligent effort in connecting all pieces of mosaic together. The article is still not bigger than London, New York or Istanbul, the size should not be restricting us at this early stage of creativity. Some people from LA are now in St. Petersburg, and I asked them to look at this article with a fresh eye, when they are back. It is always good to have more professionals in the team.

3. I agree with your idea to transfer some data to special article, eventually we’ll have to do some thoughtful splitting work. My recent edit was hinted by a comment from a designer that the weather table is overly bright and dominant among fine photographic images, he recommended to balance colors by removing the heavy red and the intense dark blue, then rest our eyes on the softer version for some time. So I tried to soften the weather table by removing its brightest parts, to see how it helps us to achieve a better presentation. Modest weather tables are seen in articles on other big cities. Also several horizontal images (weather table, cityscape panorama, Kazan cathedral) may play a better role as visual accents and attention stoppers, as long as they are balanced in color with the overall presentation. A bright weather table may be a centerpiece in a specialty article on weather, albeit in a mosaic of such finesse as offered by St. Petersburg, the weather table may not be louder than Fine Art.

4. All articles about cities are boasting their cityscapes, sometimes several panoramas in full screen and beyond, so any user can move it with a click. We may need to have each of two (or more, if you have ideas) versions exhibited here for an equal amount of time. The brighter weather table was there for a few weeks. It's time to try a smaller and softer weather table for a few weeks, that's my offer in the recent edits. After a few weeks we shall do a thoughtful discussion and then may agree on a better version. Please give both versions an equal time exposure. Eventually the cityscape panorama should have a higher resolution and better light, and we'll get a better one, it's only a matter of time, lucky we don't have a quarterly plan here. The goal is to make a fine article with tasteful, artistic presentation.

5. Wikipedia has many articles that are done by just two or three users, but St. Petersburg is too great, it belongs to the whole world, and the article may become better only through a thoughtful teamwork. Thousands of users and visitors are watching our mutual effort. Let's do our best. Thank you. Regards, Steveshelokhonov 08:14, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Dear Steve, thank you. Nice to meet you here. I am also a native of Saint Petersburg and I still visit it at times. I agree that now (and generally) we'd better concentrate on content rather than layout, but then let's be consistent here. As for the weather table, we should probably ask those who developed this template to soften its colors. Also note that when I occasionally looked at this page under a 800 px resolution, the panoramic images distorted the layout awfully. As such screens are still in use, we should avoid pictures wider than 500-600 px. They can easily be enlarged by clicking on them, if necessary.Colchicum 11:38, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Dear Colchicum, please, your idea "we should avoid pictures wider than 500-600px" should also apply to your "Weather table" (which you made on July 29, see edit history). A good example is the careful weather table for Istanbul. It would be nice to have a careful and thoughful team member. Please ... Steveshelokhonov 23:04, 30 August 2007 (UTC)


Deplorable deterioration

I haven't looked at this article for some time, and I am stunned how it has deteriorated... -Camptown 20:56, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Agree with Camptown. For one thing, the recent layout changes have made the article worse, not better. To cite one example, in several places text is now sandwiched between two images, contrary to WP:MOS#Images. There are way too many images; a separate "Gallery of St. Petersburg" is needed. Some of the text is stilted (e.g., repeated omission of the article "the" before nouns), which detracts from readability. More substantively, why was the section dealing with St. Petersburg's pivotal role in the 1917 Revolution condensed to a few brief, uninformative sentences? JGHowes talk - 07:02, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Beautiful pictures, good information

We are now in St. Petersburg visiting from Scandinavia. This article is beautiful and pictures illustrate the text very well. We saw the Hermitage museum and other museums and palaces. Thank you Wikipedia. Kristina, Lea, Erika and Jouni. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.249.35.148 (talk) 10:07, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Too many images!

I, and apparently some others on this talk page, think there are way too many images in the article. It's not that they're bad images, it's just that it's really distracting and ruins the layout making it hard to read the text, which should be the focus, after all. Accordingly I have removed a lot of images from the article, trying to keep it to about one per section, focusing on the most relevant or interesting images, and with a left-to-right alternation to give good text flow. Since there are still a ton of good images I had to cut, I left them all in a gallery at the bottom. Perhaps we should integrate them into smaller galleries in the various sub-articles? Comments? —dgiestc 22:44, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Much improved, Dgies, I'm glad to see this article look much better and comply with WP:MOS. JGHowes talk - 16:28, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Cathedrals and churches

Someone awhile back deleted the reference and image to the Smolny Cathedral without explanation (see image here. Is this not a part of the Smolny Institute campus? JGHowes talk - 16:28, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Logical nonsense

In section "Climate" it reads: "From December to March there are 123 days average with snow cover [...]" - Really? Dec(31)+Jan(31)+Feb(28.25)+Mar(31)=121.25 days, out of which 123 are days with snow cover? --Gulliveig 11:11, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

"Peterburg" vs "Petersburg"

The names "St. Peterburg" and "St. Petersburg" (with and without the "s") are used interchangably in the article, in a totally random matter, which isn't good. It should be unified. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.64.185.238 (talk) 09:19, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

I wonder why wasn't the opportunity used to call the city in other languages as it is in Russian and as it should be promoted: Sankt-Peterburg (Санкт-Петербург)? Why are Chinese worried that their capital is called Beijing, not Peking but Russians don't worry about Moskva and Sankt-Peterburg? Atitarev (talk) 13:59, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
The Russian government probably has more important things to worry about than names of Russian cities in foreign languages. I hear, the Peking to Beijing "renaming" was ordered by Mao and diligently enforced for many years, before the usage shifted... --Illythr (talk) 19:52, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
I know there are always other priorities in Russia, somehow the Czech presidents are still worried that Czechia hasn't settled in the English speaking worlds (although it is known), it's only the awkward full name "Czech Republic" with no abbreviation.
I am not putting names, transliteration and translation of names above economy or education, etc, but now that Russia is becoming prestigious there is some time for things like names, transliteration, etc, promoting Russia and the Russian language and so on. Well, if it's no priority for you, Illythr, you don't have to part in the discussion, someone who is interested might reply :-).
Note that the French city of Marseilles changed to Marseille in English without any pressure or movement from France and now archaic Leghorn is becoming more known as Livorno (Italy), simply because more people know the original name.
Yes, the official transliteration of Chinese names was requested from the the Chinese government, some people would argue that Hanyu Pinyin is not correctly reflects the pronunciation (I don't) but now we have very consistent method and no-one has to scratch their head and ask Hsi-An, Sian and Xi'an are a reference to the same city in China. Russia needs a consistent romanisation method and come to a list of recommended names transliteration, like China did. South Korea is going through a similar process after introducing a new Korean romanisation scheme (can't confirm this but I read discussions). Atitarev (talk) 21:39, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
As fascinating as the subject undoubtedly is, folks, please note that talk pages are established to discuss the articles and ways to improve them. If you wish to chat about anything but the article itself, please take it to a forum outside Wikipedia or at the very least to your own talk pages. Thanks.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 21:49, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Ëzhiki, please use my own talk page, if you have personal questions/requests. for me. The discussion topic is about the name Sankt-Peterburg (there exists a redirect page for it) vs Saint Petersburg, it's not a personal discussion and is directly related to the article with the same name. As I said before, if you have nothing to add to the topic, please don't post, that way we have much less personal offtopic discussions. I am not suggesting to rename the article yet but to provide more references to the original Russian name. Please reply only if are pro or contra this idea, not against me as a person asking this question. (I apologise if you a moderator/administrator here, I don't know who is who here yet and it's hard to tell from your own page (not obvious)). --Atitarev (talk) 23:04, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Since you are new here (welcome, by the way :)), you might want to review WP:ENGLISH and WP:RUS before continuing this discussion. Those should be sufficient for you to understand the difference between a "commonly used English name" and "romanization", as well as to explain why you should not expect many comments "pro or contra this idea". Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 04:21, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

History section too long

Thanks for this great article, but I think the history section should be shortened. I a aware that the history of Spb is eventful, but many people would be more interested in e.g. demographics or crime rate etc. Andries (talk) 23:38, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

'Revolutions' Section

This section is ridiculously POV by way of anti-Communist bias. Why has this slipped in unnoticed? Nylarathotep (talk) 20:35, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Saint_Petersburg/Archive_1&oldid=1144367439"