Talk:Kremlin

Untitled

Quoting from the article: "The northwestern section of the Kremlin holds the Armoury building." - as I've been to the Kremlin a few months ago, I'm pretty sure the Armoury building is in the southwestern section not the northwestern one. Proof found here - http://www.kreml.ru/en/main/kremlin/ - if you move the mouse cursor around, you'd find the armoury is in fact the most southwestern building in the Kremlin. So should be changed to southwestern?

Same again for the Arsenal, it's in the Northwestern section not the northeastern section. Proof found in the URL I supplied. I also find quite a lot of stuff are missing from the article such as the Tsar Bell etc. OK for me to fill those gaps? --EnglishDude 17:10, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't know who wrote this stuff. Please be bold and fill the gaps. On the Tsar Bell, check the article on the Motorins. --Ghirla | talk 21:28, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

ok so? 168.243.90.230 (talk) 15:39, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

"Kreml" is a Mongol word

The word Kreml is a Mongol word meaning fortress, and supporting information can be found below. http://www.athenapub.com/rusarch1.htm (Journal review: Russian Archaeology (Rossiiskaia Arkheologiia))

However, someone named "Ghirlandajo" (Andrey from Yaroslavl) keeps deleting my contribution about the name. No matter you like it or not, the history stays the same. You can not change or alter it. Kreml being a Mongol word does not reduce Russian greatness or history.

It is a historic fact that there are many Mongol/Turkic words in Russian language as a result of Mongol yoke. For example, Russian war cry "Ura" is a Mongol word, adopted by Peter I. So, please stop deleting my additions. Everyone deserves to know more.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.41.91.191 (talk) 14:30, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Not only is it a Mongol word, almost every Russian today carries Mongolian genes. The Russians were once a conquered people. 86.136.200.108 (talk) 02:28, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Actually, all Russians are Mongolians and should be properly named as such. You can see from their faces that they are typical Asiatic tribe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.165.173.131 (talk) 22:04, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Wiktionary says "Ultimately from Old East Slavic кремль (kremlĭ)". 70.36.142.114 (talk) 14:43, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

No it is not a Mongol (Chinese) word. It derives from Slavic term "kremlin" or "kre mlin" or "kraj mlin-a" (place of the Mill) and means "by the Mill". It was a fortress built nearby the river. I was never in Moscow so I speculate the city is surrounded by water or river as I understand this word. To the "user" above me; 70.36.142.114, this is a typial racist claim. Secondly Russians are generally of R1a Y haplogroup. No, traces among old Slavs of N haplogroups were found. They are "blond aryans" if you are going into these Wermacht SS waters. So Heil Hitler to you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.182.65.197 (talk) 16:18, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Journalists?

a bunch of Kremlin-critical journalists dying of mysterious causes... http://www.comedycentral.com/sitewide/media_player/play.jhtml?itemId=83444 I only just now heard about this -- how much truth to it? (worthy of inclusion in the article?) 199.214.27.4 16:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Skyscrapers

Will the new skyscrapers being built in Moscow be visible when looking at the kremlin? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.49.197.7 (talk) 03:23, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Kremlin as government analogy

I am not an expert but it seems that the use of Kremlin to reference the government has different meanings in Soviet and modern Russia. The way I interpret things, in Soviet times Kremlin references all branches of the government while in modern times it references only the presidential branch. Given that distinction there would be two analogies to point out, the Soviet era analogy, Kremlin == Washington (and British equivalent) and the modern era analogy, Kremlin == White House, Downing Street. Can anyone confirm, deny or modify this interpretation? [[fltchr]] (talk) 17:11, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Tanks and the Foundation

On the show Life After People on the History Channel, an episode goes into how the Kremlin's foundation has been devastated by constant military parades. Shouldnt this be included in some way, shape, or form?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.36.75.51 (talk) 01:43, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

"the study of Soviet and Russian policies"

I think this should be changed, but can't really think of the best alternative - probably "politics". Kremlinology is/was more than studying any particular Soviet or Russian government's "policies", it is/was about tracking and studying everything happening in these governments and, indeed, in Soviet times, the CPSU - changes of personnel, who was on the up, who's been demoted (or worse). Anyone offer a better word than "politics"? Maelli (talk) 16:51, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

UNESCO region

According to http://www.unesco.org/new/en/social-and-human-sciences/unesco-regions/ there is no Europe or Russia region, only Europe and North America, therefore I changed the UNESCO region to the proper one. Sadly it does not have a list of sites as a region, while Europe has. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.191.2.218 (talk) 14:44, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

As noted by Alex Bakharev, we're not restricted to following UNESCO proscriptions as there is far too much information to be carried by a few articles. Please see List of World Heritage Sites in Europe. Even there, Europe has been broken down into further regions for the sake of natural disambiguation. That is why the link stands as it is, although I do wonder whether it shouldn't point to List of World Heritage Sites in Eastern Europe since the current link is to a WP:DAB page. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 01:14, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Many errors

The article currently has many errors and omissions with regard to the actual buildings that existed; which were demolished for which particular new buildings (significant errors here); and what is the current situation. No mention of the Presidium currently being demolished. And it requires proper book referencing on these points: some sources contradict each other on large and small points, so whomever attempts a rewrite should be diligent in their research. For example, the Church of the Savior In The Forest is sometimes termed the Savior in the Pine Forest. Engleham (talk) 18:45, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

You're more than welcome to improve the article yourself using reliable sources. Thank you! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 23:36, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

synecdoche

Sorry for the confusion. Why is kremlin not synecdoche? Isn't it a part representing a whole (Russia)? Benjamin (talk) 11:07, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Benjaminikuta. Per WP:RS, it is a metonym (see George Lakoff's "Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things"). --Iryna Harpy (talk) 21:54, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified one external link on Moscow Kremlin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100926161854/http://archive.kremlin.ru/eng/articles/history_00.shtml to http://archive.kremlin.ru/eng/articles/history_00.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:43, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Kremlin from Bolshoy kamenny bridge.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:29, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 22 February 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved per request. Favonian (talk) 19:23, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

---

Moscow Kremlin → Kremlin – Both lowercase kremlin and Moscow Kremlin are negligible on a Google NGRAMS search compared to "Kremlin". Kremlin already redirects here, it is the clear primary topic and common name. (t · c) buidhe 10:38, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

• NGRAMS (t · c) buidhe 10:38, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
• Support - per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:CONCISE. BilledMammal (talk) 14:02, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
• Support. I'm surprised this article was not titled this way already. Super Ψ Dro 14:22, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
• Support per nomination, BilledMammal and Super Ψ Dro. Common name, indeed. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 21:05, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
• Support. Rreagan007 (talk) 21:18, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
• Support per WP:CONCISE. 'Kremlin' already redirects here. SWinxy (talk) 21:47, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
• Support, per nom and preceding; excellent idea. Antandrus (talk) 21:51, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
• Support. Very clear primary topic and common name. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:59, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
• Support per nom and SNOWCLOSE.--Ortizesp (talk) 18:02, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
• Weak Support Kremlin more academically does refer to other fortified citadels, but given the media's influence, I would not oppose the move. I would, however, recommend that the article's lead remains largely inact and mention "Moscow Kremlin" first. InvadingInvader (talk) 21:19, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
• Support Per above arguments, Kremlin is a more appropriate name for it. Ralphw (talk) 00:46, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
• Support as InvadingInvader put it, with "Moscow Kremlin" put first. Mellk (talk) 00:51, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
• Support Everyone calls it the Kremlin, it is like calling the White House the 'Washington White House' Randoperson1 (Randoperson1) 22:14, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

While I agree, I don't think that is a good comparison as there are many other such fortresses in Russia called kremlin, like Ryazan Kremlin, Kazan Kremlin, Suzdal Kremlin, and so on. Mellk (talk) 05:25, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

• Support Almost everyone calls it the Kremlin and even those who don't will understand if you just say the Kremlin. Saying Moscow Kremlin is just unnecessary. Natalius (talk) 04:29, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Rurik dynasty is of Ukrainian origin, not Russian!

The Kremlin article says "... fortified complex in the centre of Moscow founded by Russian ruling dynasty of Rurikids".

This is false. The Rurik dynasty article literally says "The Rurikids were the ruling dynasty of Kievan Rus'". There was no such thing as Russia in the times when Rurik ruled Kyiv! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naydeath (talk • contribs) 08:02, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Changed "Russian" to "Rus'". I'm not an expert in the topic area, so I may be wrong. If so, editors are free to revert back. QueenofBithynia (talk) 22:18, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Firstly, "Ukrainian origin" is nationalist nonsense. Secondly, the only ruling Rurikids there were when this kremlin was built were in Russia (the "RULING dynasty" of Russia) and this does not refer to origin. This is Ivan III we're talking about. Mellk (talk) 23:31, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 21 April 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (non-admin closure) NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 21:07, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

---

Kremlin → The Kremlin – There are many kremlins throughout Russia (or the former Russian Empire); only one is the Kremlin, with a capital K.

Similar analogy to the Holocaust, which is given the definite article and capitalised, as opposed to generic use of the term holocaust. QueenofBithynia (talk) 20:20, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

• Support - MOS:AT says "The" is allowed as a title prefix if it is an inseparable part of a name (The Hague) or title of a work (A Clockwork Orange, The Simpsons). So the question then becomes whether the name of the place is "Kremlin" or "The Kremlin". Searching Google Ngrams is slightly tricky in this case, because we'd want to exclude cases like "the Kremlin spokesperson said..." from the count for "The Kremlin". I believe the patterns <start of sentence> Kremlin <verb> and <start of sentence> The Kremlin <verb> should be fairly reasonable approximates that should yield very few false positives. They do fail to distinguish between the term used as a name of a building from the metonymical usage, but I think this is fine given that both usages are mentioned in the lede. The results indicates that "The Kremlin" is vastly more common over "Kremlin" alone: [1].

  That’s just wrong, and the example is actually a counter-example. “The Kremlin spokesperson” is a specific one, “a Kremlin spokesperson” is an undetermined one, “Kremlin spokespeople” is a collective. In this example, the definite article the applies to spokesperson, and Kremlin without the is an attributive noun. —Michael Z. 03:14, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

  @Mzajac: you seem to have completely misunderstood what I wrote. Yes, including The Kremlin spokesperson in the count for The Kremlin would be incorrect. Which is the reason my search specifically excludes cases like The Kremlin spokesperson by requiring the verb construct. Ljleppan (talk) 05:17, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

  So according to prevailing usage it would be “a Kremlin spokesperson,” and not “a The Kremlin spokesperson.” So the The is not inseparable. Yes, I misunderstood part of your statement, because it confusingly contradicts the other part. —Michael Z. 13:29, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

  I don't quite follow what you are trying to say at the start. As for inseparability and a a the constructs, even the canonical example of an inseparable the, The Hague, tends to not use it: [2] Ljleppan (talk) 14:10, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

• Support per Ljleppan above. ╠╣uw [talk] 09:46, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
• Support per nom. Mellk (talk) 12:35, 22 April 2022 (UTC) I see good arguments for against so I am leaning towards oppose now. Mellk (talk) 17:28, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
• Support per nom; Kremlin should remain a redirect here per WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT. BilledMammal (talk) 13:41, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
• Comment I seem to recall hearing the term "Moscow Kremlin" as well, specifically in contexts where "The Kremlin" might be synecdoche for the Russian government. But "The Kremlin" is most common. User:力 (powera, π, ν) 00:55, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

  Per Google Ngrams ([3]), Moscow Kremlin (both with and without a preceding The) is very uncommon. This is also mirrored by the previous move discussion (from Moscow Kremlin to Kremlin) above. Ljleppan (talk) 06:14, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose. I've changed my mind on this one. I have come across several instances in news articles of "Kremlin" being used without an article in its adjective form, as well as the fact that the article never seems to be capitalized mid-sentence the way something like "The Hague" seems to be. That, combined with our general policy on avoiding beginning article titles with "The" for searching and indexing purposes pushes me over to the oppose side. Support per above. I took a look on Britannica, and they also title their article The Kremlin, and also The Hague, but interestingly just Holocaust. Rreagan007 (talk) 16:31, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose The article is not part of the name, but merely a definite article. Fails to satisfy WP:THE —Michael Z. 03:19, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose per User:Mzajac. Cf. White House and other presidential residences. —  AjaxSmack  03:43, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:THE. Not usually capitalised in running text. All kremlins will be referred to as the Kremlin and capitalised within their own contexts. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:33, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. As Necrothesp points out, "the" is not capitalized in running text in this context, and shouldn't be added to the title per WP:THE. I also find the White House example persuasive. Calidum 13:49, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. Clearly covered by WP:THE/White House guideline. Favonian (talk) 15:13, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

How to join it

How to join it now 102.90.43.43 (talk) 21:43, 11 February 2024 (UTC)