Talk:State Duma

Math problem

Numbers don't sum up. I guess 450 is max by constitution. In reality someone may, e.g,. die. So, what's up with the tally? mikka (t) 21:18, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

According to the Duma's website the current nubmer of MPs is 448. You are correct that the members may die or quit (additional elections are conducted permanently). MPs may also move from one fraction to another. For example, the same website states that the proportions currently are:

United Russia - 310 (68.89%)

Communists - 46 (10.22%)

LDPR - 35 (7.78%)

Rodina I - 29 (6.44%)

Rodina II - 12 (2.67%)

Others - 16 (3.56%)

So, the question is how to reflect this information in the article, because the chart looks more like the elections results rather than uptodate situation (I mean colomn "Popular vote"). If we delete this colomn we may keep editting the chart to reflect current changes Tarabarsky 18:40, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Merge proposal

Oppose merge with Duma. -- Petri Krohn 06:47, 30 November 2006 (UTC) Oppose the merge. Superzohar 15:17, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

2003 numbers, not up to date.

This article is not up to date. Russia just had a Parliamental Election. What are the CURRENT (2007) composition?--24.87.7.43 (talk) 03:18, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Parliaments

Down at the bottom of the page is a list of international parliaments in Europe. This list is inaccurate. To cite problems, both linked articles with references to Ireland and Northern Ireland deal specifically with former parliaments rather than with the Oireachtas, the modern Irish parliament, and the Northern Ireland Assembly, the modern leglisative body for the province of Northern Ireland.

cake diagramm

what about a cake diagramm?-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 14:37, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

File:Langman sto.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Langman sto.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests December 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 12:59, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

I added a panoramic view where the building in not the prime subject of the photo and should pass the copyright restriction. It is a Wikimedia photo of Menage Square. 24.241.69.99 (talk) 14:09, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Possible copyright problem

This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. Mkativerata (talk) 05:16, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on State Duma. 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/20140227093258/http://pravo.gov.ru:8080/page.aspx?88303 to http://pravo.gov.ru:8080/page.aspx?88303
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161230022705/http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/cover_story/2016/05/the_thriving_russian_black_market_in_dissertations_and_the_crusaders_fighting.html to http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/cover_story/2016/05/the_thriving_russian_black_market_in_dissertations_and_the_crusaders_fighting.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120419092844/http://www.neva24.ru/a/2012/02/11/Partija_Zelenie_vnov_po/ to http://www.neva24.ru/a/2012/02/11/Partija_Zelenie_vnov_po/

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) 16:35, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

"Confidence and Supply"

Do we have a source for saying LDPR and Rodina have a formal confidence and supply arrangement with United Russia? The way the article is written implies a formal arrangement, and not just informal "systemic opposition" status often discussed with these parties, but I've found nothing in my searches that supports the existance of such an agreement. Please advise. --HighFlyingFish (talk) 01:54, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Seeing no sources, I'm going to remove the "confidence and supply" claim and list them as opposition. If this is going to be in the article it needs to be cited. --HighFlyingFish (talk) 02:43, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Aren't the sanctions imposed by the EU worthy of a section in this article?

Today, the EU announced that it will "extend restrictive measures to cover all the 351 members of the Russian State Duma..." who voted to "recognise the independence of the self-proclaimed Donetsk and Luhansk 'republics.'" They list the measures taken, although they did not mention names. You can find it here MagnoliaSouth ^(talk) 20:01, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

An entire section? No, I think absolutely not. And these sanctions only apply to those current deputies who voted in favour of recognition, this body in its current form exists since 1993. Mellk (talk) 20:11, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Rubber stamp?

There appears to be overwhelming evidence within this article to justify using the phrase "Rubber Stamp" to describe the Duma, presently. Do any other editors object to including this phrase in the article? 2600:387:F:4312:0:0:0:8 (talk) 00:42, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Upon further review, it appears the "Rubber Stamp Legislature" article includes the Duma, and is well sourced. I feel comfortable adding this characterization to the article, what opinions do other editors have? 2600:387:F:4313:0:0:0:9 (talk) 00:06, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

I think it can be mentioned in history section about its gradual transformation to a rubber stamp, since it was competitive in its earlier days. The slide to authoritarianism was gradual and I would say after 2011-2012 (when there was a surge of opposition and this was clamped down). Depending on what RS state. Mellk (talk) 18:24, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

eiie

Ejke 151.177.62.75 (talk) 21:22, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Russia

What the parties in Russia 2603:6080:5B09:A1DB:EFA1:707F:3991:2FF6 (talk) 15:47, 23 August 2022 (UTC)