Talk:Austria–Russia relations

See also

Article Russia in the European energy sector is clearly related to the paragraphs about Russian state-owned energy companies in Austria. Russian influence operations is clearly related to the paragraphs about Russian espionage in Austria. Is there any reason not include links to the articles? Gazpr (talk) 01:25, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

I have added the link to the article inline within the paragraph. Some Russian POV would be welcomed from you as well, because where I sit, it would appear you are only adding one-sided negative POV to articles, and this may make some think you are engaging in advocacy. Some balance would be great. --Russavia ^{Let's dialogue} 02:08, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

I have also removed the part on the bank, as it robertamsterdam.com is not a reliable source for information. And The New Times is also a WP:FRINGE publication which has a history of polemics, and does not have a history of fact checking and reliability. Plus, the issue is only tangentally related to the bilateral relationship of Austria and Russia, and would be WP:UNDUE in the article based upon the sheer amount of information out there on this subject. Perhaps add some other information to the article, which is directly related to the history of this relationship. I can give you some sources to work from if you like? --Russavia ^{Let's dialogue} 02:15, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Austria–Russia relations. 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/20070317092815/http://www.maxwell.syr.edu/moynihan/programs/ces/pcconfpdfs/Kennedy.pdf to http://www.maxwell.syr.edu/moynihan/programs/ces/pcconfpdfs/Kennedy.pdf

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) 06:51, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 2 January 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, although there's quite a bit interest in having a broader discussion about titles for bilateral-relations articles. (closed by non-admin page mover) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 05:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

---

Austria–Russia relations → Austro-Russian relations – Per WP:COMMONNAME. Current name shows no use, in google scholar or in ngrams. Between "Austro-Russian relations" and "Austrian-Russian relations", the former is the common name, with ten times more ngrams, and twice as many google scholar results. This is also backed by JSTOR results, with 107 for the proposed name, 7 for "Austrian-Russian relations", and no results for the current name. BilledMammal (talk) 04:41, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

• Support. Rreagan007 (talk) 08:00, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. See every other member of the Category:Bilateral relations of Austria. None uses a demenym. Laurel Lodged (talk) 12:00, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose per consistency with other similar articles. I don't like just spitting out "per consistency" on all RMs at bilateral relations articles but that's the situation currently. I think a discussion should be held at the WikiProject for bilateral relations to determine if we can break this consistency or not. After all, if this article is moved, barely some months later someone will probably request another RM for the article to be moved back due to consistency. It has happened countless times at Greek–Turkish relations. Super Ψ Dro 14:02, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose on WP:CONSISTENT grounds. Same comment here as other move requests: currently, bilateral relations articles are all named without the adjectives; I however support a discussion on renaming the articles on the Wikiproject WP:INTR, possibly with a RfC. Pilaz (talk) 23:15, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose Common names for the countries are Austria and Russia, not the colloquial term the nominator is requesting the article to be named to. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:28, 7 January 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.