Talk:Gorchakov

Convert to disambig?
May be will be better to split article and make disambig? Kmorozov 06:12, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 * It was done in the past by some clueless editor but I had to restore the original 1911 Britannica entry. Look into the history. --Ghirla | talk 07:11, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Please, explain why to store faithfulness to 1911 Britannica? Kmorozov 07:30, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I stick to the format in all my articles on Russian nobility, e.g., Belsky, Vorotynsky, Galitzine and Tolstoy. All these guys mean nothing by themselves. We should present their bios in the context of the family fortunes.
 * It's true, but creating of separated articles is a common practice for nobility, e.g. endless lists of Earls of something (like Earl of Warwick) or Dukes of something. Kmorozov 09:43, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I know this is common practice but it is no good pertaining to Russia, where there was not one Earl at a time but hundreds of contemporaneous princes from any given family. --Ghirla | talk 11:03, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I.e, problem is in lack of naming convention, which need to create and approve as standard. For example, it is possible to assign number to person by any principle or simple include dates of life. Kmorozov 11:34, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 * When the article was split, half the data on minor personalities got lost in the process. Either you should have initiated ridiculous stubs on these (like Pelageya), and these would be inevitably lost in the wikiocean without the prospect of ever be expanded, or you should insert the data on them into a dab page, which would contradict Disambiguation.
 * Another problem is linking. As the only prolific poster on Russian nobility, I know how many members of the same family had the same names and patronimics. Starting a separate article on each of them would lead to enormous confusion. Actually, such a linking confusion arose after Gorchakov was split, so I had to revert to the original format. --Ghirla | talk 08:55, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Also, how to add succession box to Aleksey Gorchakov, who was Minister of War? And other office-holders? Kmorozov 11:38, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid the guy doesn't deserve a succession box at the moment. When you write a long article on him, we may split him from the rest of Gorchakovs, as was the case of Alexander Gorchakov. The List of Russian Defense Ministers has too many red links to bother about succession boxes.--Ghirla | talk 11:43, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 * BTW, Dolgorukov is a dab page only as long as I don't have enough time to complete the article on the family. --Ghirla | talk 08:59, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

The article should not be split up; each Gorchakov should have his own subarticle on the same page. This helps to emphasize how in tsarist Russia a fairly small circle of ancient, powerful princely houses literally controlled Russia for nearly 10 centuries.

Kenmore 09:54, 14 December 2006 (UTC)kenmore

While we certainly need an article about this important family, each of its notable members certainly needs their own dedicated article.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 22:44, 9 January 2007 (UTC)