Talk:Russian entry into World War I

Unfortunate edit
Alas we have an unfortunate commentary in an edit summary "22:36, 8 October 2020‎ Rovingrobert talk contribs‎ 35,180 bytes +14‎  Rjensen is sneakily removing the cleanup (copy edit) tag." It does not comport well with the guidelines stated above: "Assume good faith...Avoid personal attacks...For disputes, seek dispute resolution" Actually this editor complained of some bad grammar, which I endeavored to fix in a serious effort. They have not made any attempt to improve the paragraph in question nor indicate what the problems might be--only slapping this unfortunate and totally useless commentary. Rjensen (talk) 06:09, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Well be honest in your edit summaries, dude, instead of removing the tag while hoping I wouldn’t notice — plus making minor edits to cover your tracks (removal of characters). Rovingrobert (talk) 06:28, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Done! Probably in the time it took you to write all of that drivel. Now, why not make yourself a cup of tea and read the article? Rovingrobert (talk) 07:21, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
 * turns out that copy editing yourself is more conducive to bettering Wikipedia than repeatedly demanding that other editors do the work first. By the way the reliable sources use terms like London, Paris, Vienna, St Petersburg etc to refer to the top government decision makers of their countries. Thus "on 5 July 1914 Berlin gave Vienna unconditional support ('blank cheque') for a war in the Balkans" [Holger H. Herwig The First World War (2014) p 21] Rjensen (talk) 09:31, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Fake history: Austria-Hungary "started" the WW1
It is a propaganda lie! Austro-Hungarian -Serbian war started and designed as local war. More important what powers caused the escalation of the local conflict into a World War.--II.kerulet (talk) 08:26, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Ncert 9th Social
In the world war I, which started in 1914,Russia fought against 2409:4071:D9E:DBAA:1963:4D6C:9351:FC95 (talk) 18:03, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Nature of the article as Russia's 'entry' into WW1 vs Russia's 'beginning' in WW1
The title of the article is about the entry of Russia into the war. I consider this to refer to the events and nature of Russia and Europe leading up to Russia's declaration of war and at most perhaps initial intended strategy and deployments. However it seems that in the article under Russian Weaknesses the various mentions of post 1914 events is contrary to this philosophy.

I considered direct action but came to believe it's a matter worthy of discussion first and foremost. If my understanding is flawed then I simply ask for clarification, however if I am persuasive it may require deletion of some sentences. Flirn Kirgs (talk) 08:52, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Germany felt threatened
"Germany felt threatened by Russia, and thus responded with its own mobilization and a declaration of war on 1 August 1914."

"Germany felt threatened" should have a reference. I watched a British two hour long documentary on the causes leading up to World War I, and it seems like the main issue was Germany getting trapped between France, England, and Russia. "Germany felt threatened by Russia" is wrong because Germany actually wanted to enter the war and encouraged Austria-Hungary to start the war.

I mean the documentary was. So if there's any proof either way, coming here should link or reference proof. 2003:C7:871B:783B:5D0E:1602:1A52:BD86 (talk) 20:45, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Fascist Russia?
3 of the 4 reasons given for Russia's entry into the war are fundamental aspects of fascism, and that that's why they're not at fault. What gives? 69.146.52.20 (talk) 21:44, 23 April 2023 (UTC)