Talk:Livonian–Russian war of 1480–1481

Military history: Baltic states / European

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	Baltic states military history task force
	European military history task force

Russia

	Russia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

On 26 September 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved from Russian-Livonian War (1480-1481) to Livonian–Russian war of 1480–1481. The result of the discussion was moved.

Requested move 26 September 2024

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. to Livonian–Russian war of 1480–1481 (closed by non-admin page mover) ❯❯❯ Raydann ^(Talk) 11:50, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Russian-Livonian War (1480-1481) → Livonian–Russian war of 1480–1481 – or Livonian–Pskov Republic war. The hyphenated date range is strange, especially since Russian-Livonian War is a red link. Perhaps the Livonian War (of 1558–1583) could be described as a Russian–Livonian war. Perhaps alphabetical order is appropriate. A dash rather than a hyphen seems appropriate between the opposing parties in a war (unless a combining form is used such as Russo-Livonian war of 1480–1481). —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 21:08, 26 September 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 05:00, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Military history and WikiProject Russia have been notified of this discussion. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 05:00, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why not just replace the hyphenation, per other cases, such as Austrian–Hungarian War (1477–1488) or whatever the MOS says for hyphens. --Altenmann >talk 18:45, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Russian-Livonian War is a redlink, but must be a dab page Russian–Livonian War, because google say there were Russian-Livonian War of 1240-1242 and Russian-Livonian War of 1501-1503 and the Livonian War of 1558–1583 --Altenmann >talk 18:43, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I dislike the parentheses since directly including the date range in the title is a better approach. Also, unless we have a good reason to do otherwise, we tend to choose alphabetical order for multi-party conflicts, borders, treaties, etc. See the recent RM discussion at Talk:Habsburg–Ottoman war of 1529–1533#Requested move 2 September 2024 about both of these aspects. If there were multiple Livonian–Russian wars, especially within a similar era, nobody would just refer to one of them as the Russian-Livonian War; they would instead talk about the Russian-Livonian war of 1240–1242, the Russian–Livonian war of 1501–1503, the Russian–Livonian war of 1480–1481, or the Russian–Livonian War of 1558–1583, just as you did, because it is obviously confusing to speak otherwise. Removing the parentheses and converting "War" to lowercase can provide WP:NATURALDIS. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 19:16, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What's the reasoning behind putting Livonian ahead of Russian? Kowal2701 (talk) 18:59, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alphabetical order. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 22:54, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Would it make more sense to have the aggressor first? Kowal2701 (talk) 23:40, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen alphabetical order suggested in other discussions. It was recently agreed for use at Talk:Habsburg–Ottoman war of 1529–1533#Requested move 2 September 2024 (suggested there by Srnec). I don't see that question covered in WP:MILMOS, but that seems like the natural place for it. It may sometimes be difficult to identify the primary aggressor. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 00:59, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support, the 1st option, after explanations. --Altenmann >talk 20:05, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support First per Noms argument. Cinderella157 (talk) 23:34, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support first option. Ths doesn't have a conventionalized proper name that is consistently captalized in sources, and we have no reason to go parenthetical when natural English will suffice. Yes, it should be a dash not a hyphen per MOS:DASH. Yes, use alpha order. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 01:40, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support the first option. Tony (talk) 06:28, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Disambig or list?

In the infobox I noticed a curious item (my renaming):

| partof = Livonian–Russian wars [ru]

So now I am wondering, shall we make a list List of Livonian–Russian wars of it or a disambig page?

My preference would be a list, because most of items in ruwiki will be redinks in enwiki, and brief explanations (as advised in lists) would come handy. --Altenmann >talk 20:16, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List would work. Mellk (talk) 09:04, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]