Military Review

Another lie of the anti-Russian project "Wikipedia"

124
Another lie of the anti-Russian project "Wikipedia"



Not so long ago, in the American project Wikipedia, unfortunately, still popular in Russia, a scandalous, thoroughly false revision of an article about the famous battle of Chemulpo, which is still a symbol of the courage of Russian sailors, appeared.

A review of an article cannot be complete without an explanation of what it is actually based on. And this is nothing but the infamous "Landing Operation of the Japanese Army and fleet in February 1904, in Chemulpo "(also known as the Blue Book) of a certain A. Polutov. Referring to the allegedly" Top Secret history Wars at sea in 37-38 Meiji "(all existing 3 copies of this book are currently lost), he habitually for the current revisionist talks about the incredible coolness of the Japanese, during the most complex operation did not suffer any losses at all.

Where does the forgery of Polutov begin, and after him the author of an article in Wikipedia?

During the last tests in October 1903 of the year, which were carried out when the machines were operating at lower than design values ​​(shaft speed 140 rpm, vapor pressure 15 atm, at design 160 rpm and 18 atm), the Varyag reached speed 20,5 node.

In order to understand the delusional nature of this statement, it is enough to open the book “Cruiser Varyag” by the Soviet historian Rafail Melnikov. There are described in detail the misadventures with boilers kindly supplied by the shipbuilders of Pindosskie, as well as the fact that at this mileage speed was achieved only in 14 nodes.

The Japanese squadron had an advantage over Varyag and Korean in 3,9 times in airborne salvo salvo - 1671 kg against 432 kg.


Here, too, the forgery is considered to be the weight of shells only, and not the explosives in them (not to mention the fact that shimoza is much stronger than pyroxylin), the Varyag and the Koreytsa have a full salvo, the Japanese only have onboard. Look further:

At the same time, due to the narrowness of the fairway and the impossibility of simultaneously entering all the ships into battle, it was difficult to fully realize this advantage of the Japanese squadron. The battle plan from the Japanese side provided for the division of the squadron into three groups and their consistent introduction into battle as the Russian ships advanced along the fairway.

That is, it is concluded that the enemy was not so strong, and the chances of a breakthrough were not at all bad. This, of course, directly contradicts the fact that not the 2 and not the 3 of the Japanese cruisers fired at the Varyag, but all of the 6, but does Poluutova care about this?

According to the report of Rudnev, one of the Japanese projectiles killed the communication tube with the drives to the steering machine, however, the survey of the Varyag after lifting the traces of hits in the area of ​​the passage of the pipe and fighting damage to the steering did not reveal.

This is nonsense, since all traction drives 1,5 years did not survive in sea water, and the Japanese pulled them again.

The consumption of shells in battle by Russian ships remains the subject of discussion. According to Rudnev's report, Varyag launched 425 152-mm projectiles, 470-75-mm, 210-47-mm, that is significantly more than all Japanese ships combined. However, the calculation of the projectiles remaining on it made by the Japanese after raising the cruiser does not confirm this information and gives significantly lower figures of the consumption of ammunition by the Varyag in combat. According to the calculation, the cruiser fired no more than 160 shells of the 152 caliber mm and around 50 - of the 75 caliber mm

How funny, i.e. We do not believe Rudnev, but we trust the Japanese who have every reason to lie to the word. And the fact that in the Japanese fleet the combat expenditure of shells was chronically underestimated in order to demonstrate a greater percentage of hits (the missing ones were later written off as being “non-conforming”) —it doesn't matter. And only Poluutov could seriously believe that the British-built cruisers leading the hurricane fire actually fired at the 4-5 just slower than the guns mounted on them allowed.

According to Rudnev from various sources (including rumors), the cruiser Takachiho sank after the battle during the transition to Sasebo, the cruisers Asama and Naniwa were docked to repair the damage, the Japanese brought the killed 30 to the shore

Including rumors are the reports of the commanders of all foreign stationary (except Italian, which due to his position of the battle have not seen) about the numerous hits they observed in Japanese ships. Apparently, according to Polutov, they were all bribed by Rudnev, including and hostile to Russia, the British and Americans.

However, Japanese historical and archival sources do not confirm hits on ships of the Japanese squadron, as well as any damage and losses. The fate of the ships of the Japanese fleet is now well known; in particular, the cruiser Takachiho died already during the First World War during the siege of Qingdao, the destroyers of the 9 and 14 units were excluded from the fleet lists in 1919 — 1923 and scrapped.

Well, yes, in the case of "Takachiho" Rudnev was mistaken, he did not sink, but stood in repair until the end of the war. And "Asama" with "Naniva" got such damage that they had to be put in the dock ... because of the meeting with the ice floes during the march to Vladivostok (if you believe the Japanese and Polutov)! Although neither ice (in March!) Nor these ships were there, of course, because they were under repair.

The application for the destroyer is even more ridiculous, since the exact number of ships of this type (taking into account those built in Japan) is unknown, and not one, and not two of them could have died, immediately giving their name to the new one.

Shooting of Russian ships was rated by Uriu as “disorderly” and having “extremely low accuracy”

Well, of course, how else can white barbarians shoot? And it does not matter that from their fire "Asama" lost half the main caliber.

It is absolutely unbelievable to launch 1105 shells into the target and never hit, with 2,5% typical of that war, their probability was to hit at least 28. And this is in good agreement with the picture of damage to the Japanese ships, which was observed by foreign stationary personnel.

So, during the shooting on 16 December shield 1903 of the 145 shells fired by Varyag, the target was hit only by three


Melnikov's book does not know about such teachings.

From March to October 1904, most of the artillery, including 10 152 mm caliber guns, recognized as suitable for use, was removed from the Varyag.

After the battle on Varyag, only 2 serviceable 152-mm guns remained.

The actions of the Japanese side in modern sources are assessed as competent and professional. They allowed to perform all the tasks - to ensure the landing of troops and neutralize the Russian ships, without incurring losses.

Yep, i.e. to attack without declaring war, with overwhelming numerical superiority and suffering serious losses at the same time is, of course, according to Polutov, an example of naval talent.

was not used to break through the night before the fight;

For those clowns who considered a night break possible, it is worth looking at the Chemulpo channel's fairway and wondering if it is possible to pass it in the dark without radar and GPS.

going on a breakthrough, “Varyag” has tied itself up with a low-speed “Korean”, without using its advantage in speed;

"Varyag" at the time of the battle was not faster than the "Korean".

after the battle, “Varyag” was not blown up, but flooded in shallow water, which allowed the Japanese to lift it and put it into operation.

Apparently, it was not the British who so vehemently asked not to blow up the cruiser, ostensibly because it would damage the hospital staff.

The unprecedented award of the highest military awards to all members of the crews of the ships was ambiguously met in the officer corps:

And then there is a link ... to the opinion of the land rat, which did not even think of rejecting its (probably not deserved) rewards.

And about the same commander of the cruiser "Pascal" Senesa ... there is no mention at all. He does not need Polutov.

Having analyzed the anti-Russian article, it is important to name those who wrote it, designed and defended it.

The main author is Ivan Vladimirovich Sliva (aka Saiga 20K), born 1979, who lives in Moscow, a top blogger who previously worked at RusHydro and wrote wonderful articles about Soviet artillery in Wikipedia, but not so long ago overbought by foreign NGOs and abruptly replaced his worldview



Its main defender is Zehtser Yuri Igorevich (aka WindWarrior, “Made by Us” visitors is better known as MiG-42MFI), living in Tula, a student of the Faculty of History of the TSPU.



Nobody else was noted there, Sas1975kr (aka KaiserAdler), a Ukrainian nationalist, a big fan of Kaiser Germany and the creator of the theory of the Ukrainian Sovereign Fleet, which successfully adopted itself in Wikipedia.

So what to do? In Wikipedia, the choice of a status article is formally done by voting. We go to the appropriate Page and express your opinion. Even if the administration declares the article elected after that, having done so in spite of the majority, it will lose face. An important task is to bring the article to a normal mind, in the presence of a wide domestic historiography, this is not so difficult.
Author:
Originator:
http://pravdaimif.ru/blogs/41355/
124 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. gansik
    gansik 3 October 2013 07: 58
    47
    Glory to the Russian sailors !!! Goats to believe - do not respect yourself!
    1. smiths xnumx
      smiths xnumx 3 October 2013 10: 13
      35
      They went scum ...

      For such at least the face must be beaten and preferably with your feet.
      1. Aryan
        Aryan 3 October 2013 10: 42
        14
        It is necessary to judge and punish those
        who wants to wipe the St. Andrew flag
        Where does the law on falsification of history work?
        1. ROA
          ROA 3 October 2013 15: 47
          +1
          This law was adopted by defective degenerates, as well as the law on the protection of believers.
          1. skeptic-
            skeptic- 3 October 2013 17: 10
            +6
            Quote: [b
            ROA [/ b]] This law was adopted by defective degenerates, as well as the law on the protection of believers.


            Well, do not judge by yourself. Although one should not expect more from a Vlasov fan.
            I sympathize with your parents.
          2. Blackgrifon
            Blackgrifon 3 October 2013 20: 21
            +1
            Quote: ROA
            This law was adopted by defective degenerates, as well as the law on the protection of believers.


            No, this law protects normal citizens from people like you.
          3. dark_65
            dark_65 3 October 2013 22: 14
            +1
            Can’t you show your face by chance? Just in case.
        2. jasper
          jasper 3 October 2013 20: 48
          0
          for example Trotsky
        3. OffenroR
          OffenroR 3 October 2013 23: 00
          +1
          "Not so long ago, in the American project" Wikipedia ", unfortunately, still popular in Russia, a scandalous, through and through false revision of an article appeared"

          Until we take up our minds and stop yelling at every corner what "stupid Americans", "bourgeois" will continue to fuck with our history ... That's when we ourselves open a project of such a "Wikipedia", then it will be true (if Of course, "historians" like Rezun will not get in there). In the meantime, we will read and enjoy the "truth" ... For they are to blame.
          1. OffenroR
            OffenroR 3 October 2013 23: 08
            +2
            Nothing ... let them write "the truth." And let them believe in this "truth." The time will come .... so they will get on their brains from "bears with balalaikas" that will not seem a little.
    2. jasper
      jasper 3 October 2013 20: 47
      +2
      even the enemies, the Japanese, recognized the courage of the Russian sailors, and the crusher is the crusher, the communist choices ...
  2. Dazdranagon
    Dazdranagon 3 October 2013 08: 00
    31
    Unfortunately, many people take information from Wikipedia and do not think about the fact that any nonsense can be written there ...
    1. Dangerous
      Dangerous 3 October 2013 08: 24
      20
      Don't go to extremes. In any case, there is a lot of useful information, and as for history, it is actively being changed even without Wikipedia, both in Russia and abroad. History is such a thing ... how many different textbooks have now appeared and everywhere their interpretation, full of "authors" appear who question and refute even some facts of the very recent (by historical standards) Second World War. And the wiki is a normal site, you can pick up the basic information from there
      1. Misantrop
        Misantrop 3 October 2013 10: 25
        18
        Quote: Dangerous
        wiki is a normal site, basic information from there onдyou can draw
        It is possible to scoop up information (rather than scoop it up), but the reliability of this information is often in question. And to consider them the ultimate truth lol
        1. sub307
          sub307 3 October 2013 13: 41
          10
          Any information obtained on the Internet (on the site) must be double-checked by checking with other sources or sites. Otherwise, you can get into a "stupid position".
          1. cdrt
            cdrt 3 October 2013 15: 38
            +9
            Any information obtained on the Internet (on the site) must be double-checked by checking with other sources or sites. Otherwise, you can get into a "stupid position".

            This is true for ANY information.
            In books, too, a lot of every dregs is written.
            Therefore, comparative studies appeared - a comparison of the sources of one against the other.
            Well, there are all sorts of things - internal and external criticism of sources ...

            And so - Wiki - a good system that allowed you to collect all the rumors of the world in an encyclopedic look laughing

            At the same time, to declare that Vicki is an anti-Russian project - only a short-sighted person (or rather an Internet fighter) can.
            The correct phrase probably looks like this - in the community voting on the article on the Varangian, the minority opponents of the existing article laughing

            Wiki - no, indifferent. The Wiki project is an engine + the idea that users write articles themselves and criticize them themselves - Vox populi vox dei.
            And for the English-speaking - those same British scientists laughing compared Brittanica and Wiki. The result showed the absence of clearly large discrepancies in the reliability of information between a professionally compiled encyclopedia and a Wiki formed by a user community. Another thing is that on emotionally charged topics Wiki will broadcast the attitude of the predominant part of the active audience.

            By the way, I note that it is easy to read in several languages, and I always look at articles on Wikis in more than one language, articles in English and German Wikis are usually many, much more informative, informative than Russian.

            Considering how articles are formed, the problems of the Russian-speaking Wiki are the problems of the garbage contained in the heads of the Internet-active part of the Russian-speaking world.

            Well ... Wiki is valuable not only in the text of the article, but in links to sources.
            1. avg
              avg 3 October 2013 20: 22
              0
              Considering how articles are formed, the problems of the Russian-speaking Wiki are the problems of the garbage contained in the heads of the Internet-active part of the Russian-speaking world.

              Unfortunately, this is not just rubbish, but active, often paid work to comprehensively discredit Russia to ridicule and destroy our symbols, our national pride. This is the gradual introduction of disbelief in oneself, in the country, in our future.
      2. Yarosvet
        Yarosvet 3 October 2013 15: 49
        +6
        Quote: Dangerous
        and as for history, it is actively changing without Wikipedia
        1. Varies
          Varies 3 October 2013 16: 14
          +1
          The Tatar-Mongol yoke is all the same that the Finno-Chinese invasion has nothing to do with reality and history because they were written by Germans brought to the RAS.
          1. Arabist
            Arabist 3 October 2013 16: 15
            0
            But then what happened?
          2. Very old
            Very old 3 October 2013 20: 23
            0
            Yeah.Konechno.And ruined Russia "not one". And the Nazis came with good intentions As under a mattress banner, so a learned man
      3. jasper
        jasper 3 October 2013 20: 50
        0
        take technical data and strain your brains
    2. Canep
      Canep 3 October 2013 08: 41
      24
      Let the author of this article correct the Wikipedia article in accordance with his point of view, and substantiate it reasonably, I do not see any special problems with this. If you dig around, then Wikipedia has a bunch of anti-American articles. In fact, they try to be objective, but there are truth-to-truth issues, and this needs to be dealt with.
      In this article, 95% of references to Polutov, this itself indicates that there is no objectivity in it, the objectivity of several historians is necessary for objectivity.
      1. matross
        matross 3 October 2013 11: 01
        14
        Quote: Canep
        Let the author of this article correct the Wikipedia article in accordance with his point of view, and justify it reasonably, I do not see any special problems with this.

        Right! This is not a matter of wide discussion. And the statement about the anti-Russian nature of Wikipedia as a whole is, to put it mildly, controversial.
        And there is no need to agitate "for Soviet power". The heroism of the sailors "Varyag" and "Koreyets" does not need proof from Wikipedia!
        1. washi
          washi 3 October 2013 13: 58
          +7
          Quote: matRoss
          Quote: Canep
          Let the author of this article correct the Wikipedia article in accordance with his point of view, and justify it reasonably, I do not see any special problems with this.

          Right! This is not a matter of wide discussion. And the statement about the anti-Russian nature of Wikipedia as a whole is, to put it mildly, controversial.
          And there is no need to agitate "for Soviet power". The heroism of the sailors "Varyag" and "Koreyets" does not need proof from Wikipedia!

          There is a website: http://tsushima.org.ru. There is a discussion of both "Varyag" and the entire fleet during the RYA.
          Nobody cancels the heroism of our sailors. But the tactics of using ships raise questions for Rudnev (a brilliant manager, but a bad tactic)
    3. kotvov
      kotvov 3 October 2013 19: 49
      +3
      so nato and the head is given, to sift out idiocy and nonsense. who seriously approaches any question, I think will look at more than one source.
      1. jasper
        jasper 3 October 2013 20: 51
        +1
        and at the same time when Putin wants to make 1 history book which stink was lifted by liberals and communists
  3. Narkom
    Narkom 3 October 2013 08: 02
    +9
    Whoever believes "Vika", links to her have long been considered bad manners in many forums.
    1. Apollo
      Apollo 3 October 2013 08: 08
      24
      Quote: Narkom
      Whoever believes "Vika", links to her have long been considered bad manners in many forums.


      Nevertheless, I believe that you can not ignore. The action is equal to counteraction. The answer lies in the inf
      quote-In Wikipedia, the choice of a status article is formally made by voting. We go to the corresponding page and express our opinion.Come in and give on the "brains".
      1. Revolver
        Revolver 3 October 2013 08: 17
        +9
        Quote: Apollon
        In Wikipedia, the choice of a status article is formally made by voting. We go to the appropriate page and express our opinion. Go and give on the "brains".

        You got ahead of me, I wanted to post the same thing, and almost the same words. You +
      2. Narkom
        Narkom 3 October 2013 16: 32
        +1
        it is undeniable, give the brain necessary.
    2. Ezhaak
      Ezhaak 3 October 2013 11: 42
      0
      Quote: Narkom
      Whoever "Vika" believes, links to her have long been considered bad manners in many forums

      You are absolutely wrong! Try to convince me of the false claims of the wiki about this http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C7%E0%EA%EE%ED_%F1%EE%F5%F0%E0%ED%E5%ED% E8% FF_% FD%
      ED%E5%F0%E3%E8%E8
      Not everything, not everything in that Wiki is deceitful. And that which is false it would be necessary to learn to distinguish! I think so!
      1. cdrt
        cdrt 3 October 2013 15: 43
        +2
        You are absolutely wrong! Try to convince me of the false claims of the wiki about this http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C7%E0%EA%EE%ED_%F1%EE%F5%F0%E0%ED%E5%ED% E8% FF_% FD%

        ED%E5%F0%E3%E8%E8
        Not everything, not everything in that Wiki is deceitful. And that which is false it would be necessary to learn to distinguish! I think so!


        The link doesn’t work like laughing (at least for me)
    3. Avenger711
      Avenger711 3 October 2013 19: 37
      +1
      Yeah, but the link to Vasya Pupkin’s blog, or the devil knows whose site it’s like, is more credible. Wikipedia is nothing more than a great copy machine.
      1. OffenroR
        OffenroR 3 October 2013 23: 16
        0
        That's just not copying "Wikipedia" ... it is copied from it ... and then "reliable information" goes and walks all over the Internet
        1. OffenroR
          OffenroR 3 October 2013 23: 17
          +1
          Somehow on Wikipedia there was information about the losses in the "Ardennes Operation" - so it was written that the losses of the Americans were only 47400 people, while the Germans had ~ 250000 (now they have corrected. In real life, the losses of the USA are ~ 90000, Germany ~ 64000)
  4. borisjdin1957
    borisjdin1957 3 October 2013 08: 12
    +2
    from the Don.
    Do not hell with these writers to read. And brainwash!
    1. major071
      major071 3 October 2013 09: 38
      +6
      Pisunov or pisyunov? laughing
      1. borisjdin1957
        borisjdin1957 3 October 2013 20: 05
        0
        From the Don.
        And who likes it!
        1. jasper
          jasper 3 October 2013 20: 52
          +1
          I would use a different word. but banned
  5. AlexSkywalker
    AlexSkywalker 3 October 2013 08: 13
    11
    Complete nonsense is the name of the article. The author is not friends with the head? Let's call it anti-Russian projects: television, radio, the press, and OBS (one grandmother said) - there, too, it is often unflattering about Russia.
    There is a constant feeling that the title of the articles is written either by stupid people, or by paranoiacs.
    Regarding the topic: Wikipedia is a folk encyclopedia, an article in which not only anyone can challenge, but personally correct. What is the problem, author?
    1. Very old
      Very old 3 October 2013 09: 31
      +5
      It is indeed possible to correct, but this procedure is furnished with irresistible slingshots. Once I tried to challenge and correct the obvious distortion of historical facts - I ran into a wall of unacceptable resource requirements. Well, not ours, not paid in rubles. Although I often turn to Wikipedia. Sometimes there’s nowhere else to get the necessary information from
      1. sub307
        sub307 3 October 2013 13: 49
        +3
        That's right Wikipedia is not a "publication of the Central Committee of the CPSU" or whatever. When "removing" any information, it is not harmful to "turn on" YOUR head, if there is one, and not take "on faith" something read or heard. In general, study, study and study again - work with sources of information.
        1. jasper
          jasper 3 October 2013 20: 55
          0
          harmful not to include brother
      2. cdrt
        cdrt 3 October 2013 15: 47
        +3
        Well, not ours, he is not paid in rubles

        Are ruble-paid historical resources more objective? laughing

        It seems that it is with us that history changes every minute, in the rest of the world it is usually quite static laughing

        Wiki is a project that expresses the opinion of the majority of parties of different nations writing in it. Sometimes Russian-speaking are the same ukrofashists, and the Balts, etc., who for some reason consider it important for themselves to write in the Russian Wiki. So ... I want my version to be more presented - look for supporters in the Wiki community.
        1. jasper
          jasper 3 October 2013 20: 55
          0
          Thanks to the Bolsheviks, it’s not a bad story hi
      3. Tourist Breakfast
        Tourist Breakfast 3 October 2013 17: 11
        +1
        It is indeed possible to correct, but this procedure is furnished with irresistible slingshots.


        I somehow corrected a mistake in a wiki article on the Israeli War of Independence. There the author had problems with geography. The whole procedure took exactly a minute and was not difficult.
        It is possible to edit large chunks of text more difficult, but hardly much.
      4. jasper
        jasper 3 October 2013 20: 54
        0
        revolutionary feats? or terry fomenofshiny?
    2. Misantrop
      Misantrop 3 October 2013 10: 30
      +1
      Quote: AlexSkywalker
      Wikipedia is a national encyclopedia, an article in which not only anyone can challenge, but personally correct.

      That is, its reliability at the level of kitchen rumors? Since the literacy of the bulk of the "people" is not only below the plinth, but also constantly falls even lower lol
      1. cdrt
        cdrt 3 October 2013 15: 54
        +1
        That is, its reliability at the level of kitchen rumors? Since the literacy of the bulk of the "people" is not only below the plinth, but also constantly falls even lower lol

        Comparison by British scientists laughing showed that it is not much worse than Brittanica, which seems to be considered as a standard (for the Russian language - this is probably Brockhaus and Efron).
        Although in general ... yes, Vicki is a collection of all the rumors. But ... due to the large number of writers and voters - in interpretations that do not contradict the facts, the generally accepted point of view usually wins - because statistics are overwhelming laughing
        1. Misantrop
          Misantrop 3 October 2013 17: 03
          +1
          Quote: cdrt
          for the Russian language - this is probably Brockhaus and Efron
          "Brockhaus and Efron" - consumer goods for cooks, and thought so. I have an encyclopedic dictionary of the Granat publishing house (1903), which is a cut above it. By the way, this dictionary was then republished 27 (!) More times.
    3. shapkin14
      shapkin14 3 October 2013 10: 37
      +9
      I am also not friends with the head or paranoid.
      1. "Wikipedia is a people's encyclopedia" - just NOT OUR people.
      2. "Let's call it anti-Russian projects: television, radio, press" - Unfortunately, 70% of the media are anti-Russian projects. It is worth seeing to WHOM they belong and WHAT they sow.
    4. Albert1988
      Albert1988 3 October 2013 17: 27
      +1
      Quote: AlexSkywalker
      Let's call it anti-Russian projects: television, radio, the press, and OBS (one grandmother said) - there, too, it is often unflattering about Russia.

      That's it: Wikipedia, unfortunately, is not a resource that can be taken seriously, because anyone can write an article there in an amicable way, but people should have their own heads - which prevents you from looking at the sources to which the author refers and see what is solid there "rezun" ... oh, "Polutov", who "everything is according to secret documents to which only he has access"! Immediately, everything will become clear to a normal adequate person)))
    5. jasper
      jasper 3 October 2013 20: 53
      0
      Yeah, and the propaganda of other people's values ​​such as Marxism or liberalism, in your opinion what?
  6. Anubis Gorynych
    Anubis Gorynych 3 October 2013 08: 21
    +8
    Brace yourself, comrades, in the near future, your own pro-Russian Internet resource will be created by patriotic forces, on the basis of which there will be a subsection that includes a library, an analytical council with censorship functions, a lecture hall, information and practical complexes for raising children and adult self-development. In the meantime, we use Wikipedia like any other resource, comparing it with other sources. After all, not only enemies write there.
    1. Very old
      Very old 3 October 2013 09: 33
      0
      The good news is the choice, the ability to compare,
      1. Dober
        Dober 3 October 2013 12: 27
        +1
        Quote: Very old
        there will be a choice, the ability to compare

        Yes, already full of alternative projects. More often it is in opposition to "pedovikia".
        For example, compare -
        traditio-ru.org/wiki/Home_page
        1. Very old
          Very old 3 October 2013 13: 02
          +2
          Thanks for the help. I'll go look.
        2. cdrt
          cdrt 3 October 2013 15: 57
          +1
          Yes, already full of alternative projects. More often it is in opposition to "pedovikia".
          For example, compare -
          traditio-ru.org/wiki/Home_page


          Yes, they just do not reach the popularity of even 1-2% of the Wiki.
          That as if hints at their quality (well ... from the same wisdom Vox populi vox dei).
          1. Very old
            Very old 3 October 2013 17: 00
            0
            Exactly. They do not hold out. I checked it, but after all, so far in the sliders ... We will wait. They will grow up.
          2. poquello
            poquello 3 October 2013 22: 59
            +2
            Quote: cdrt
            Yes, already full of alternative projects. More often it is in opposition to "pedovikia".
            For example, compare -
            traditio-ru.org/wiki/Home_page


            Yes, they just do not reach the popularity of even 1-2% of the Wiki.
            That as if hints at their quality (well ... from the same wisdom Vox populi vox dei).

            But about the promotion of the resource modestly silent.
    2. OffenroR
      OffenroR 3 October 2013 23: 19
      +1
      For five years now, they say that "very soon" a domestic analogue of Wikipedia will be created ...
      Quote: Anubis Gorynych
      Brace yourself, comrades

      Soon the tendons will crack .... how much can be attached?
  7. The comment was deleted.
  8. ReifA
    ReifA 3 October 2013 08: 27
    +9
    Sometimes I just goof, how some people like * their people. It just doesn't fit in my head. I don’t know all the principles of the wiki, but they seem to be supposed to print balanced articles, otherwise opus like the victory of Germany in the 2nd World War and in such a way may appear.
    1. Apollo
      Apollo 3 October 2013 08: 47
      +4
      Quote: ReifA
      Sometimes I just goof, how some people like about *;% their people


      Why be surprised, the paid troll for whom there is nothing sacred.
      1. Dober
        Dober 3 October 2013 12: 35
        +5
        Quote: Apollon
        Quote: ReifA
        Sometimes I just goof, how some people like about *;% their people

        Why be surprised, the paid troll for whom there is nothing sacred.


        "Paid"? Likely.
        "Troll"? Hardly. Almost always "ideological".
        You can at least get to know this -
        Roman Aleksandrovich Becker (born May 30, 1973) is a member of Wikipedia, Homopedia, Wikia, Fidonet, Internet forums and other sites. Homosexual Israeli gay.
        Born in the city of Khotyn, Chernivtsi region of the Ukrainian SSR. In Israel since 1998. He is a programmer by education, but made assurances that he is a psychiatrist - therefore, the question of his education is not yet clear. He is interested in medicine, psychology, history, politics. Homosexual, sadist and enema. Apparently, it is one of the leaders in the number of floods on Wikipedia.
        He was the leader of the association for Free Wikipedia, which he created (formerly, the Center for Free Wikipedia, free of censorship), which stood for gay activism. He made a significant contribution to the article “Cleemophilia”, describing all kinds of its varieties, and also worked a lot on the development of the LGBT wikipedia portal dedicated to “sexual minorities”. He upheld the unreliable texts written by the anonymous author about varieties of coprophagy, which were eventually removed from Wikipedia. Managed to disrupt the vote, which was raised the question of how to write - “homosexual” or “homosexual”


        traditio-ru.org/wiki/Roman_Bekker
        1. densh
          densh 4 October 2013 00: 44
          +1
          Mdaa! Well and personality belay Such, as the ancient Egyptians said, only the pyramid will correct. negative
      2. OffenroR
        OffenroR 3 October 2013 23: 21
        0
        Quote: Apollon
        Why be surprised, the paid troll for whom there is nothing sacred.

        It's time to plant these "trolls" in the "zoo" ... let them communicate with their own kind ...
    2. Very old
      Very old 3 October 2013 09: 35
      +7
      The information war, as well as the economic war, does not know a ceasefire. Here, in the course of re-reading history, hushing up facts and inventing nonexistent ones (the main principle: live like in a chicken coop)
    3. Djozz
      Djozz 3 October 2013 11: 14
      +5
      Unfortunately, "smerdyakovism" is flourishing with the complete connivance of the authorities, look at the faces of these "nerds" and the surname of Polutov, take the letter "O" and no comment!
      1. Albert1988
        Albert1988 3 October 2013 17: 30
        0
        Quote: Djozz
        Unfortunately, "smerdyakovism" is flourishing with the complete connivance of the authorities,

        Well, the authorities seem to be starting to think about this, I want to believe that they will act adequately soon
    4. cdrt
      cdrt 3 October 2013 16: 02
      0
      Sometimes I just goof, how some people like about *;% their people

      And where did you get that your people?
      1. Many Russian-speaking writers - not Russians, but only those who know the Russian language (in principle, throughout Eastern Europe the whole of Eastern Europe taught Russian). Well, Russians in Eastern Europe are treated with deep sincere dislike, and sometimes with hatred
      2. Then, many residents of the Russian Federation are also not Russian and sometimes more active than Russians
      3. The opinion of the country and the people as a whole is lower and lower from year to year. Of course, railway Masonic propaganda is to blame for everything, but first of all, it (not necessarily railway ... d ... the Masonic, but propaganda laughing ) is, secondly there is no smoke without fire is also present. This cannot but affect the Russian-speaking world, which writes to the Russian Wiki
      4. Many Russians also love to whip themselves and their people on the cheeks - national masochism is everything for the Russian intelligentsia laughing (if there is no water in the tap, then the Russian intelligentsia is still alive laughing )
  9. SPBOBL
    SPBOBL 3 October 2013 08: 30
    +3
    To introduce an article ... for distorting the real facts of history ... And these scribblers have not yet passed a law ... scribbling anti-Russian opuses must be expelled from state institutions in Russia!
  10. NORILCHANIN
    NORILCHANIN 3 October 2013 08: 30
    +5
    These are representatives of the Jewish-Yak diaspora in Russia and these creatures will sing even more steeply. The further to the west, the more crap these representatives of the "brotherly people" will pour on Russia.
  11. PSih2097
    PSih2097 3 October 2013 08: 40
    +4
    Where does the forgery of Polutov begin, and after him the author of an article in Wikipedia?

    With the same success, it is easier to read Doinikov's "Varyag" and the Tsushima forums, from where Doinikov took information for the book ...
    1. Landwarrior
      Landwarrior 3 October 2013 14: 24
      +2
      Quote: PSih2097
      easier to read Doinikov's "Varyag"

      Yes, the book is really good (more precisely, even books, there are 2 of them, for now). Although not a big fan of alternative history, I read it with pleasure hi
      1. densh
        densh 4 October 2013 00: 48
        +1
        Doinikov finished the cycle "Varyag" But there the further, the worse. No.
        A. Chernov wrote his own version of the ending. That, although not without flaws, I liked more.
        1. Landwarrior
          Landwarrior 4 October 2013 08: 03
          0
          densh, thank. I'll have to go to the bookstore wink
          1. densh
            densh 4 October 2013 12: 53
            0
            Chernov is on Flibust hi
  12. The comment was deleted.
    1. Apollo
      Apollo 3 October 2013 09: 06
      +7
      Quote: Starshina wmf
      And these Jews in general must be expelled from the institute. And how is the Ukrainian Natsik sang with them.


      And here, Jews and Ukrainians. Do rascals and degenerates have a nationality ?!
      1. PSih2097
        PSih2097 3 October 2013 09: 28
        +5
        Quote: Apollon
        And here, Jews and Ukrainians. Do rascals and degenerates have a nationality ?!

        is - it’s called the world backstage, it’s the golden billion ...
  13. shark
    shark 3 October 2013 08: 50
    +3
    Creative, on the bones of Russian sailors, are promoted. Unfortunately, they are not subject to secular court. Because the country is ruled by people like them, but there is a higher court. And on it, they will answer for their lies. Well, what kind of generation is that-any-price to yourself name to do .... There is the same limit .. God grant them health
  14. kartalovkolya
    kartalovkolya 3 October 2013 08: 54
    10
    Everything is much simpler and more complicated at the same time: all attempts to discredit the valor and heroism of our compatriots are links of the same chain. And the main thing is that our so-called "partners" are conducting an undisguised revision of history. If now in the USA a rare school graduate answers correctly to the question of who fought with whom and against whom in World War II, and a young Japanese will begin to convince you that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were atomic bombed by RUSSIANS, then what can we talk about. That's what Wikipedia brings to light historical fakes, and our liberals from the NGOs they immediately begin to dissolve drooling. We will not let them fool us and disgrace our heroic ancestors. I was lucky to personally meet one of the heroes of the cruiser Varyag in early childhood and from his stories the blood froze in my veins and our hearts were filled with pride and love for the heroes - sailors cruiser Varyag. And it is significant that the song praising the heroic feat of the Varyag was written by a German, and in the reports of foreign sailors a lot is said about this and truthfully! GLORY TO THE RUSSIAN FLEET !!!
    1. Windbreak
      Windbreak 3 October 2013 11: 00
      +3
      Quote: kartalovkolya
      and a young Japanese will begin to convince you that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were subjected to the atomic bombing
      I often see this statement on topwar. Is there any confirmation of these words?
  15. VohaAhov
    VohaAhov 3 October 2013 09: 17
    +8
    Let's give some analogy. This Plum would try to walk along the corridor in which there are 6 hostile guys, one of whom is a master of sports in boxing. I think his diaper immediately overflowed and leaked. And he wouldn't even go out into this corridor. And our heroes on the cruiser "Varyag" did not shy away and went out to meet the enemy and went down in history. And where did this Plum enter. Traitor, coward and deceiver. I agree with the previous speaker. Glory to "Varyag" and "Koreyets" !!! Glory to our Russian Navy. Shame and general contempt for "Plum" -like. !!!
  16. Stas57
    Stas57 3 October 2013 09: 19
    +8
    I do not understand, but what is the speech?
    Well, go there everyone and write what you need, WIKI is still a dump.
    Instead of writing articles, you better deploy your work on the WIKI platform
    1. Russ69
      Russ69 3 October 2013 09: 52
      +6
      Quote: Stas57
      I don’t understand, what’s the speech? Well, come in everyone and write what you need, WIKI is still a dump.

      Not a few articles are removed, edited and written with a certain political subtext, except for technical ones.
      On this and the link to Vika, as a sign of bad taste.
  17. vvvvv
    vvvvv 3 October 2013 10: 00
    +7
    Need to create your own resources. I just wanted to create a resource with a claim to the Wikipedia level and invested money on the cost of the apartment, but it turned out that the owner of the developer company is a US citizen and he has a network of firms in Russia working very unscrupulously and throwing Russians. Those. they do it on unacceptable quality and don’t finish it at all,% by 50. They also do not pay taxes, as it was found out.
    And Russia, as a state, does not give a damn what such foreign dealers do and how they throw Russians. Now the maximum is the arbitration court and the problems lasting for years, instead of the site. And I planned my site with a patriotic information bias. In the main links, I would have sites like this. But...
    But such crooks need to be banned from working in Russia and completely blown up. Of course, nobody cares. What then can one want if Russia cannot support its own citizens, protect it from foreign scammers. And the company makes itself very respectable, it’s hard not to go crazy ...
    1. jasper
      jasper 3 October 2013 20: 57
      0
      will not work. we are not peace-makers, it’s easier for us to call on the scoreboard than to scream about human rights or the class
  18. Magellan
    Magellan 3 October 2013 10: 04
    15
    I am not a professional historian, but I noticed a couple of logical paradoxes in the article:
    after the battle, “Varyag” was not blown up, but flooded in shallow water, which allowed the Japanese to lift it and put it into operation.

    Apparently, it was not the British who so vehemently asked not to blow up the cruiser, ostensibly because it would damage the hospital staff.


    The requests of the British, even if they were in fact, did not prevent the "Korean" from being blown up ...

    Shooting of Russian ships was rated by Uriu as “disorderly” and having “extremely low accuracy”

    Well, of course, how else can white barbarians shoot? And it does not matter that from their fire "Asama" lost half the main caliber.


    Just like they shot during the Tsushima battle. The rout with a score of ~ 20: 0 (EBRs and cruisers)
    Quote: VohaAhov
    And our heroes on the cruiser "Varyag" did not shy away and went out to meet the enemy and went down in history.

    The Varangian did not die in battle, but described the circulation and returned to the port
    At the same time, the losses among the crew can hardly be called catastrophic - out of 600 people died 37. Photographs of the cruiser "Varyag" after the battle also do not confirm severe damage: there is no smoke from fires, traces of strong explosions; all superstructures, sloop beams, masts and pipes have been preserved

    The photo was taken at the moment when Rudnev with the officers and the ship's cash desk are leaving the Varyag on a "miraculously survived" steam boat
    1. Uzoliv
      Uzoliv 3 October 2013 10: 58
      +4
      Quote: Magellan
      no smoke from fires

      There is a photo when the cruiser returns to the anchorage after the battle, smoke from the fire in Utah is clearly visible and a roll to the port side is clearly visible. The roll is also visible in your photo. I didn’t find the photo on the Internet but it is in the book of Victor Kataev dedicated to the cruiser.
      I agree with your assessment of the results of the shooting. The Japanese are not whipping boys. And if you believe the version that in such an unequal battle, the Varangian seriously damaged two or three Japanese cruisers, then the remaining Port Arthur squadron should simply have swept the Japanese fleet to pieces.
      1. Pilat2009
        Pilat2009 3 October 2013 17: 33
        +1
        Quote: Uzoliv
        I agree with your assessment of the results of the shooting.

        I will bring my five cents
        Nobody denies heroism proper - they tried to get out, well done, though they didn’t give up like some ... (Here you can also recall the “Admiral Count Spee ... in the Second World War) Nobody detracts from the advantages of Japanese artillery. But here other squeals and obvious sucked embellishments, they are superfluous.
        I will not be very clever but:
        and not explosives in them (not to mention the fact that shimosa is much stronger than pyroxylin)
        - Here I have obvious doubts. The same Semenov writes that in the Yellow Sea there was no shimoza effect even among the main forces, what can we say about the cruiser at the beginning of the war ...
      2. jasper
        jasper 3 October 2013 21: 01
        +1
        not all cats have a Shrovetide, and the tight fuses and sabotage of the socialists and the defeat in the strategic nuclear forces are not so much the fault of the fleet, they fought for part of the mainland as much as the geyvolution of 1905
    2. alicante11
      alicante11 3 October 2013 16: 39
      0
      The photo was taken at the moment when Rudnev with the officers and the ship's cash desk are leaving the Varyag on a "miraculously survived" steam boat


      If you look at the photo of "Warrior" after Jutland, you can't say that he has less than an hour to live. There, too, the masts and pipes are standing, and there is not even a roll. But the MCOs are already being flooded.
  19. 0255
    0255 3 October 2013 10: 05
    +5
    people, on Wikipedia there is such an item as DISCLAIMER. Therefore, you can score on it [a bad word that we all wrote on fences in childhood] laughing
  20. Vasilenko Vladimir
    Vasilenko Vladimir 3 October 2013 10: 10
    +4
    let's write an article tomorrow as a neighbor Vasya Pupkin threw some garbage in the trash
    Wiki is the same dumpster, everyone who knows how to receive information and analyze it knows this, so why not discuss it
    1. Misantrop
      Misantrop 3 October 2013 10: 44
      +3
      Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
      let's write an article tomorrow as a neighbor Vasya Pupkin threw some garbage in the trash
      It is better to correct geographical articles and maps not in accordance with images, telemetry data, etc., but with "folk knowledge" (since a wiki is a "folk encyclopedia") That will be laughing ... laughing
  21. Altona
    Altona 3 October 2013 10: 10
    10
    No matter how the course of the battle and its end are interpreted, I do not in the least doubt the selfless and conscientious actions of the Russian sailors, they fought in deliberately losing conditions, the Andreev flag was not lowered, the ship was not surrendered ... What happened then and that that the ship was later raised, this is a completely different story and has nothing to do with the heroism of the Russian crews of the Varyag and Koreets ...
  22. Magellan
    Magellan 3 October 2013 10: 20
    +5
    Well, yes, in the case of "Takachiho" Rudnev was mistaken - he did not sink, but stood in repair until the end of the war
    Is it?
    Just a month after the battle at Chemulpo, "Takachiho" was spotted near Port Arthur

    August 1, 1904 "Takachiho took part in the battle in the Korea Strait, where he sank the cruiser" Rurik ". The author of the article drives worse than Wikipedia. That at least occasionally makes mistakes, but this one blatantly lies
  23. major071
    major071 3 October 2013 10: 46
    +9
    The desire to promote yourself on the history of Russia, to write an article based on foreign sources, excuse me to justify the courage of Russian sailors, does not cause respect for the author. fool Propiarized, now I will remember this surname. Bye Bye! negative
  24. Polovec
    Polovec 3 October 2013 10: 50
    +8
    For European civilized powers, the instinct of self-preservation is justified and indisputable. With the obvious lethal outcome of the operation, surrender is considered reasonable and justified. It is difficult for them to understand the actions of the commander leading a knowingly losing battle of their subordinates. It is even more difficult to understand the support of subordinate actions of the commander in this situation.
    The example of the "Varyag" is far from an isolated case of the actions of Russian weapons - illogical, barbaric and often invincible. Sacrifice for the Motherland and honor often look silly and savage from their positions.
    The example of World War II, however, showed the combat capabilities of civilized Europe. I am bitter to think about the colossal losses of our Motherland in this war, but did someone even after many years offer another solution? War has come to the house. This happened. Why not ready, why allowed, etc. Questions are left for later. Today, families must be saved from Auschwitz and Dachau. Or do you have to be reasonable?
    Anglo-Saxons are the biggest bastards in the world. Are you waiting for them to tell the truth? There is an information war for the minds of modern youth. We are losing it.
    Age takes its toll and with my 110 kg at 50 I can no longer properly defend my country, as I did as an officer. And if the brains and hearts of today's youth are lost, then the shadow of Auschwitz will again hang over our country. Only there will be nobody to resist this ...
    1. Uzoliv
      Uzoliv 3 October 2013 11: 34
      +6
      Quote: Polovec
      It is difficult for them to understand the actions of the commander leading a knowingly losing battle of their subordinates. It is even more difficult to understand the support of subordinate actions of the commander in this situation.

      Your rating is incorrect. In the history of wars at sea, there are many examples when sailors of other countries entered the battle with a knowingly strong enemy. A very clear example from the First World War. The battle of Coronel, when the British sailors entered the battle with a stronger rival and died in battle. The Germans who defeated them were a bit later in the same situation, the enemy (the English fleet) was numerically stronger than them. however, the Germans did not lower the flag and also died. (Battle of the Falkland Islands)
    2. cdrt
      cdrt 3 October 2013 17: 39
      +2
      With the obvious lethal outcome of the operation, surrender is considered reasonable and justified.

      I would not wave Russian nationalism, proving our sacrifice to Western pragmatism.

      Although ... in general, for the army in the west, this is probably true.

      At the same time, one can recall the Germans who died in Taman, the same SS divisions — how often did they surrender?
      And in general - how many times have the Germans surrendered the same without an order, and even in large numbers? And the vast majority only at the end of April in May 1945.
      We gave up in the millions.
      Well, about the Anglo-Saxons.
      For example, the British fleet - is there really more of our ships surrendered in its entire history?
      So how many ships sank without a battle in the sight of the enemy? And we drowned the whole fleet ...
      Did many American ships surrender or did they flood themselves in the face of the enemy?

      A lot depends on the situation - Russians are traditionally persistent because they are fatalists, but psychologically we can break down when we encounter something unexpected faster than the same measured Germans, the British ..
      1. Dober
        Dober 3 October 2013 17: 54
        0
        Quote: cdrt
        but psychologically we can break down when we encounter something unexpected faster than the same measured Germans, the British ..

        Can you be more specific about "breaking" and about the "unexpected"?
        On occasion, we will discuss with the Germans.
        And how the Germans "suddenly break down" in the same "everyday life" jokes circulate. The term "life hacking" was not coined in Russia. What they LEARN from seminars and forums in Russia, almost every REAL housewife knows and a SIMPLE man has been using it in the yard and in his father's garage since childhood ...
  25. Chicot 1
    Chicot 1 3 October 2013 10: 54
    +4
    Immediately I would like to clarify a few points ...
    Referring to his alleged "Top secret history of the war at sea in 37-38 years. Meiji" (all existing 3 copies of this book are currently lost)

    Any more or less serious historian will tell you that such an argument, which is based on appealing to a completely disappeared source of an egg, is not worth it ...
    going on a breakthrough, “Varyag” has tied itself up with a low-speed “Korean”, without using its advantage in speed;
    "Varyag" at the time of the battle was not faster than "Koreyets"

    For the sake of objectivity, it must be added that the thesis that the high-speed armored cruiser tied itself up with a slower gunboat appeared and was voiced by Soviet historiography ...
    And this had quite serious reasons. "Varyag" was one of the high-speed ships of the Russian fleet. In the 1st Pacific Squadron in terms of this indicator, he was second only to the armored "Bogatyr" ...
    after the battle, “Varyag” was not blown up, but flooded in shallow water, which allowed the Japanese to lift it and put it into operation.
    Apparently, it was not the British who so fiercely asked not to blow up the cruiser, ostensibly because in this case the inpatients would suffer

    Be that as it may, but at low tide the cruiser hull was significantly exposed from the water. And naturally, it was not difficult for the Japanese to pick it up and put it into operation ...

    I completely agree with the rest of the author’s argument ...


    And now the main thing ...
    "Vika" (for all its shortcomings) will be popular until a domestic analogue of the electronic encyclopedia appears. Until this happens, they will go to "pedia" for info ...
    And what do we have today? .. Hundreds of good, but scattered sites, in which infa (not uncommon, however!) Contradicts each other ... And also "Lukomorye" and something "like her" ... Not a lot, however! ..
    The idea of ​​voting, which was proposed above by our respected colleagues on the site, I think is correct ... But still there are delusions - is there a Churov in the "wiki"? .. Personally, I would not rule out such an option ...
    Yes, this problem must be solved more radically and radically than voting ...

    And now the most important thing ...
    Guys! I appeal to those who have significant experience working in tyrnet, experience in creating sites, try (well, try!) To create a domestic encyclopedia ...
    While she is gone, we will continue to run into such "masterpieces" ...
    1. alicante11
      alicante11 3 October 2013 16: 42
      +1
      The 1st Pacific Squadron was second only to the armored Bogatyr in this indicator.


      The hero was armored. And taking into account the state of the boilers, "Varyag" was inferior in speed to everyone who could. Perhaps that is why they put him in Chemulpo as "the weakest link".
      1. Pilat2009
        Pilat2009 3 October 2013 19: 43
        0
        Quote: alicante11
        Perhaps that is why they put him in Chemulpo as "the weakest link".

        If you still take into account that he was walking along a winding forwarder and the rake decently hits before going out into the open ....
  26. Djozz
    Djozz 3 October 2013 10: 59
    +4
    There was such a "itoric" democrat Igor Bunich (already deceased), so he apparently was the first in the 90s to pour dirt on the Russian fleet and not only, and in particular, he fouled the exploit of the "Varyag" calling it a "PR action" of the tsarist government and generally worthlessness this fight!
  27. Druid
    Druid 3 October 2013 11: 13
    +8
    Quote: Magellan
    The author of the article drives worse than Wikipedia. She at least occasionally makes a mistake, but this brazenly lies
    A voice crying in the desert ... It remains to be hoped that even a few of those who are friends with the head all this - and the article in the Wiki and the opus, sorry, the article on this forum, may be encouraged to read more.
    The author of the article skillfully uses the now popular nationalism, as Jews and Ukrainians always got, the latter will now also be trampled into the mud day and night.
    I really liked the attempt to "objectivity" the author, reminded the statement of the leader of one of the European countries of the late 30s on a similar occasion: "The main author is Ivan Vladimirovich Sliva (aka Saiga20K), born in 1979, living in Moscow, a top blogger, previously who worked at RusHydro and wrote excellent articles on the Soviet artillery in Wikipedia, but not so long ago overbought by a foreign NPO and drastically changed his worldview "... That is, as soon as a foreign NPO was immediately overbought against the" general party line ", it is sad. The authorities have taken away the right to think and decide their fate from the Russians, and now they are taking this right away from each other ...
    In short, it’s cheap and cheerful that the hooting crowd rushes to tear anyone, the crowd doesn’t need anything else, the main thing is not to think - why strain.
    The trouble is that tsarism lied - history put an end to it, after the communists lied - history again put an end to it. And we contemporaries have to clean up the Abdian stables of what the "historians" have dumped under these regimes, some fairy tales are very pleasant and we do not want to part with them, but this does not stop them being fairy tales.
  28. New Russia
    New Russia 3 October 2013 11: 23
    +4
    What a loud and idiotic headline. "Anti-Russian project" Anyone can make changes there, if you do not agree, make the necessary changes. Judging by the title, the author has paranoid schizophrenia. If someone made false edits, make the edits yourself. In general, until, thanks to the wiki, the Russian Federation will disintegrate, stability will be covered, and people will begin to hate their country :)
  29. Basileus
    Basileus 3 October 2013 11: 40
    +5
    The author, as has been rightly pointed out here, is an oversight. Nothing prevents him from simply taking and correcting the text of the article. But no, he needs to start his graphomanian impulse on another, revealing article against, undoubtedly, the anti-Russian project.

    By the way, if you use the services of another deceitful anti-Russian project, you can find out that there is ice in the Sea of ​​Japan in March. And in April, too.
  30. Admiral 013
    Admiral 013 3 October 2013 11: 52
    +1
    Wikipedia dump crap! Where anyone can contribute anything, even I can contribute an article stating that the earth is flat! And that young freak over there, I didn’t like at once! These are now sitting at the top, they have carried out army reform since 2008.
  31. ed65b
    ed65b 3 October 2013 12: 03
    0
    the head must be smashed to this mudanjyan. he will erase everything. Then the children really believe that it was so.
  32. Taoist
    Taoist 3 October 2013 12: 10
    +8
    On the same "Tsushima" srach about the fight "Varyag" is simply endless. Moreover, they sort out the battle and all the previous events, sometimes almost every second ... But the truth, as usual, is "somewhere there" ...
    The problem really just has multiple dimensions. And this is fully illustrated by those "set of stamps" which, like any legendary event, this battle is shrouded in. Even in this topic ...
    /It describes in detail the misadventures with boilers kindly supplied by shipbuilders, as well as the fact that at this run speed was achieved only in 14 knots./

    Well, firstly, Belleville boilers were installed on the Varangian at the insistence of the MTK (which was enchanted by their advertising TTX and pushed these boilers to all the ships of the Russian fleet under construction). And in particular, Melnikov writes about this in particular.

    Second: Now it’s impossible to say exactly what speed in a combat situation a cruiser could develop, the theory often diverges greatly from practice. But this is really not important - on the shallow Chemulpo fairway no (real or theoretical) superiority in speed could help - there is nowhere to accelerate.

    Third - the battle phenomenon of the Varangian has two components, purely military (and here we must admit that defeat is defeat) - the Japanese completed the task and the Russian ships were unable to prevent it. And human - and here, too, everything is completely clear - the Russian crews once again demonstrated to the world selfless courage, courage and will, even in an objectively hopeless situation. Which is legal and caused admiration (and at the same time misunderstanding) of the whole world.


    Today, the danger of "revising" the feat of Varyag (as well as Gastello, Matrosov and thousands of other heroes "who fell for their friends") lies precisely in the fact that under the guise of "searching for truth", "fighting ideological clichés" and other "liberal crap "trying to use the ambiguity of the" military "or" historical "description of the feat to belittle or rewrite the" human "aspect - to make such a" passionate behavior algorithm "become" unfashionable "in the future.

    This is not an attempt to "rewrite history" at all - this is an "attack on the future" ...
    1. v.lyamkin
      v.lyamkin 3 October 2013 13: 38
      +1
      He who rules the past rules the future. Or something like that.
      1. cdrt
        cdrt 3 October 2013 17: 44
        +1
        He who rules the past rules the future. Or something like that.

        This seems to be true only for the world of "1984".
        For other worlds - there are many different sources, therefore there will be many different opinions.
    2. Nagaibak
      Nagaibak 3 October 2013 20: 39
      0
      Taoist "Today the danger of" revising "the feat of the Varyag (as well as Gastello, Matrosov and thousands of other heroes" who fell for their own friends ") lies precisely in the fact that under the guise of" searching for truth "," fighting against ideological clichés "and so on." Liberal crap "trying to use the ambiguity of the" military "or" historical "description of the feat to belittle or rewrite and the" human "aspect - to make it so that in the future such a" passionate behavior algorithm "would become" unfashionable. "
      This is not an attempt to "rewrite history" at all - this is an "attack on the future" ...
      Gold words!!! This can be attributed to other newfangled "historical" discoveries.
      There is an uncompromising ideological struggle against our country. Everything that we value, which is dear to us, is attacked. Under this or that sauce.
  33. Peaceful military
    Peaceful military 3 October 2013 12: 46
    +3
    Goebbels said: first, we will take away their history and after 2-3 generations they will turn into an obedient herd of sheep.
    He is not, and his business is booming.angry
  34. Yuri Y.
    Yuri Y. 3 October 2013 12: 48
    +2
    Become, as I understand it, against Vicki. And until there is a similar project, there will be such talk. Although the use of links is bad, you have to use this resource. Since sometimes you just need to understand what it is about, at least for orientation.
  35. AZB15
    AZB15 3 October 2013 13: 07
    +4
    Dear!
    You can rally endlessly about the glory of the Russian fleet, but there are nuances:
    1. Breakthrough "Varyag", if it is a breakthrough in the afternoon with a slow-speed "Koreyets" and it is not necessary about the "Koreyets" artillery.
    2. The flooding of the "Varyag", and not detonation like a KL, allegedly at the request of foreign stationary personnel;
    3. Transition of "Varyag" under their cars to Japan;
    4. Inconsistency of combat damage according to Rudnev's report and the fact in the photo of the burning Varyag and the raised ship.
    5. How did this feat appear in general against the background of the pogrom of the 1st squadron, "Boyar", etc.

    In general, it is discussed a lot where and many times. Sailors are of course heroes, but there are questions to the command of the detachment ...
    1. Ulysses
      Ulysses 3 October 2013 14: 22
      +1
      Here are more questions for the manufacturer of this "technical miracle":

      Varyag "was founded on May 10, 1899 at the shipyard of the Charles William Crump and Sons plant in Philadelphia.
      Crump surrendered a real marriage to the Russian fleet. The new cruiser was considered experimental. And the company Charles Crump tried, trying in every possible way to save in order to get maximum financial benefit.

      The steering wheel for the "Varyag" was made almost half the size of other ships of this displacement. At the same time, Crump benefited from the cost of bronze and other expensive metals, but for a cruiser, such savings turned into insufficient maneuverability.

      Wanting to save several tons of weight at the expense of anti-fragmentation armor, the Americans neglected the protection for the guns - the Varyag lacked not only gun turrets (like the Oleg or the Bogatyr), but even shields (like the Askold); the deck guns were completely open. As a result, during the hour of the battle at Chemulpo, the Varyag lost more than a hundred people in killed and wounded from fragments of Japanese shells - almost a quarter of the crew.

      But the biggest problem was the power plant. The Americans put on the cruiser the steam boilers of the new and insufficiently tested Nikloss system (they were cheaper) instead of the reliable boilers of the Belleville system.
      ... When the cruiser reached Russia, it was already close to "paralysis", and all attempts of Russian engineers to return the four-pipe handsome man to its original agility ended in failure.

      Upon arrival in the Far East, the cruiser was completely unsuitable for combat service - the new ship needed major repairs. During sea trials, boiler tubes constantly burst, bearings overheated - after numerous accidents, the machine team was already afraid to approach this "overseas miracle of technology". With great difficulty and risk, the Varyag could give no more than 19 knots for a short time, and the recommended speed for it was now only 14 knots.

      As for questions to the command, here are his answers:

      Opinion of Vice Admiral P.P. Tyrtov: "What kind of boilers are these, in which after a year of service it is necessary to change the mass of pipes and forty collectors?"

      Vice-Admiral Skrydlov, squadron commander: "The stoic behavior of the crew is commendable. But the youth would not have had to mobilize all their forces to overcome a simple curriculum, if the damned fate in the person of one American did not put them in such conditions with its incompetence in engineering matters."

      The conclusion of the Port Arthur Commission of Uspensky based on the test results: "The cruiser will not be able to reach speeds above 20 knots without the risk of severe damage to boilers and machines."

      Special opinion of the flag engineer I. I. Gippius: "The cruiser is hopeless. Correcting what is out of the factory faulty is an extremely difficult task, if it is real at all. "
      http://varjag-2007.livejournal.com/2490496.html
    2. Taoist
      Taoist 3 October 2013 14: 25
      +5
      I have already noted above the simple fact that any feat has 2 dimensions. And anyone who has even a little contact with military service knows how the innocent are rewarded and the innocent are punished. Here, after all, it's not about that ... But about the fact that when in a revealing rage (no matter sincere or artificially stimulated), the "overthrow of idols" and "debunking of heroes" begins, the destruction of those very moral guidelines without which a person cannot exist. "A holy place is never empty". And in the end, instead of Pokryshkin (who was also named a hero), they suddenly begin to admire Hartmann ... Etc. etc.
      It is quite possible that Rudnev was not such a brilliant naval commander as "the notorious Doinikov" (Varyag the winner) - it is possible that he was not really a hero at all and he was "appointed" there. Everything is possible ... But knocking out the supports of morality and destroying myths, we are in fact we will not find some "truth" we just destroy ...
      1. AZB15
        AZB15 3 October 2013 16: 46
        -1
        Unfortunately, in many respects they are right. It generally surprises me, if not to say that I’m just fucking out the amount of paper how-to that brings down and brings down: all sorts of revelations from SS soldiers, Wehrmacht, about German divisions and allies, about Reich leaders, etc., and etc. And certainly with the faces of the Hitler’s Himmlergering, shooting German soldiers on the covers, if the book is about German tanks, then in the background is our burning T-34.
        What kind pancake -And all this woof-about release, taking into account the fact that more than half of the publishers with the 5th column? Business probably ...

        And about the exploits of ours ... Yes, in general, directly, no one ever says that there was no exploit, Tsushima or A. Matrosov’s exploit. General technical details are sorted out. I personally have not seen blasphemy and chuckles.
        1. kartalovkolya
          kartalovkolya 4 October 2013 07: 55
          0
          Sorry, but the devil is in the details! (I didn’t say that)
      2. Odysseus
        Odysseus 3 October 2013 22: 56
        0
        Quote: Taoist
        It is quite possible that Rudnev was not such a brilliant naval commander as "the notorious Doinikov" (Varyag the winner) - it is possible that he was not really a hero at all and he was "appointed" there. Everything is possible ... But knocking out the supports of morality and destroying myths, we are in fact we will not find some "truth" we just destroy ...

        Reasonably write. But the point is that the story about the "heroic death of the Varyag" is absolutely impossible to defend for factual considerations. Well, there was no "passionary behavior algorithm" about which you wrote.
        It would be right to switch the propaganda to a story about the truly heroic actions of Rurik or Admiral Ushakov (unfortunately, very few people know about them), and with regard to the Varyag, they will limit themselves to the phrase, they have fulfilled their duty. This would be both reasonable and useful.
        1. Taoist
          Taoist 3 October 2013 23: 56
          0
          Why wasn't it? After all, it was quite possible not to go into battle at all, but to immediately flood the ships ... From the point of view of "Western observers", it was worth doing. So, going out to a deliberately hopeless battle, this very "passionary behavior" was demonstrated, moreover, even from the point of view of the "appointed feat", the battle of the Varyag was an ideal option - for it was under the supervision of a bunch of "independent people" - and which was assessed as feat. The German wrote the same famous song "upstairs, you comrades" - because even then the third power had "well, a very big influence." So maybe there were more glorious feats, but they, as they say, "remained behind the scenes." By the way, I don't know what kind of "factology" you are missing ...
          1. Odysseus
            Odysseus 4 October 2013 02: 31
            +1
            Quote: Taoist
            After all, it was quite possible not to go into battle at all, but to immediately sink the ships ...

            Absolutely excluded. The flooding of entire ships without a fight is a naval court.
            Quote: Taoist
            So maybe there were more glorious feats, but they, as they say, "remained behind the scenes."

            You put it very gently. Reality is tougher. Compare-
            "Rurik" - did not capitulate in a hopeless situation, fought to the last shell, opened the Kingston - lost 202 people (including the captain).
            "Admiral Ushakov" - did not capitulate in a hopeless situation, fought to the last, opened the kingstones - lost 94 people (including the captain)
            "Varyag with Koreets" - left the raid in the daytime - took a half-hour battle - turned around (for unknown reasons) - blew up a whole Korean, and flooded the Varyag on the move (yes, they flooded it so that the Japanese raised it and put it into operation) - the loss of 31 people for two (1 officer).
            It is easy to notice the enormous distance between the actions of these ships. Therefore, it is reasonable to propagate the feat of Rurik, Ushakov (and many other ships), and as for Varyag, say, they did their duty. It would be both honest and useful.
            1. Taoist
              Taoist 4 October 2013 12: 03
              0
              Don't you want to hear me? we are not talking about "propaganda" or finding out "whose feat is cooler." Varyag was not promoted by us, but by witnesses of his fight ... (Unfortunately, the battle of Ushakov or Rurik did not have such) - but this does not mean that you need to engage in his "propaganda" (which I actually wrote above. First of all, all such things are very subjective (and after so many years, when not only living witnesses, but also many documents were gone, even more so) Secondly:
              “Mu Da knew half of the truth,” said the Teacher. “Let him also learn the other half: each person has his own Heaven inside, and each such Heaven has its own support. A noble husband protects other people's supports, no matter how strange they sometimes seem to him, because anyone in whom Heaven is overturned becomes inhuman and ceases to understand justice. "
              "And there are people whose support of their Heaven is to break other people's supports?" Mu Da asked.
              The teacher sighed and turned away. "(C) XXII chapter of" Lunyu "
  36. AZB15
    AZB15 3 October 2013 13: 30
    +3
    Now about "Vicki". In my bookcases there are many encyclopedias of the Soviet period, as well as Russian encyclopedias. There is a blast on the military and the party at 37-39 without explanation and sparingly "repressed" in the Russian. Of course not about Trotsky and Beria. And about Yeltsin and Chubais - prominent state. figures (this is true and not, depending on how you look). This is about information content and truthfulness.
    I do not know where and who on the forums the link to "Wiki" is considered bad form, but name a resource where you can get quick and sharp enough prompt and complete information?
    But in order to correctly perceive the information, you need to read books, have knowledge, think with your head, and not shout about the "anti-Russian" orientation of the articles. Take it and write to the English "Vicky" about the battle of the "Invincibles" with the Spee squadron ... What they say, they showered them with 12-inches. Will not weaken?

    For those who wish, I can throw this http://dic.academic.ru/
    1. Djozz
      Djozz 3 October 2013 14: 50
      0
      Repressed, not yet shot!
  37. sven27
    sven27 3 October 2013 13: 50
    +5
    some of the articles are anti-Russian, some anti-American, you can’t call the wiki anti-Russian, by and large it’s a hodgepodge of user articles and their personal sympathies and beliefs, and you should not seriously consider this resource.
    1. Santa Fe
      Santa Fe 3 October 2013 20: 04
      +2
      Quote: sven27
      and seriously consider this resource is not worth it.

      Vika is a great resource for getting started with the subject: key terms, dates, and numbers. Everything else - in books and on thematic sites
      1. sven27
        sven27 3 October 2013 20: 32
        +1
        [quote = SWEET_SIXTEEN] Wick is a great resource for getting started with the subject: key terms, dates, and numbers. Everything else is in books and on thematic sites. all right
      2. family tree
        family tree 3 October 2013 21: 07
        +1
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN

        Vika is a great resource for getting started with the subject: key terms, dates, and numbers. Everything else - in books and on thematic sites

        You can’t say better
  38. Ulysses
    Ulysses 3 October 2013 13: 52
    +1
    "Our proud Varyag does not surrender to enemies."
  39. kostya_a
    kostya_a 3 October 2013 14: 30
    +3
    I would say that Wikipedia is neutral! And mistakes are always possible! hi
    1. Djozz
      Djozz 3 October 2013 14: 55
      0
      Try to get in with criticism of Einstein's "theories", and we will look at the "unbiased" Vicki, and also forgot the topic of the "Holocaust"!
      1. ROA
        ROA 3 October 2013 15: 51
        -1
        Duc Holocaust was not there, it's fiction.
      2. cdrt
        cdrt 3 October 2013 17: 59
        0
        Try to get in with criticism of Einstein's "theories", and we will look at the "unbiased" Vicki, and also forgot the topic of the "Holocaust"!


        About Einstein's theory.
        You see, professionals really do not like to argue with illiterate laymans.
        Moreover, the opinion of the amateur, of course, is not equal to the opinion of a professional.
        In general, it’s right - it looks as if a dumb blonde will tell an auto mechanic how to regulate the engine for him (although it is clear that the amateur considers himself smart) laughing
        Moreover - I will reveal a terrible secret laughing for any cases both Newton's mechanics and Einstein's mechanics are not true laughing They act, but in the field of their applicability (and act so far in a repeated experiment the opposite is not clearly proved) laughing Theories are a mechanism of cognition, a way of explaining a number of phenomena, and not a goal.

        About the Holocaust.
        Stubborn anti-Semitism is not a justification for the need to discuss with such a subject.
        And given that there were a lot of such Nazis, in many European countries they came up with an article in the Criminal Code.
        Therefore - again ... the opinion of a stubborn person who denies the obvious is not equal in rights (well, if you do not include demagogy) laughing To believe in the evidence, it’s very simple - to spend 500 euros and go on an excursion to some end. camp. Sane helps to penetrate.
        1. Djozz
          Djozz 4 October 2013 10: 46
          0
          Of course, anyone who doubts the 6 million victims of the "Holocaust" is labeled an anti-Semite and a "club" of the criminal article in Geyrop! This is how they turned the historical discussion into criminal prosecution, well done, by the way, in the 60s, the Russian Academy of Sciences forbade any criticism of Einstein's theories to be considered, you consider this the right decision! In the Middle Ages, obscurantists from the church burned at the stake those who did not believe that the earth was flat. Do you want that!
      3. Santa Fe
        Santa Fe 3 October 2013 20: 01
        0
        Quote: Djozz
        Try to get in with criticism of Einstein's "theories", and we'll take a look at the "unbiased" Wiki,

        Naturally, no one is going to discuss another nonsense
        (as a rule, 99,9% of critics of Einstein’s theory are ordinary charlatans. And those 0,1% of scientists who could really come up with serious criticism or propose something new (tachyon theory) have the habit of checking their calculations on 100 once in a row. And they don’t have the insolence to publish whatever is on the national information resource)

        Let's discuss! The earth is flat! Let's discuss! The speed of light is not equal to "c"! Let's discuss!

        There you are am
        Obviously delusional questions and pseudoscience should be cut off even at the stage of application. How to identify science from pseudoscience? Through the eyes! It is obvious as black and white.

        However, Vika admits adequate articles on this topic:
        http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%80%D1%85%D1%81%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1
        %82%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B5_%D0%B4%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B6%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5

        or

        http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A2%D0%B0%D1%85%D0%B8%D0%BE%D0%BD
  40. erofich
    erofich 3 October 2013 16: 13
    +1
    Wikipedia is the substitution of history for the sake of an open wallet.
  41. tverskoi77
    tverskoi77 3 October 2013 17: 32
    0
    Wikipedia is a trash. It is edited by completely incomprehensible people to their taste and color. Even if we remove the political taste and economic color of their activities, the system of collecting and presenting information remains absolutely incompetent. In other words, whoever wants something, writes or deletes)))
  42. xomaNN
    xomaNN 3 October 2013 18: 44
    0
    There is only one way out. Create a portal more authoritative and popular on the network than "Wiki .." And then the "tap winners" will ask in line there belay
  43. Luga
    Luga 3 October 2013 18: 49
    +2
    I read Melnikov's book in the early 90s. Father brought, he was very interested (and is interested) in everything related to the Navy. Then he collected the series "Ships and Battles", in my opinion, it was in this series that the book about "Vryag" was published. It was difficult for me to run the book, a lot of purely technical information, links to sources, but, nevertheless, I got to the end. But one, given in the book, I remember the figure, it is the figure about the losses of the Varyag crew in that battle - 45%, and the bulk of the losses fell on the gunners, the Japanese knocked them out, almost all. The artillery on the "Varyag" was not protected at all, as the respected Ulysses justly wrote above. In addition, I remember that the six-inch guns of our cruiser showed themselves from the worst side, in which, when firing at high elevation angles, some gears flew out and the guns went out of order. It obviously follows from this that by the moment of the turn, the cruiser could not physically continue the battle, that is, cause harm to the enemy with its shooting. Despite the fact that the "Varyag" even before the battle was significantly inferior in speed to any Japanese warship, a breakthrough, even if it took place (which was incredible in itself), would have ended in failure after a short chase.
    Hence the conclusion: the cruiser blocked in Chemulpo by superior forces was doomed to death even before the battle. The ship's commander decided to conduct a hopeless battle solely in order to cause at least some harm to the enemy in view of the inevitable death of the cruiser.
    The losses of the Japanese fleet could not be significant for many reasons. The quality of Russian shells of that time has been talked about. They could inflict real harm only from the smallest distances. The long and narrow fairway of Chemulpo did not allow the "Varyag" to make any maneuvers (to the question of tactics), its entire path was known to the Japanese with an accuracy of several meters, while the Japanese themselves on the outer roadstead could more or less freely maneuver ... The accuracy of Russian fire could not be high - the guns are high above the deck, protection, as already mentioned, was absent. High-explosive Japanese shells, when bursting, gave thousands of small fragments, which swept away everything that was not protected by armor, therefore, not only direct hits, but also close explosions presented a significant danger to the gunners. So, personally, I do not believe in sunken and significantly damaged Japanese ships.
    And the heroism and self-sacrifice of our sailors and officers in that battle, in my opinion, is beyond doubt, only the most vicious and narrow-minded enemy can deny this. The same can be said about the expediency of the battle, its necessity. A battleship should not and cannot surrender without a fight, for that is why it is a combat ship. The doomed "Varyag" died with glory, and not like a cornered rat, and for this my great gratitude to his commander and crew. Everlasting memory!
    And Wikipedia, in my opinion, is a normal resource. I do not see any political commitment in it. It is very suitable for the initial collection of information on an unfamiliar issue. Leave it, let it work smile
  44. michajlo
    michajlo 3 October 2013 20: 25
    +1
    Dazdranagon (1) SU Today, 08:00 AM

    Unfortunately, many people take information from Wikipedia and do not think about the fact that any nonsense can be written there ...

    Good evening everyone!

    Dear forum users, maybe you should not be angry with Wikipedia. According to the principle of construction, this is an open resource where everyone can write and supplement what they wish.

    Accepting it as the LAST INSTANCE is probably not worth it.
    It is good (as already mentioned above) with links, a lot of information that EVERYTHING needs to be evaluated, filtered and CHECKED for accuracy and truthfulness.

    The work (publication) of articles there is also regulated by Admins.
    For example, I cannot have claims against the VO site admins or argue and quarrel with them, due to the fact that they did not publish 2 of my materials, since they are Admins, they are responsible for the operation of the site, and I am just a "forum user ".

    And the main thing that all users need to remember is that in the “free” Internet about 70-80% of the content is not only unscrupulous advertising, but also FALSE, trick, theft, and that you always have to EXTREMELY critical and cautious approach to the content and directions of the web -pages of the Internet.
  45. Boris63
    Boris63 3 October 2013 20: 34
    0
    Gentlemen, a lot of time has passed since those battles and no one can prove with complete certainty how it was. Each "side" has its own "documents", but there is a lot of evidence about the heroism of RUSSIAN soldiers and sailors - that's what we need to talk about. Even the Japanese themselves (in a memo to their cavalry) wrote that it was possible to engage in battle with the Cossacks only with a 10-fold superiority. And Wikipedia is God the judge of these authors.
  46. Sour
    Sour 3 October 2013 21: 02
    +1
    There are unclear moments in the Chkmulpinsky battle.
    You can argue what damage the Japanese had. The fact that their data cannot be trusted absolutely is a fact.
    But there are questions to which I can not find an answer:
    1) Almost all Russian and Soviet sources have information that the Varyag sank a Japanese destroyer. But nowhere is there any data on what this destroyer was called.
    2) Why did Rudnev not dare to break through at night - the only chance to break through? After all, during the day there was no chance. And why didn't he get rid of the Koreyets while going for a breakthrough? (there were such proposals) After all, the artillery of the "Koreyets", which fired black powder, still did not give anything in battle. But on the other hand, the "Korean" limited the speed of the "Varyag", and thus completely deprived him of his chances of a breakthrough.
    It seems that Rudnev did not try to break through, but had planned a kind of demonstration in advance, followed by the flooding of his ships.
    3) Why was the Varyag sunk in shallow water and the Koreets blown up?
    Who can - clarify the situation.
    Only, if possible, clearly and convincingly, without propaganda (both Russophobic and cheers-patriotic).
    Thank you in advance.
    1. Jager
      Jager 3 October 2013 22: 35
      0
      1) One of the Japanese ships really sank from damage during the battle, but sank after it.
      2) The risk of damaging the ship in the dark at night with this fairway was too high. It’s not for you to walk around the city with a navigator.
      1. Pilat2009
        Pilat2009 4 October 2013 19: 29
        0
        Quote: Jager
        One of the Japanese ships really sank from damage during the battle, but sank after it.

        Here I like these statements. Someone sank, and who I do not know.
        Rudnev saw, heard ...
  47. sird64
    sird64 3 October 2013 22: 20
    0
    Glory to the Russian sailors, we always have courage on top, and it’s advantageous for enemies to take away our history and turn us into because these enemies know that we have such a great history
    1. Andrey11
      Andrey11 28 May 2016 21: 16
      0
      The main thing is that you do not lose the Russian language with such illiteracy - a patriot cannot connect two words.
  48. Jager
    Jager 3 October 2013 22: 30
    +4
    I read an article on Wiki about "Varyag" a couple of months before this article. And he asked exactly the same questions as the author. There is not a word about heroism. There is nothing at all about the fact that TWO Russian ships did not surrender and did not lower the flag fighting for the Fatherland against the Japanese ESCADRA, about the heroism of the crew. There is only a description of the captain, who does not know what to do, and about how "oblique" the Varyag artillerymen were. Once again I am convinced - Wikipedia is rubbish, you can't believe it.
  49. poquello
    poquello 3 October 2013 23: 35
    +2
    So do not go to her stinking.
  50. Borz
    Borz 3 October 2013 23: 58
    0
    There is nothing to read all nonsense. In the stove of it!