Talk:National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Avoiding political preferences in choosing the most appropriate terminology

I hope editors will exercise their best care in choosing the best terms when writing this article (I will also try my best) and will concentrate on the article content rather than on pushing the terms they favor into the article. This is not to say, that terms I choose are the best, but I am trying. Thanks to all, who will contribute Irpen 03:22, Mar 20, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Choice of names: Kiev/Kyiv, Mogila/Mohyla

I think that it's fine to keep Kyiv and Mohyla in the school name because that's how it calls itself. However, when talking about the city, Kiev should be used. The city is called in English as Kiev now and, AFAIK, was called so for as long as there are any records. The discussions on this are abundant in several WP talk pages. Also, the school's founder is called in English most frequently as Peter Mogila (see for example a Britannica article [1]). So, let's call him as such and keep the alternative spelling as secondary in the article. Irpen 15:44, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

The city is also called Kyiv in English, today. The abundant discussions and resolutions are about article titling, and didn't rule out other usage where it may be acceptable.
I agree that the usage of the city name in other articles is a different issue from the article titling. I also agree with you regarding the fact that the city is now also called Kyiv sometimes. I see the usage of Kyiv by many authors as a completely legitimate attempt to change the established name of the city. This may or may not succeed. However, encyclopedia, being a reference book, should not be in the forefront of the new terminology. When (and if) the new name gets established, it can be used in WP rather than the usage in WP should help establish the name. Irpen
More importantly, this article is about a living Ukrainian institution, named after a Ruthenian saint (of Moldovan origin) who lived in a city in Ukraine under Cossack rule (I think; correct me if I'm wrong).
I think it was under the the Polish and Lithuanian rule. Khmelnytsky's Cossacks entered Kiev two years later afet PM's death. What's noteworthy, though, English sources have always called the city as Kiev AFAIK. I can't look up in 17th century texts of course, but that's what I have read elsewhere about the name usage.Irpen
Giving primacy to the Anglo-Russified(?) version of the name seems especially inappropriate here, as well as in the article on Petro Mohyla.
I view it as giving primacy to the accepted in English version. If such exists, it is unimportant what its source is. Irpen
Anyway, "Petro Mohyla" (659 Google results) seems at first glance to be used more than "Peter Mogila" (241), Britannica notwithstanding. —Michael Z. 2005-04-15 17:22 Z
Update: results for English-language pages only: "Petro Mohyla" (473), "Peter Mogila" (226). —Michael Z. 2005-04-15 17:28 Z
I agree that here google test is inconclusive. Lets check other reference sources: Britannica, Oxford and Encyclopedia Americana use Peter Mogila. So, I think we should use it here too. Irpen 18:36, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
Subtelny's history uses "Petro Mohyla". —Michael Z. 2005-04-15 19:29 Z
  • Orest Subtelny. Ukraine: A History. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1988. ISBN 0-8020-5809-6.
There is no doubt that P.M. is a notable political figure in the History of Ukraine. On the other hand he is an important religious leader and a prominent Christian theologian of his time. I believe the authors in the history of UA are more likely to have the Ukrainophile views and, therefore, would use Petro Mohyla. If, however, you would do any of these google searches: (P M Christianity), (P M Metropolitan), (P M Orthodox), alternating Petro Mohyla and Peter Mogila for P M, the usage of the latter variant is more common by about a factor of two. I agree that this is less a clear cut issue than Kiev (BTW used by both Anna Reid and Andrew Wilson) but Peter Mogila still seems preferable for a WP article. - Irpen 18:41, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)
  • Anna Reid. Borderland: A Journey Through the History of Ukraine. London, Orion Books; 4th impression (1998, preface 2003) ISBN 0813337925.
  • Andrew Wilson. The Ukrainians: Unexpected Nation. Yale University Press; 2nd edition (2002) ISBN 0300093098.
If you have some basis for accusing the Canadian scholar Subtelny of pushing Ukrainophile views, I am interested to hear about it. If you're just speculating, it's inappropriate to do so.
I am not saying that Subtelny, a serious scholar no doubts, deliberately "pushes" Ukrainophile views. All I said is that a historian's deep involevement in the country is likely to affect his positions. This is especially true for the historians who write the history of their own people. This in no way implies that historians deliberately push their views in their work. Irpen
Here are my results for searches on English-language web pages. I see "Peter Mohyla" consistently used on more web sites. If you leave out the quotation marks in the search, you will no doubt add a strong bias towards the common name "Peter", and possibly to the transliteration of Russian mogila. Of course, being merely a collection of Google searches, you should treat my list as merely "damn lies", and not "statistics":
—Michael Z. 2005-04-16 21:36 Z
I made an honest mistake, sorry. I only searched for the last name Mogila/Mohyla coupled with these terms and ommitted the first name entirely. The reason is that 4 versions of his first name (Peter, Petro, Petr and Pyotr) combined with two version of his last name and combined with three religeous terms would give too many possible combinations. Mogila+Orthodox to Mohyla+Orthodox gives 1090 to 680. M+Metropolitan also gives 1630 to 807 in favor of Mogila. Mohyla indeed wins the google test with Christianity over Mogila+Christianity as 4150 to 1410. So, the google test is not clear, I agree. However, the reference books cited above use Peter Mogila. I think, WP should follow suit. BTW, "Peter" is not and English transliterated Russian name which would have beem Pyotr or Petr. And, finally, I don't think that google test is "damn lies". It is a statitistical test, just the margin of error is large. So, it is useful only when the difference is overwhelming which is not the case for this one. Irpen 02:55, Apr 17, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Predecessor?

Actually, I fail to see how the 17th-century collegium could be termed a predecessor of the Academy founded in 1992. The last passage should be modified or removed altogether. --Ghirlandajo 08:14, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

I thought about having two separate articles but I was not feeling too strong about it, so it ended up like this. You van check the hisotry as well as the history of redirects to see the details. I would not oppose either the development of the last section or having the original KMA as a separate article. --Irpen 08:18, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Official name

Kuban Kazak just moved this article from "National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy" to "National University of Kiev-Mohyla Academy", citing naming policy for the name in the text.

This seems inappropriate, and I don't see which policy applies. The previous name used the organization's official English name (official home). Wikipedia's article-naming policy and conventional transliteration do not seem to apply. The naming policy does not speak to what appears in article text. I'm going to move it back, pending a convincing argument to abandon the consensus position previously discussed here. —Michael Z. 2005-12-15 22:05 Z

A quick search on Google shows 42,800 hits on "Kyiv-Mohyla Academy" and only 11,400 hits on "Kiev-Mohyla Academy". It seems to me that Kyiv-Mohyla Academy is more appropriate. -- JamesTeterenko 22:26, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

I will write on the issue later (my todo list is too much backlogged inside and outside of wp) but please all do not ever move articles without discussion. This has been raised by me earlier with one notorious page mover and the dialog that followed tells about the willingnes to seek for other people's opinions.

One thing is to change in the text, and even there going into the artilce just to make Mogila for Mohyla changes or vice versa annoys the readers. However, moving is a totally different and more troublesome to undo. Lets not do too much of that. As for going to articles for Kyiv/Kiev or Mogila/Mohyla corrections, may I ask anyone who isn't around for a long time to check my earlier "Games with Names" proposal I raised at Wikipedia:Eastern_European_Wikipedians'_notice_board. One of the responses to it was this. Maybe others would think differently? Thanks, --Irpen 00:37, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Official name and information from the insider

I've been studying in this university for the last four years. So I'm an insider. The official name is spelled as "Kyiv-Mohyla Academy". This spelling is used by the administration of the university. Kyiv-Mohyla is positioned as the university with strong national traditions and spelling as Kiev-Mohyla is unacceptable. I think, I'll provide some information for the article later. Also I will monitor the article. --Wavebreaker 12 July 2006

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../n/a/t/Talk%7ENational_University_of_Kyiv-Mohyla_Academy_5921.html"