User:Ostap R/archive

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome

Hello, Ostap R/archive, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

If you are interested in Ukraine-related themes, you may want to check out the Ukraine Portal, particularly the Portal:Ukraine/New article announcements and Portal:Ukraine/Ukraine-related Wikipedia notice board. The New article announcements board is probably the most important and the most attended one. Please don't forget to announce there the new articles you create. Adding both boards to your watchlist is probably a good idea.

Finally, in case you are interested, similar boards exist at Russia portal as many editors contribute to topics related to both countries. The respective boards there are: Portal:Russia/New article announcements and Portal:Russia/Russia-related Wikipedia notice board. Of course there are also many other portals at Wikipedia or you may just get right into editing.

Again, welcome! —dima/talk/ 01:02, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Order of the White Eagle

Hi there. Thanks for your recent addition to Ronald Reagan about the Order of the White Eagle award. I thought that the award is to be presented July 17, 2007, at the Ronald Reagan Library. I am scheduled to attend that event, so if it is to be presented then, I am going to remove that addition to the page for now. Happyme22 17:06, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ukraine in WW2

I see that you are now taking an interest in that disgusting page. I must say that the attention to it is long overdue. However, I do not think it is a good idea to remove other user's comments. Trolls are best exposed when their comments are visible.

Also, would you be interested in working on the article on the Ukraine in World War Two? If created, it would be a nice subarticle in the {{History of Ukraine}}. We already have some articles about the history of the nation in the specific period of which Ukraine after the Russian Revolution is probably the best one.

Regards, --Irpen 06:06, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Forgive me, I fear that if someone saw that statement, they might have some thought in their mind that it is true. I would help with the article in any way I can. Ostap 06:15, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
LOL. No one takes seriously the Wikipedia articles with the massacres, invasions, collaborations, attack, etc. in the title. It is plain obvious that those articles were started or tilted by the users with an ax to grind. I will let you know if (and when) I (or someone esle) starts a WW2 article. Of course, you can start it any time. --Irpen

[edit] Chortkiv offensive

Good work with starting the article. Thanks, --Irpen 03:04, 5 September 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Images

Image:Cheremshyna Marko.jpg and Image:Vitovsky Dmytro.jpg‎ uploaded per your request. Happy edits, --Irpen 05:11, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. Ostap 14:21, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Uploading images is not that difficult. There is a link from any wp page that says: upload file. Make sure you choose to title the image with some descriptive filename. Tagging it properly takes some experience. But you will quickly grasp its basics. --Irpen 20:58, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I did this. I selected the file from where it says browse, and entered the copyright information. Then I said "upload" and nothing happened. I have uploaded before a few times, but now it doesn't work. I don't know what the problem is. You really made the Chortkiv offensive article look good. Sorry about the "офензива" part. I guess its been a while, and my english is starting to find its way into my Ukrainian. Ostap

[edit] Foreign names

Thanks. In fact this is not the case, IMO, where the Ukrainian translation is necessary at all. It is important to render a native name when it serves the basis of the English name through a transliteration, like placenames, people's names, rivers, etc. If, however, the English term is obtained through a translation rather than transliteration, then the original term is not important to an English reader and is mere clutter.

Compare:

Kyivrada (Ukrainian: Київрада) is ...

with:

Kiev city council is ...

In the former case we transliterate the foreign term into an English article. In the latter one we translate "Київська міська рада". The reader might use the term, whose origin may seem obscure to him (case 1) but very few readers come to the wikipedia to learn the translation of the words "city" and "council" into Ukrainian and those who look for such info should refer to dictionaries rather than encyclopedias.

So, I am thinking of removing the non-English term from the article. --Irpen 22:42, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

  • That sounds resonable, but I have seen foreign words in other articles where the English term is obtained through a translation rather than transliteration. Do you want me to stop adding the foreign words if the article name is based on translation? What about the Treaty of Kurukove? Ostap 04:23, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, it is hard to have a set in stone rule. This is more or less an editor's judgment issue. Probably, if the term is firmly established in national historiography, it is useful to give it. At the same time, if various authors use different terms, then giving just one is probably excessive. Re "treaty", there are several similar words used in Ukrainian historiography depending on which treaty we are talking about. Some treaties are "dogovir", some are "rada" (Pereyaslav), some are "akt" (Zluky), some are "spilka", etc. Also, some treaties are named through a name of the place (Kurukove Lake) and some through the derived adjectives (Pereyaslavs'ka rada). If there are firmly established word-combination (Pereyaslavska Rada), I would give it. If the event is covered in few books only (Chortkiv) and has no universally established name (it can be "nastup", "ataka", "udar", etc.) perhaps we need none of it.

I recently removed the pure translational name from Seven wonders of Ukraine, but the author restored it. I chose not to persist. This is just food for thought, not a rule set in stone.

For a different but related issue, see Talk:Kiev Bandurist Capella. Happy edits, --Irpen 18:08, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

So its probably best to limit the Ukrainian names to people and geographic places? Would this also include works of literature? Ostap 05:24, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
This is not a sort of the rule to set in stone. So, up to editors. I would definitely include it for works of literature (like Perebendya). BTW, we are almost late to nominate our article on Chortkiv offensive to DYK. I will try to submit something right now but it may be too late. We'll see. --Irpen 06:15, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Submitted[1] but may still not make it because of the last minute and because some might give the nom a fight. We'll see. Feel free to edit my hook. In any case even if it ends up not featured at the main page having the new article is more important. Cheers, --Irpen 07:31, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
So the article turned out well? That is good. You really made it quite good. Ostap 07:44, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Taking an extra effort of DYK submission is worth it for two reasons. It brings readers to the Ukrainian topics, not only to the article in question but often to the articles linked from it. Secondly, it results with the article being copyedited for style, grammar and text by native speakers. Congrats. --Irpen 20:03, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Did you know...

Updated DYK query On 8 September 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Chortkiv offensive, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Congratulations with your first DYK! --Irpen 20:01, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

Hello,

Thank you for your support.

There is a request for comment open at the talk page. Please contribute.

Thanks, Horlo 23:37, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


Bud'mo

Horlo 00:14, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Ostap, it is of course up to you to decide how to spend your time but I recommend against "contributing" anything to the page name's "debate" for a simple reason that realistically the page won't get moved now. In a year or two, perhaps, the issue might be worth to be looked at again but now it is a mere waste of time. Since Horlo has no better use for his time than conduct his futile crusade and has no desire to make a single meaningful content edit, he types in kilobytes of text at the page designated by the administrators just for him. But as I see you are interested in content writing, I would appreciate that you continue doing it in the time you have for the Wikipedia. Getting involved in the campaigns that are clearly doomed is a big waste of time no matter of whether your heart lies with the campaign's goals. BTW, have you thought of a serious development of the PUW series? If you want to take upon this task, I will try to help with all I can. The main war article would then be a good place to start. Regards, -Irpen 00:26, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
I have voiced my opinion and am now ready to go back to editing articles. Given the evidence, I believe that Kyiv is more accurate. But perhaps you are right, and only more time is needed before the article will be moved. I am just curious, what is your opinion? Ostap 00:36, 14 September 2007 (UTC)


Hello,

Thanks for the help. And don't let anybody tell you what is a wasted effort. Horlo 01:05, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree that it is not a wasted effort, and I have made my comment in support of the move. But seeing the coverage of Ukraine on wikipedia I do think we have alot on our hands, even some other things that may be just as important. I wish you good luck with your struggle for greater accuracy, Ostap 01:16, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

I think it should be Kiev as per currently prevailing English usage. How can one prove that the current prevailing usage is Kiev? There has been a lot said about it. I will refer you to three lengthy discussions I had that simply pop up at the top of my head. In fact I had plenty of more. But here are some:

As of now, I have no plans to spend time on this debate. But if I see the usage in the media shifts, I would consider it. Cheers, --Irpen 02:05, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kiev

It is not a personal attack if it is true. I told Horlo that he lied and spun my words. You don't seem to be interpereting it but you are just taking my text without considering Horlo's filibuster. Accusations of lying, especially when they are justified are not personal attacks. Reginmund 01:17, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CUIAS article

Thanks Ostape for the dressing up of the CUIAS article. I will have more content shortly Eduvalko 16:29, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:VolodymyrZatonsky.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:VolodymyrZatonsky.gif. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 05:07, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Chekayu

Ostape,

Chekayu.

Horlo 00:35, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I'm sorry if my response was not clear. Please see my response on my user page.

Horlo 05:32, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Berehynia

Hi, I noticed that you are interested in topics related to Ukraine. I would appreciate if you offered your opinion on the subject of the article Berehynia. The discussion takes place at the article's talk page. Thanks in advance. --Hillock65 11:43, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Interesting, but mythology isn't really an area I know too much about. I will say that I have always been taught that she was a goddess. I will see what I can find, and if I get any information I will be sure to bring it to the discussion. Ostap 16:00, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hryhory Loboda

Hi Ostap. Even without changing the spelling, you can fix the template by using a piped link, so it links to one name but displays another. For example, [[Hryhory Loboda|Hryhoriy Loboda]] makes this: Hryhoriy Loboda, and would turn to bold text on the page.

We usually name articles by the simplified version which commonly appears in books, so that -ій and -ий endings become -y, and often the same version is used in the article. Where the Ukrainian appears in the leading line, I usually put a more precise transliteration there, according to the BGN/PCGN system. This way both versions appear in the article for the sake of web searches, and someone who doesn't know the Cyrillic alphabet can divine the original spelling. I'll have a look and do something to the article. —Michael Z. 2007-09-21 19:26 Z

Hi again. A Google search showed almost no non-wikipedia links for either version, so in this case I went with the simplified name in the text (to match the title another editor chose), plus precise transliteration. If I look in my history books, perhaps I will get a better indication that one spelling or the other is more appropriate. —Michael Z. 2007-09-21 19:33 Z

Looking at what I wrote above—I'm not sure that we actually use the simplified version more often. I usually prefer original names like "Oleksandr", but very often the most commonly used version in English literature is anglicized, like "Alexander", so that would be more appropriate for the title. This is why I like to add the precise transliteration: it will always be consistent, regardless of the whims of English-language publications, or lack of them.

Sorry for the long explanation. Sometimes one has to be very careful about the detail of naming in articles, as you know. —Michael Z. 2007-09-21 19:39 Z


Yes indeed, "Oleksandr" was listed in Dovzhenko's article until recently. I'll restore the transliteration. —Michael Z. 2007-09-21 19:48 Z

[edit] Muscovy

Sorry, did not get your doubt at first. Actually, per EB Muscovy ended even earlier. The last ruler with the title as simply the Grand Duke of Moscow was Ivan III by the end of whose reign the country is more properly called Russia. Ivan IV was crowned as the Tsar and the proper period is called Tsardom of Russia. Thanks for catching this. You could have just corrected. --Irpen 05:59, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I had no doubt that the onion domes came from Russia. However, the article about Naryshkin Baroque says that it occured in the 17th 18th centuries, yet it said it happened in Muscovy. I figured that either the part about Muscovy should have been changed, or that the domes came from an earlier Baroque movement in Russia that perhaps took place during the Grand Duchy. Keep in mind I know very little about architecture. Ostap 06:05, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Ostap Please keep an eye on the K uban c ossack article. The information is very Russophilic. All my edits regarding the Ukraininess of the c ossacks has been edited out as have all aspects of Ukrainian language and culture there. Recently the addition of the article to the category of Ukrainian population groups was removed despite the fact that Ukrainian c ossacks settled there 200 years ago and Ukrainian is still spoken on the streets Bandurist 15:20, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

That article is truly sad. I will help anyway you need me to. Ostap 20:05, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I am trying. Thanks for your suopport. Bandurist 22:49, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wołyń Voivodeship (1921–1939)

Aargh, a typo. I hate them :> It's 1921, I will correct the errors.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  20:27, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, they are. Btw, I need to to some weeding of Polish new articles, could you disambig the rest of links here?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  20:32, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks!-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  23:14, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I owe you an appology

I'm sorry for mis-understanding your intentions there. It's just that after a long-lasting fight with Hillock i kind of got crazy in that place, so sorry. P.S. You might be interested in taking part in what i offered to Bandurist here. M.V.E.i. 21:44, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Łukasz Ciepliński

Yes, it would seem he satisfies the criteria. My understanding is that the criteria require an orchestrated, notable effort to wipe out a person from history. We can't require such efforts to be ultimately successful, because for persons whose unpersoning did not fail, we wouldn't have WP:RS to use. The article Łukasz Ciepliński mentions such an orchestrated effort in its very lead, and therefore, I'd say the criteria are satisfied. Thank you for the help! ΔιγυρενΕμπροσ! 07:42, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Good question. I thought about him myself, and I'm not entirely sure, but I tend to think he fits. However, a major counterargument that I see is that the Soviets preferred to make him more of an Universal Enemy rather than just expunging him, and accordingly, the focus was not as much on removing references to him but on removing references to his relations with Lenin and Stalin.
If you manage to find a more definitive conclusion than I have, I would be interested to hear it. ΔιγυρενΕμπροσ! 07:57, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalwatch

Thanks for your guarding the House with Chimaeras article from vandals and nonsense editors. Since you are a relatively new editor, I just though it might be worthwhile to give you heads up on the fact that reverts of simple vandalism do not count under WP:3RR and mainpage article should be restored from vandalism without waiting for another editor to notice even if you reverted earlier several times. Thanks for your good work! --Irpen 05:49, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. When will I no longer be a new editor? Ostap 20:17, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, I meant no offense. I just thought it won't heart to give you a heads up. --Irpen 20:21, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
None taken. It just seems that you have been here for many years. Ostap 20:22, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Since about the Orange Revolution give or take a couple of months. But I have been less active in some periods and more active in others. You are doing a great work here. Are you following the article Ukrainian parliamentary election, 2007? We need to be updating it every 20-30 minutes as CEC updates the newest count data. I am off form much of the rest of the day. Please help if you can. --Irpen 20:28, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
I would help but I'm pretty busy and probably won't be on much until later. In fact I'm so busy I shouldn't really even be on wikipedia now, but I couldn't abandon the Kyiv/kiev conversation that started going. Sorry, Ostap 20:42, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Yes, thanks a lot for helpin out with reverting the vandalism... I too was on the lookout, but you beat me to it every time! Cheers, —dima/talk/ 20:40, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Your welcome. The nerve of those petty vandals... Ostap 20:42, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Allow me

The Exceptional Newcomer Award
For your enthusiasm, friendly attitude, commitment to NPOV in articles setting aside own POV and several articles created in a highly unattended areas of Wikipedia, I, Irpen, hereby award you the exceptional newcomer barnstar.

[edit] Petl(i/y)ura

Hi Ostap.

Regarding the Romanization of Петлюра: at the time I had some ideas about how ye/ie, ya/ia and yu/iu was used in transliterations. I still think it would be good to use the different versions to show when an iotated letter palatalizes a preceding consonant, but I now know that no standardized system really does that. I even wrote something like this into a guideline which later made its way into WP:CYR#Ukrainian. I've tried to correct it more than once, but some editors who watch that page have their own, unique ideas about transliteration, and no consensus on a change could be reached. (I'll have to try again—in my opinion English-language Wikipedia should use straight BGN/PCGN transliteration for Ukrainian aside from geographic names in Ukraine, and in fact it almost always does anyway.)

For the most part, North American academic publications use ALA-LC transliteration which uses i for iotified vowels (Petliura), and British ones use BGN/PCGN, which uses y (Petlyura). (Many North American publications actually uses a modified ALA-LC, which is easier on anglophone eyes.) "Putliura" seems to show up most in Google search results.

But at the time I also wasn't aware that the Polish orthography would render the name as Petlura, that this version showed up still more often in Google, and this is what the family uses. The article should probably be moved to Symon Petlura (and of course, the text should be cleaned up for consistency). What do you think? —Michael Z. 2007-10-09 01:23 Z

Hi

1) Keep in mind in central Ukraine all vowels after an l are softened automatically. This is part of the central Ukrainian dialect. It has been firmed up in writing in 1934 ie Klas instead of kliasam lampa,instead of liampa. My dad's nianian used to say molioko instead of moloko. The same for Petlura - Petliura. 2) The direct family in Canada spells it Petlura. Bandurist 11:19, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Thank you for your help with the revert-war. Hopefully we can now focus on the discussion.

Horlo 02:43, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I suggest keeping focused on content writing. BTW, Ostap, do you remember our discussion on a development of UA-PL war article? Are you still interested? --Irpen 03:53, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I am going through some available print sources looking for good information on the subject. I am yet to find anything very useful, but I have alot left to go through. I will do my best. I have a question, if I create an article Baptists in Ukraine, would this violate some policy because that section exists in Protestants in Ukraine? Ostap 05:06, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
You can create a separate article on a more detailed presentation of the subject already covered briefly in another article on a more general topic. Please read this for some general advise. Regards, --Irpen 05:12, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Chinese in Russian Revolution

On the above - you understand me very well. Absolutely correct. I couldn't have put it better. Someone finally gets the point!

Yours truly, --Ludvikus 06:32, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
Great. But why are you preaching to the converted? You've paraphrased my points so well, why don't you make your agreement known to our Polish cousins on the Talk page of the Article? Are the Ukrainians affraid of the Poles? The are today 38.5 Million Poles in Poland - but the are 46.5 Million Ukrainians in the Ukraine! --Ludvikus 06:51, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
Dear Ostrap,
Your the only editor who makes me laugh! Here we are, in the middle of an Editors War, and you talk about the weather. That's actually nice - that's prpbably why you don't get upset. Cheers. --Ludvikus 03:52, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
PS: I've just been informed by a WP Administrator (User:Banno) that the limit for Reversions is not Three Per Article, but Three Per Editor. So by all means, if you believe that the Poster of Trotsky should be Deleted do so. It will give me some pleasure seeing what happens when two Poles now encounter one Ukrainian (I'm thinking in Sportsmanship terms, not Chauvenistic ones). Let's make believe we are playing Soccer. --Ludvikus 04:01, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm proud of you, Ostrap. Now I've got to go to sleep. Peace & Happiness to you, --Ludvikus 04:46, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
You've paralized the article war - All's quiet on the Chinese front! --Ludvikus 14:18, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "illustrates propaganda" vs. "used as propaganda"

    14 October 2007 Bishonen (Talk | contribs) (6,114 bytes)
    (Rv. Please settle on talk before removing this very telling image.
    I'm hoping Ludvikus will eventually see that it *illustrates* propaganda, as opposed to being *used as* propaganda.)
  • The latest Reversion is by User:Bishonen: he restored the Propaganda Poster of Lenin.
  • He makes an excellent distinction (the above).
  • However, he fails to see that at the moment it is being improperly "used as propaganda."
    1. The Poster is not discussed in the article.
    2. It is not Sourced or Referenced exactly - it may be a pretty good hoax.
    3. It does not "illustrate propaganda" - the article is not about that. The article is about the Chinese in the Revolution. There is nothing - at this stage of the article's life - which is benefited by the poster. Quite the contrary, it merely portrays the Chinese as the killers in the Russian Revolution.
  • I wish User:Bishonen would have explained how the Poster illustrates Propaganda before he had Reverted.
Yours truly, --Ludvikus 16:28, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm so glad to know that I'm not alone. Ostap, you're wonderful - I though you might have been scared off by that majority!

  • There's now an editor there who says, "What are they Mongolians? Koreans?" He even says, "Look at their mustach!"
  • So now Wikipedia articles use the 'appearance in Propagand Posters as evidence - of Chinese in the Russian Revolution!
  • I wonder if Mikkai is going to Revert you to restore the Poster? I think it is he who created the Stub for the Article, and he, I think, put up the Poster. Best to you, Ostrap. Oh - is there a uniquely Ukrainian slur against the Poles? I'm curious about that. It is amazing how difficult it is for me to demonstrate that an offensive, derrogatory, poster should not be used lightly. Right now the only reason for the Poster is that there appear to be Chinese in it! --Ludvikus 07:00, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
    • You were great - but what happened? How come you left? And why did you mention that Polish/Ukrainian atrocity? I do not understand what just happened? Regards, --Ludvikus 01:57, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
      • That's OK. This is not a Real War. I kinda think truth will prevail in the end. But I'm rather surprised you gave up so soon. We were winning. It seems it's Four (us) against Two (them). So I'm confused by the reason you gave up? And you still didn't tell me why you mentioned that Ukrainian/Polish massacre? What's that got to do with anything? Were you feeling guilty, or something like that? You seem like a fair guy to me, and you are not really responsible for what someone else did which you could not control. --Ludvikus 02:19, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
        • Yes, I knew he (Irpen) was also Ukrainian before you just told me that he's not Polish. I also noticed that he's been a Wikipedian much longer than I have (or you, I think). Let me just say that I do my best to treat everyone fairly and not pre-judge them. Nevertheless, history often helps you to keep a look-out for what may come. So Polish, Ukrainian, Russian, etc., history can tell you a lot what kind of a position a person may hold. And I know, for instance that Poland kept the Ukrainians from having their own independent state. And that Nationalism is a relatively new phenomena (no more than 200 years old).
        • About the Protocols, as you've asked. That stuff is fascinating to me not because it contains every antisemitic accusation you could think of, but because it really is not at all what 99% [don't take this figure too loiterally] of the people think it is. When you go to the Original Source you discover how complex things are - and that they are much more different than you read in the so-called scholarship.
        • And then there's the amasement how people can believe such ridiculous nonesense. I like to study the Preface, Introduction, Commentary, etc. It turns out that this Book is not one book at all, but something which these annonymous editors keep recycling over-and-over-and over-again. Anyway, that's roughly why I'm fascinated by these Protocols - in part because it shows me how amazingly stupid, gullible, and wicked Man - the believer in the Protocols - can be. Now maybe I should go to sleep - like dream of nicer things. Peace. --Ludvikus 02:52, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
        • And the answer to your question is "yes." There is nothing any antisemite can think of that has not already been formulated in the so-called "Protocols." --Ludvikus 02:54, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The four (4) sources to the opening of our article

(1) Пын Мин. История китайско-советской дружбы. М., 1959. (Peng Ming,
"History of the Chinese-Russian Frienship",
translation from Chinese, Moscow, Sotsekgiz, 1959,
original: "Zhong-su yu she", Pekin, 1957 (Russian)
[no quote supplied by WP editor]
(2) Россия и мир глазами друг друга: Из истории взаимовосприятия /
Под ред. А.В. Голубева; РАН. Ин-т рос. истории. - М., 2000.
Вып. 1. - 365 с. ISBN 5-8055-0043-4,
Chapter IV, Section "The Perception of China by USSR Political Elite" (Russian)
"Chinese detachments, together with Latvians, Hungarians, and others
guarded the Soviet government already in 1917-1918"
(3) a b Donald Rayfield, Stalin and His Hangmen:
The Tyrant and Those Who Killed for Him, Viking Press 2004: ISBN 0670910880 (hardcover)
"In 1919, 75 percent of the Cheka's central management was Latvian.
When Russian soldiers refused to carry out executions,
Latvian (and Chinese force of some 500 men) were brought in.
(4) a b c Lukin, Alexander (2002). The Bear Watches the Dragon:
Russia's Perceptions of China
and the Evolution of Russian Chinese Relations
since the Eighteenth Century.
China: M.E. Sharpe, p.98.
[no quote supplied by WP editor]
  • This is the basis of the article's opening. It is important, therefore, to examine these arefully. To a great extent, the status of the article rests or falls on these 4 items. Yours truly, --Ludvikus 12:47, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
  1. Lets look exactly at what our article actually says: Chinese served as bodyguards of Bolshevik functionaries[1][2], served in the Cheka[3], and even formed complete regiments of the Red Army.[4]
  2. Now lets look exactlt at what our four (4) sources actually say: "Chinese detachments, together with Latvians, Hungarians, and others guarded the Soviet government already in 1917-1918" and "In 1919, 75 percent of the Cheka's central management was Latvian. When Russian soldiers refused to carry out executions, Latvian (and Chinese force of some 500 men) were brought in.
  • Such use of sources (to interpret, selectively edit, and expand on what's actually said) is prohibited by Wikipedia. At best, it's original research.
Yours truly, --Ludvikus 13:12, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Drohobych Дрогобич

That's my parents' home town. It's now in the Ukraine. It was in Poland before WWII. --Ludvikus 06:38, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

THank you for a very nice message. Our nations should be friends forever, we are so close and we share so much of common history. Hope massacres of any kind will never occur, and this is why I am expanding the article - to remaind people and to warn them to where hatred can lead us. Greetings and all best Tymek 18:01, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Am I happy? You bet! Are you interested in football? Before the war the Ukrainian minority in Poland had several good football/soccer teams. I will later write about it

Tymek 23:33, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Stefan Fedak

Sorry, I missed your question at talk JP. I don't have any really reliable sources for that (but I haven't looked for them neither); I just based this on his article on pl wiki. If you think this is controversial, we can remove his membership from that article until we get a better ref. PS. Perhaps you could stub an entry on him? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  21:03, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

There are pl and uk entries, but not referenced. I wonder how did he die in Berlin - was he a prisoner, or a soldier - and if so, on which side? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  21:06, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Henryk Józewski

I think you will find this new article I wrote interesting. Feel free to expand! -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  21:24, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

Ostape, I started an article about the Ukrainian Republic Capella, but as that is my first one, there are surely lots of things to fix. I would really appreciate any help/suggestions. Thanks, Horlo 01:48, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the editing. Hopefully I will have more to add soon. Horlo 05:04, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Minorities

That's no bother. I am using naming conventions as used for other Polish minorities; let me suggest you raise the issue at WP:PWNB and suggest batch renaming. I don't expect any objections if this is indeed the naming convention, and in a few days we can rename the article. Since I am usually the only one editing the articles Poland related minorities in the east, they include as much content as I have time and will to add, of course, feel free to expand them as much as you want.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  19:01, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Protocols of Zion (imprints)

Ostrap! Here's the link to the AfD page for the above [2] --Ludvikus 03:57, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, Ostrap. You always come through in the end. Hope you have a pleasant evening!
Where are you, anyway? I'm in NYC.
Cheers, --Ludvikus 04:09, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Class interests

  • I've started the {{Stub}} for it.
  • Feel free to contact me by email on this issue, as you asked.
Best to you as always, --Ludvikus 14:23, 20 October 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Polish repatriation from Ukraine

‎ I'm porting (translating, summarizing etc) over Serhiychuk's book on Polish repatriation from Ukraine. Please join. Bandurist 15:12, 20 October 2007 (UTC)‎

I will do what I can. Thanks, Ostap 18:56, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Ostape, thank you for the info. If the personal attacks - actually, they're quite funny - continue, I will definitely report them.

Thanks for your help with the Ukrainian Republic Capella article, too. Horlo 04:48, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks from eduvalko

Thanks Ostape wise words to go along with what mama always said "Не чіпaйся гім-a бо будеш смердів" Till the next time Eduvalko 06:22, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ihor

"People commonly called Ihor" does not include notable persons whose first name happens to be Ihor, like Ihor Drizhachny, etc. Those are not "commonly called Ihor". Only few selected people are called by their first names, princes, tsars, patriarchs and metropolitans. Those are already listed in the Igor article. Ihor and Igor are not different names to warrant separate articles but one and the same name in different languages. --Irpen 03:35, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

What now? originaly I did say "people named Ihor" Ostap 03:51, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
The former solution would have been a List of people by name: Ihor, but all such lists from Aadu to Zvonimir were deleted at some point as community decided that such lists are useles junk. So, first thing is to purge all Ihors but the princes. This would live us with two princes and the article, being a fork of Igor. Forks are confusing and unneeded. So, I suggest replacing it with a redirect to Igor, the name under which this princes are better known to anglophones and add "Ukrainian: Iгор" to the latter article. --Irpen 04:00, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
"Aadu to Zvonimir" ha ha! I have redirected the page. Ostap 04:47, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, here is how the logic goes. List articles are useful if lists are meaningful. For instance, List of dog breeds is clearly called for and useful. Some lists are marginal, but still their existence may be justified. Take a look at List of Leopolitans. A reader may go through such list and say: "Wow! And this one too? I would have never thought that A and B are indeed from Lviv". But List of people named John (or Ihor for that matter) is of course of little use for anyone. There were such lists and they were all nuked at some point. There is absolutely no justification to have a list that would lump Igor I of Kiev, Igor Sikorsky and Ihor Yukhnovskyi together, is it? So, that was the logic behind deletion of all those lists. --Irpen 00:01, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I understand. Where on earth did you come up with the name Aadu? Thats what was funny. Ostap 00:10, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
I found Aadu at Category:Given names. --Irpen 00:13, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lwów dialect

Could you comment at the talk of this talk page? Input from Ukrainian editors would be valuable.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  21:54, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Has been done. Ostap 22:27, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Anti Russian sentiment

On your entry for the AFD here, can I ask that you clarify your position. You voted to Delete, and re-write. Well did you mean Keep but re-write or did you actually mean for it to be deleted? --Kuban Cossack 19:25, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Has been done. Keep the article, but re-write. Ostap 21:18, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Baptist church image

I have a photo of a baptist church in Kremenchuk. I can scan it, and upload it here. Photo is a few years old, but that church has been there since late 80s. Ceriy 21:46, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Award

Ukrainian Barnstar of National Merit
You are hereby awarded this specifically minted Ukrainian Barnstar of National Merit for expanding and improving Wikipedia's coverage of Ukraine, both textually and visually, with entries such as Ostap Dashkevych, Ihor Kalynets, Mykola Rudenko and Chortkiv offensive, a did you know? entry. Congrats.--Riurik(discuss) 18:40, 2 November 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Mykolajchuk.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Mykolajchuk.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:30, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Nachtigall

Ostap I added alot of material to the Batallion Nachtigall and Batallion Rolland sites and also Roman Shukhevych. They are constantly being reverted etc. I'm getting tired of having all my research being just destroyed. Could you have a look and see what is salvagable. Thanks Bandurist 21:58, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Grigory Nikolayevich Potanin

While writing the article on Jan Czerski I run into this person. He seems to be a Russian explorer/geographer, but one Polish source refers to him as Cossack. Could he be Ukrainian? The article currently calls him a Russian.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 18:04, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Battle of Kostiuchnówka

Would you happen to know the Ukrainian and/or Russian name of Kostiuchnówka? I couldn't find one :( -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 22:33, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Could you correct the name on en wiki and create a stub for it?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 23:55, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Interesting point

I'd appreciate your comment - and perhaps that of your fellow Ukrainian editors - here.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 05:13, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Uh-oh. Redlink. Ostap (talk) 05:14, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
My bad. Sorry. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 05:19, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Bereza

Thanks; I replied to Bandurist incorporating your remark. As I suggest to him, let's continue the discussion (if needed) on article's talk page. Although I hope there is no need for further discussion (i.e. that my merge and the current name are acceptable).-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 05:50, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

True. Although it is used by some reliable academic publications. Not that I intend to revert you - but something to consider along the lines of neutrality, verifiability and usage of various terms on Wiki.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 08:09, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I started the article last night intending to continue it today. What I have done is translated a Page from Idzio's book and put it on the talk page for our mutual discussion and maybe updating the article. I don't want to butcher it like I have seen on some pages. Bandurist (talk) 14:39, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Please see my recent reply on Bandurist talk regarding this issue. I believe this discussion may have much bigger impact than just renaming (or not) a single article.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 21:05, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

For your recent votes. If there are any articles on Wikipedia that you think would benefit from Polish-Ukrainian collaboration, do let me know. I would love to help with them! -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 06:05, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Do you know who may be interested in helping me stub Ukraine related governorates from Administrative division of Polish territories after partitions#Russian partition? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 05:52, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Kiev Governorate, Volhynia Governorate , and any others that would be of interest to Ukrainian editors. See blue links from that section for what can be added to such articles. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 21:11, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Interesting bios

uk:Стефанів Гнат and uk:Кравс Антін - I was reading about the P-U war of 1918-1919 and they came up.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 21:19, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bans on languages in Russian Empire after the January Uprising in 1863

Could you comment at Talk:Lithuanian press ban? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 00:05, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Can we have something less alarming?

Hey, man. This is alarming. Please do not scare your colleagues :). Can we have something more optimistic? There are pieces of great poetry without dangerous promises. Perhaps,

"The broad Dnieper roars and moans"

Or

"The mighty Dnieper roars and bellows"

Or

"Roaring, the groaning Dnieper stretches"

(Not so sure which of the translations is the best.) Art pictures were nice too, btw. But of course the choice is yours. Cheers, --Irpen 05:29, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

I suppose thats not the happiest poem ever. I replaced it with something less pessimistic. Ostap (talk) 05:46, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Much better now :). Oh, and consider to proudly display your wikiawards during the next update. Have a great weekend! --Irpen 05:48, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
I will use the weekend to think about (Думи мої, думи мої…) Blokhin leaving. Ostap (talk) 06:10, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Kidnapping of Polish children by Germany

Thank you, I am satisfied with that version. "Seems high" indeed is rather... not very serious. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 15:41, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vinok

We can move the article back if you wish. It just seemed to that these traditions of the nations based on the common origin are related enough. Presenting it as purely Ukrainian seemed like an attempt to usurp as this symbol of unspoiled girlhood is shared in Belarus as well. Or are you suggesting separate articles on basically one thing, or at least very related things, and titled Vinok, Vianok, Wianek, etc? Of course the Korean or whatever aspect is irrelevant. We agree on that. --Irpen 01:12, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I just realize what happened with this attacks. I posted a good faith proposal to the Polish board asking them expand the article to cover the similar Polish usage. The help we got was rather unhelpful :( First Piotrus' trying to kill the article entirely and then it brought Molobo, the latter's becoming interested in any article is almost always making it the article's editing difficult. Sorry, for being unwillingly responsible for the current mess. Let me know what how would you like to proceed and I will try to help the best way I can. --Irpen 01:20, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Alright, I see what you mean. As it is now the situation looks good. But the vinok is and always will be a Ukrainian symbol :) Ostap (talk) 01:25, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
No question about it. As well as Vianok's being the Belarusian one. The question is whether there are reasons to keep these related items in one article under a commonly understood to native speakers name. We had a similar issue a long time with closely related kovbasa and kielbasa being separate article. They were later merged as anyone knows what kielbasa is from the local deli. And Kielbasa covers the Ukrainian aspect and gives the Ukrainian word. Look at this for more. --Irpen 01:32, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

The more I think of it, the more I like it. Let's make the redlink Ukrainian wreath blue, put there your original content with small modifications plus the pic I found and I can't care less what happens with the grab-bag of the unrelated issues that this article is turning. We do not need to move the page even. What do you think? --Irpen 02:03, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good. Ostap (talk) 02:04, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Done. That article is written by you is acknowledged in the edit summary. Cheers, --Irpen 02:16, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
I suppose Ukrainian wreath is best, I wrote the article because of links to it from from Ukrainian dance and Ukrainian Culture pages. What a hassle. Thanks Ostap (talk) 02:24, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Good article, it's always interesting to read about foreign cultures.I'm glad we managed to solve the issue regarding this article through discussion. Keep up the good work and happy editting Ostap R.--Molobo (talk) 02:37, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

Updated DYK query On 10 December 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Casper ten Boom, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Royalbroil 16:20, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ukrainian Architecture

Since you have an interest in Ukraine I was wondering if you could help me in expanding the still young article here? --Kuban Cossack 20:36, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Sure I will try to help. The article looks very nice already. Thanks Ostap (talk) 20:44, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

Updated DYK query On 14 December 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ukrainian wreath, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Carabinieri (talk) 12:13, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ukrainian wreath

I'm going to take a second try at editing. Please don't just undo it, since whether you agree or disagree, my edit is not intentional vandalism. The trouble with the article right now is that it presents theories passed on from one article in the popular press as if they were established facts, and we need to qualify some of the claims a bit. David (talk) 18:09, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

David, please present any source that dispute the totally uncontroversial claims in the article. Also, please take your grievances to the article's talk page. TIA, --Irpen 18:40, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Serhiy Yefremov

Prometheism article mentions the 1930 trial of Serhiy Yefremov in USSR. I wonder if uk wiki has an article on him that could be translated? A quick google search indicates he is a notable and interesting figure.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:19, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

Updated DYK query On 20 December 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Korovai, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--EncycloPetey (talk) 14:43, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Print sources list

Great list on your user page Ostap. Do you mind if I use some of those references in a new "Further reading" section at the Ukraine article? Regards, Bogdan що? 05:06, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Sure. I spent the day going through the library finding all the books I could for writing about Ukraine in WWII. It was hard, they are scattered about in three different sections. Thats all I found. Problem is I just realized I will be away from these books for over a month :( Ostap 05:16, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
That's too bad, but I'm glad to hear someone's putting in effort around here :). How does that look? Bogdan що? 05:37, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
It looks good. After you get Ukraine to good article status, you should write Ukraine in World War Two. That is an article that needs to be written. Ostap 05:40, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Definitely, I was even thinking about writing a larger scope article, something like "Military History of Ukraine", and then "Ukraine in World War II". Congratulations on the award! Bogdan що? 16:19, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Award

Image:Zasluhy-3.jpg For Merit - 3rd degree
You are hereby awarded this Ukrainian National Award "For Merit" because you continue to write new articles on Ukrainian topics - such as Mykhailo Khanenko, Oleksander Osetsky, Sylvestr Kosiv, Korovai and Serhiy Yefremov - and because you actively participate in the Wikipedia community.--Riurik(discuss) 07:34, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Battle of Cudnów

See move discussion at talk; I have no objections to move if there is consensus for that. We also need to transliterate some of the names in the article - I am using Polish sources and I prefer to leave them as Polish until somebody who knows how can transliterate them. In particular: Tymofiej Cieciura (we probaby need a stub on him); Słobodyszcze (village?). See also the war infobox for more name that may merit transliteration from Polish to English of their Ukrainian variant. Thanks, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 21:20, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merry XMAS!

User:Piotrus and friends, in the midsts of Wigilia, wish you to enjoy this Christmas Eve!
User:Piotrus and friends, in the midsts of Wigilia, wish you to enjoy this Christmas Eve!

[edit] User talk:150.140.130.80

Hi, could you place a better description of the problem I have put there? Thanks Mallerd (talk) 22:04, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Holodomor denial

Ostape,

I have started an article about Holodomor denial. It is very badly in need of assistance. Please help.

Thanks, Horlo (talk) 09:37, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

I commented at talk. I think AfD. What is your opinion? --Irpen 16:39, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Have you seen anyone but Tottle that denies that the famine took place? What other "editors" deny it? Sorry, I don't understand your edit. --Irpen 07:23, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
There was an editor who defended denier Tottle here: [3]. I was not referring to you. Ostap 07:26, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Well, there are also editors who believe that Ukraine should be partitioned and editors who claimed that the Ukrainian women were eager to please Nazis. Such outrageous views are so rare that even at Wikipedia such "editors" are complete outcasts. The overwhelming majority of people reject such xenophobic views. --Irpen 07:33, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
I apologize, i assure you I was not talking about you, nor did I intend to sound like I was talking about you. That other comment was the one I was reffering to. Ostap 07:41, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

You don't need to apologize. I did not take your statement on my own account. However, I am stopping to edit this article for now. I invested a huge effort in Holodomor article having written a very significant part of what it is now. I care about the topic a lot, including for personal family reasons, and I take its being used for soapboxing more close to heart than most any other topic's getting soapboxed. Horlo's and Molobo's joining the fest was a final straw. I can't handle them on these topics anymore and argue with their "points". I tried to help with the article but the recent edits were too much. I tagged it and I am stopping to edit it for now. --Irpen 07:52, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh come now, thats all the more reason to keep editing it. Ostap 07:58, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 1939

Hi Ostap I just have a question.I read somewhere that in early September 1939, taking advantage of the chaotic situation resulting from German attack on Poland, Ukrainian paramilitary units temporarily captured the town of Stryj, and retreating Polish forces had to fight for the town, pushing out the Ukrainians. Have you heard about it? Tymek (talk) 14:53, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

That sounds likely. I will look around and try to verify for you. Cheers, Ostap 21:50, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] З Новим роком!

DDima wishes you a Happy New Year!—dima/talk/ 22:56, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
DDima wishes you a Happy New Year!
—dima/talk/ 22:56, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] З Новим Роком!

Riurik wishes you a Happy 2008!
Riurik wishes you a Happy 2008!

--Riurik(discuss) 21:58, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

  • Сійся, родися,
  • Жито, пшениця,
  • Горох, чечевиця,
  • І всяка пашниця,
  • Внизу корениста,
  • Зверху колосиста,
  • Щоб на майбутній рік
  • Було більше, ніж торік.
  • Щоб всього було доволі
    • І в коморі, і на полі.

Сію, сію, посіваю,

  • З Новим роком
  • Поздоровляю!
  • Щастя, радості, краси,
  • Бочку меду вам в труси.
  • Щоб не злиплись яйця голі,
  • Молодичок Вам доволі.
  • А щоб сало було в хаті,
  • Кабани хай волохаті
  • Запетрушать свиноматок,
  • Отоді буде достаток.
  • З Старим новим роком!

Bandurist (talk) 01:38, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

“In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” -- George Orwell

[edit] З Новим Роком!

Остапе,

Вибач за спізнення, але бажаю тобі всього найкращого з Новим новим Роком.

Щастя, сили, здоровля, і терпеливості.

Horlo (talk) 07:25, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What a difference a day makes!

Ostape,

Thanks for the head's up. Actually, we had some people over for New Years and the next time that I logged in, the AfD was already closed.

Amazing, what some people do to ring in the new year!

Horlo (talk) 07:38, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] DYK nom

Updated DYK query On 4 January 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ukrainian embroidery, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thanks for the nom. -- Royalbroil 05:16, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Józef Piłsudski

Since you commented in the last round, please note that the nomination has been restarted. Thanks for the comments and edits so far! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 16:26, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Regime victim

Regime victim of the Ukrainian Diaspora - I like it xaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxx Bandurist (talk) 02:57, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

He really gave himself away with that one. Quite the POV pusher. Ostap 03:09, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Come on Ostap, why can't you just have a normal user page with some babel, or a list of contributions, or something :)? Bogdan що? 03:12, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
It's not that controversial. This type of sarcasm is very effectively (and entertainingly) used by Halibutt on his user page, in the 3rd paragraph. No more oppression of RVs! :) --Riurik(discuss) 20:53, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ukraine

Please, at least not during the GA review. Bogdan що? 02:23, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

It was true. Right now the part about the early Bolshevik rule seems to focus on just the accomplishments, not the effects of the extension of the red terror that went on in the country. Ostap 02:34, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
It was well-referenced and accurate; GA does not mean that an article is "nice", but instead representative of a professional encyclopedia article...which that statement meets. Armenian genocide could be a GA, but it most certainly isn't a "nice" topic and can't ever be, to give a hypothetical example. Octane [improve me] 15.01.08 0239 (UTC)
That's not what I meant by "not during a GA review", I didn't want to start an edit war (Wikipedia:Good article criteria). That said, it's somewhat obvious that an article like Ukraine, which covers thousands of sub-topics, has no room at all for individual incident. If you're so convinced that the article has a pro-Soviet bias, Ostap, please do add something more meaningful. Bogdan що? 02:47, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Really, I don't see what your concern for an edit war is. If it's accurate and relevant, then there's honestly nothing to remove and thus no problem. Octane [improve me] 15.01.08 0306 (UTC)
That's my point, it's accurate but irrelevant. Bogdan що? 03:08, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
(edit conflicted) How is it not? Ukraine#Interwar Soviet Ukraine (1922–1939) details what happened in the Ukrainian SSR, and as you said yourself it is accurate, and therefore did occur in Soviet Ukraine, and thus needs at least a "such as" mention, to provide balance. The first paragraph really does read like pro-Soviet bias to me, as well, and more things other than the collectivization and purges deserve note. Frankly, it's nine positive examples versus five negative. Seems a bit off. Octane [improve me] 15.01.08 0322 (UTC)
I don't plan on readding it. Ostap 03:16, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Is it even necessary to list these things like womens rights, and education? And what exactly does the "right to work" mean? And, good work with that infobox thing on the talk page, you should put it in the article. Ostap 02:53, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes it's necessary. If mass policy changes like that aren't significant, then what is? I'm not sure about the right to work part, we could exclude it. I just took the quote (along with the template) directly from Russia. As for Women's rights...I don't have a copy of that book so I cannot specify what that quote is saying. Bogdan що? 03:05, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

I believe the womens rights introduced were right to easy divorce and abortion. Not exactly the most pleasant rights... Ostap 03:16, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
It's irrelevant because it isn't nationwide. Bolshevik policies were nationwide, the Holodomor was nationwide, Religious suppression (needs to be added) was nationwide, Korenization was nationwide, industrialization was nation-wide, collectivization was nationwide, deportation was nationwide. Heated rat cages weren't nationwide.
Again Ostap, I don't have a copy of that book, and perhaps it was "the right to work" that was given [encouraged] to women. (P.s., 9-5?)Bogdan що? 03:36, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
That incident might not be nationwide, but it is only an example of the atrocities that were. That said, I see what you mean about not including it. And I won't try to re-add it. No edit wars on Ukraine. Ostap 05:38, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

9-5? Does that mean you want me to edit some article? Ostap 03:42, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Frankly, it's nine positive examples versus five negative. Seems a bit off.

Please explain Octane, Bogdan що? 03:45, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

"Not exactly the most pleasant rights"? Are you serious? You are saying that granting women the ability to get a divorce and an abortion was bad? It looks like you and Joseph Stalin share the same views because he recriminalized abortion. Besides the obvious repressiveness of not allowing women to get a divorce and have an abortion, I'll point out that when abortion was criminalized many women had to resort to unsafe home abortions, thousands dieing in the process from complications, infection, etc. It seems that you are consumed by a hatred for all things Soviet. Let me clarify some of the confusion for users here. When the Bolshevik's came in, women's rights were greatly increased through new political, civic, economic and family codes aimed to wipe away centuries-old inequalities at one stroke. Homosexuality was decriminalized and racism was forbidden by law. In addition to granting full freedom of divorce and decriminalizing abortion, the new government (yes, the Bolsheviks) granted women the right to vote, introduced social reforms that made marriage a voluntary relationship, enacted employment rights for women equal to those for men, gave women equal pay and introduced universal paid maternity leave. 'Right to work' meant that the government provided everyone with a job, there was no unemployment. 'Right to housing' meant that all citizens were provided with housing, the government constructed housing and leased them to people for pittance. --Miyokan (talk) 14:54, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

I am not going to debate with you about the morality of abortion, nor the amazing accomplishments of the Bolsheviks. Believe it or not, history has already judged them. By adding point after point about accomplishments and not telling of the horrible atrocities, you are violating WP:NPOV. "You are saying that granting women the ability to get ... an abortion was bad?" No, not me. Russia's very own Orthodox Church. Ostap 20:15, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Balachka

Have a read and chack language etc. Thanks Bandurist (talk) 03:07, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Has been done. Ostap 03:35, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Request

Why would you want to have your userpage deleted? I certainly hope you are not leaving us; it was a pleasure to work with you and I hope to see you here in the future more and more often! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:01, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Frustrated with what? Anything I can help with? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:08, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Very true; discussions rarely yield useful effect. We are here to write an encyclopedia, not to take part in a discussion (or flaming) club. I highly recommend writing one page articles and dyking them.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:57, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Question

Nope, but I am to this notable individual :) Btw, glad to see you decided to keep your userpage. Now, when are you going to restore your talk page? :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 04:31, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] My RfA

 Thanks for your support at my request for adminship, which passed today with 42/0/0!

I would like to thank Wizardman for nominating me, Ostap R/archive and everyone else for their support and comments. I'll continue with contributing to the encyclopedia's content (hopefully writing an FA here and there :) and will help out with admin-related tasks which you just entrusted me with. If you need any help, don't hesitate to ask!

Thanks again, —dima/talk/ 01:40, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Please start using a normal talk page

Please don't take it a wrong way, but the current one is plain annoying. In any case, I came by to ask if you would be willing to stub the Ukrainian-Soviet War article, red linked in the Battle of Kruty. If not, do let me know whom I can try to bug about it. It sounds like a fascinating missing subject, at least as important as the Polish-Ukrainian War. See also my question at Talk:Tsentralna Rada.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 06:03, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for going back to the normal talk page. Just as Polish war has a subarticle, so I am sure the Soviet one deserves one. We could start by copying relevant parts from the Ukrainian War of Independence and expanding them, with an infobox, list of battles, etc. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:13, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Another useful article to translate, in case you are missing stuff on your 'to do' list :) uk:Армія Української Народної Республіки --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:07, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
I've already started 'Ukrainian People's Army', might be done in a few hours. Bogdan що? 23:10, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
There is some good information and images here: [4] Ostap 23:13, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, I know. I'm also using this book. Bogdan що? 23:18, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
More here. What do you plan to call the article? "peoples" or "national"? Encyclopedia of Ukraine uses national. Ostap 23:23, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I prefer people's; it corresponds with our Ukrainian People's Republic article. You? Bogdan що? 23:30, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I go with national, peoples sounds too... ugh. Read the People's Republic article. Ostap 00:38, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Alright, have it your way. p.s., history.franko.lviv.ua doesn't work, is it just me? Bogdan що? 00:50, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
It works for me. But leave it as peoples if you want, that is evidently the most accurate translation. Ostap 00:51, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Ok, national creates a problem anyways. (i.e., Ukrainian National Army) 00:54, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Nice job guys. I have translated a related stub from pl wiki: Free Cossacks. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:58, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll try to find more information on them. Ostap 00:38, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

About the Ukrainian Wikipedia maps.. They are copyrighted, but can be included in the article under the "fair-use" policy if the image meets the criteria listed.. It's better to have a freely-licenced image, but if none are available, then you can upload the copyrighted image.. (as long as it meets the criteria..) —dima/talk/ 03:44, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

You are hereby awarded this "Minor Barnstar" for your enthusiasm and dedication to Ukrainian topics, especially thanks for the Ukrainian-Soviet War article, very interesting! Keep it up!Mariah-Yulia (talk) 21:00, 30 January 2008 (UTC).

[edit] Your anger at "the Ukraine" and google news

Your claim that none of those articles refer to the country itself as "the Ukraine" doesn't hold up.

Result #2[5] - Debt talks with the Ukraine's state oil and gas company Naftogaz..

Result #5 - European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso:"We are confident that political stability can become a reality in the Ukraine

Result #6 - “Metalurg” has slipped back to the 13th place in the current championship of the Ukraine

Result #7 - UEFA chief - "By choosing Poland and the Ukraine, UEFA took...

Result #8 - Teller was commissioned, along with four other artists, by the PinchukArtCentre to interpret the Ukraine for the 52nd International Venice

Result #9 - She writes, "Large populated areas surrounding the reactor site in the Ukraine and in nearby Belorussia remain contaminated

Result #10 - We’ve got 85 netball teams and two track and field competitors from the Ukraine

etc, etc, etc.

Please don't make unsubstantiated accusations of vandalism next time.--Miyokan (talk) 00:51, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Despite the odd article that doesn't refer to the country as "the Ukraine", most do, and it is not necessary for every source to refer to the country as "the Ukraine", only to show that "the Ukraine" is still in use.--Miyokan (talk) 01:04, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Please stop making unsubstantiate accusations again. Firstly "has become established..." - what does that even mean? Predominant is much less confusing and indicates that it is now used by a majority, "although the latter is still in use" is necessary to show that despite "Ukraine" is now more often used, "the Ukraine" is still used.--Miyokan (talk) 01:09, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

You keep changing your argument. First the problem was that some of the search results do not refer to the country as "the Ukraine" now you are saying its the claim is redundant. The source is not invalid just because you say so.--Miyokan (talk) 01:14, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

It is not a claim, it is written in black and white. If you would prefer, I could link directly to the news articles which use "the Ukraine".--Miyokan (talk) 01:19, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't asking a question about the definition of established, I was saying that the sentence doesn't make sense. How it is now is acceptable.--Miyokan (talk) 01:52, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: My username

I don't mind if people use the full version (it is after all what I use in my sig), nor if they use the short version, or my first name. I am only annoyed by people who interpret the prokonsul part as some desire for power or authority, instead of (as it is explained on my userpage) a tribute to one of my favorite poems. But really I have seen only one person who twisted my nickname to make fun of me or repeatedly criticized it in the above fashion, so it's really not a big deal :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 04:53, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Certainly Piotrus is completely fine. It's stuff like "Piotrus the self-proclaimed prokonsul" that I have trouble with, for obvious reasons :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 04:59, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] DYK hook for USW

See Template_talk:Did_you_know#Articles_created.2Fexpanded_on_January_31. I've nominated it but there is complain about a 'boring' hook... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 18:55, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Do say it there, then.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 20:07, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Updated DYK query On 4 February 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ukrainian-Soviet War, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Congrats! Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:36, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Please check this out: Controversy regarding the Nachtigall Battalion

and also check out http://memorial.kiev.ua/content/view/539/149/ amazing materials. Thanks Bandurist (talk) 21:42, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

very interesting. Thanks, Ostap 01:30, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Uszatek

Thanks dude, I really did not know before that this cartoon is so popular all over the world, including Japan. Anyway, I watched it as a kid, but it was not my favorite. Among others, I liked the Soviet Wolf and Hare (Wilk i Zajac). Greetings. Tymek (talk) 06:10, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hatred of Western Ukrainians

Can you please explain to me this edit comment [6]. I would like some evidence of how this absoloutely historical fact is "hatred". Even more considering that my wife is from Rivne... --Kuban Cossack 16:55, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry. Ostap 16:56, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Apology accepted... Could you please help convince Hillock to stop destroying the Zaporozhian Cossacks article. The passage about the Pan-Slavic resulting from the Pereyaslav Rada is curcial to the article and fits perfectly in with the remaining ones about the effect the Zaporozhians had on the eventual outcome of Crimea and Ottaman Empire and on Poland-Lithuania. I explained to you in the edit summary that the paragraph that I am removing in the process is repeated essentially word for word five paragraphs down, try reading the section with Hillock's "Corrections" and you will find that what was a concise text becomes repetetive and poorly structured. If there are issues with the order at which the countries are placed, then I more than welcome an attempt to re-writte re-shuffle them, but I would assume chronologically Ukraine should be placed near the end, along with the saving best for last assumption to convince the opinionated editors. --Kuban Cossack 18:11, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
I didn't see the paragraph repeated below. I was curious as to why the cited paragraph was being removed. Now I understand, probably should have read more thoroughly. As far as the Kuban Cossacks being the only descendants, that's not entirely true. The way that Faustian has it now is fine also IMO, if you have seen what he added (I think it says "most"). Sorry for the misunderstanding at the Zaporozhian article and for that edit comment at the SMERSH article. I was a little off-wiki frustrated at the time. Ostap 05:28, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Well I'm glad we agreed... Completly separte note, what do you think of my proposal at Talk:Russian Civil War to create a full navigable template to encompass the various theatres there were in that conflict? --Kuban Cossack 20:46, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
That looks like a lot of work. Ostap 20:52, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] National Revival of Poland

Thanks for reverting the changes to the National Revival of Poland page. Similar reverting has to be done at National Radical Camp. See the history and talk page there. Any insights that you might have about the sources used would be beneficial. Thanks ABANumber (talk) 17:16, 11 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Theukrainians.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Theukrainians.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:40, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. The page with the rationale should always include the wikilinked article to where fair-use is asserted. Otherwise this bot nominates the image for deletion. Don't ask me why. This is how the bot's operator programmed his bot. You may want to ask him but this user is not very responsive to questions. So, just make sure the article is not only mentioned but also wikilinked. --Irpen 02:52, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. This is all very confusing. Next time I will wikilink it. I don't understand how to write a valid rationale, to be honest I just copied the rationale from some different album cover image. Ostap 03:15, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Covert Polish Missions across the Soviet Ukrainian Border, 1928-1933

A very interesting article: pdf. Enjoy! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 22:47, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] On your deleted edit to Talk:Holodomor

I'm not sure if that was a serious suggestion, but I see it just survived an AfD - or, to be precise, the nominator withdrew it. I do think that material exists for an article dealing with the cover-up by the USSR, related propaganda, and its place in Ukrainian activism and nationalism (if it were a journal article, it would be titled "Holodomor: Reception, Memory and Myth") but that wont happen at the current title easily, and definitely not with the current skew. Relata refero (talk) 22:51, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Biophys has already said he will help with any issues. Regards, Ostap 23:08, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your comments will be appreciated

There is a discussion going on whether the Zaporozhian Sich was indeed destroyed. Your comments in this matter will be appreciated. Thanks. --Hillock65 (talk) 16:04, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Slight correction on the dispute, its not weather the actual Sich (fortress) was destroyed, but weather the Zaporozhian Host was destoryed. --Kuban Cossack 17:09, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] No need

Ostap, please stop making sarcastic or WP:POINTy edits and suggestions. Maybe you could do some work in apolitical articles for cooldown? --Irpen 19:34, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I just realized most of the sources I use to write on wikipedia are written by diaspora revisionists and thus are not valid. Ostap 19:37, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
No problem here. Personal talk pages are the best place if one needs to make a joke. Just do not insert this into articles and don't make outrageous move page suggestions. This would fly on the talk page though. Let's keep it here. --Irpen 20:12, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Is this about Kiev -> Kyiv? Because I didn't know it had been proposed 5 times before... Ostap 20:35, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

No, it is about Ukrainian culture move request (I reverted) and several highly unneeded article edits lately. --Irpen 20:43, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

In my defense, the google results were clear. Ostap 20:50, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
That's not a "defense". That's a WP:POINT. --Irpen 21:16, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps. But I thought it was a good point. Ostap 22:36, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Please reread the link above. WP:POINT is considered disruption. Make your point at the talk page calmly instead. --Irpen 22:38, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I thought it was justified (per WP:IAR). Ostap 22:40, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

OK, I edit non-controversial now. Ostap 04:44, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Re your next move, Lwow, I must say that enough is enough. Drop it please. --Irpen 07:01, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
I am not sure I know what you are talking about. The policies are quite clear. Kiev is english. Lwow is english. Galicia is english. Ukrainian wikipedia can have the ukrainian names, but we must use english. Ostap 07:07, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
It's not English. It's WP:POINT and wasting yours and others' time. A good joke is OK once in a while. The sarcastic remarks don't fall under that category. --Irpen 07:13, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
But Lwow is used thoudands of times more than both Lviv and L'viv combined. Wikipedia can't let those Hrushevskyist Greater Galician nationalists (and their diaspora revisionist supporters) try to change English usage. Ostap 07:26, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] This looks like an interesting article to translate

uk:Акт відновлення Української Держави. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 18:43, 16 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Miś Uszatek

Was it shown in Ukraine or Russia? The article doesn't mention that, and is missing names in those languages.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 06:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] This and that-speaking countries

Please do not disrupt Wikipedia to make a point. Not cool.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 22:25, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Please. Bogdan що? 22:26, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

How is that disruption? Does not Russia have a sizable Chechen speaking population? Ostap 22:28, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

See also this recent thread. Quit it. --Irpen 22:34, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

No one has answered my question. Does Russia have a sizable Chechen speaking population? If so, then it should be included in that category. Ostap 22:35, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

(*after edit conflict*) Forgetting for a moment that your edit was caused by a completely unrelated dispute in Ukraine, Russia's Chechen-speaking population is not "sizeable" comparing to the total population of the country.
Please note that I have no interest in your categorization dispute in the Ukraine article. Whatever grievances you may have there, please take them directly with the editors whose opinion you don't share and discuss them on that article's talk page. Editing unrelated pages just to prove your point is clearly a disruption. Thanks.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 22:36, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
I did use the talk page before any of this. And the response I recieved justified the inclusion of Russia into Chechen category. Ostap 22:39, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

And good catch with "sizeable". On Ukraines talk page the editor spelled it "sizeble". I got all confused. Ostap 22:40, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] circus

Hi, I think Nihil Novi has come up with this term before, and your first guess was right. Anyway, write an e-mail to me, you've got my e-mail on my user page. Tymek (talk) 21:18, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Request_for_clarification:_Digwuren

Arbcom are voting to apply discretionary sanctions across East European articles. Martintg (talk) 21:32, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Castle

Hi Ostap, when you have a moment, look at Pidhirtsi Castle. Your help is appreciated. Tymek (talk) 18:30, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Don't scare me like that :)

[7] :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 21:42, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Ivan Rohach

Please make a comment Bandurist (talk) 03:03, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

An editor has nominated Ivan Rohach, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ivan Rohach and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

[edit] How do you feel ?

You just have been called a Polish nationalists :) How does it make you feel ;] I'm just asking, since one time I was callled a Ukrainian one from UPA :D--Molobo (talk) 01:17, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Encouraged! :) Ostap 02:19, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Articles on Gogol's Short Stories

Ostap, the reason I tagged these articles with a notability tag was not to doubt the notability of these works, but to encourage editors to add information that demonstrated the notability of the material. From WP:FICTION (emphasis mine):

Wikipedia articles on published works (such as fictional stories) should cover their real-world context and sourced analysis, offering detail on a work's development, impact or historical significance, not solely a detailed summary of that work's plot. This applies both to stand-alone works, and also to series. A brief plot summary may sometimes be appropriate as an aspect of a larger topic.

and also

Articles on a work of fiction (a book, movie, television series, video game, or other medium) should demonstrate notability by citing critical reception, viewings or sales figures, development and other information from reliable sources.

Of the works of Gogol that I looked at, the following articles contain only a plot summary and no demonstration of notability:

I encourage you to work with me here to improve these articles. The goal of tagging articles is not to get them deleted, but to help turn them into good articles. —BradV 02:40, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

No worries. —BradV 02:58, 5 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] My RfA

Image:David,larry.JPG My RFA
Thank you muchly for your support in my recent request for adminship, which was successfully closed on 76%, finishing at 73 supports, 23 opposes and 1 neutral. The supports were wonderful, and I will keep in mind the points made in the useful opposes and try to suppress the Larry David in me! Now I'm off to issue some cool down blocks, just to get my money's worth!

Kidding btw. All the best, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 11:41, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Archduke Wilhelm of Austria

I just returned from a lecture by Timothy Snyder, where he discussed that very interesting person at length. I am sure you will enjoy his upcoming book; I've noticed that 1) Vasyl Vyshyvanyi is Featured on uk wiki (he was a stub before I expanded him a little now) and 2) he would make a good DYK if we were to expand his article over the next few days a little. Perhaps you or your Ukrainian colleagues would like to help me DYK him? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 00:10, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, he was just visiting. But he is a very good speaker; I wish somebody had taped it. At least I took a photo of him, will upload it to Commons soon.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 03:06, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WP:POINT

Ostap, please, this edit is WP:POINT. The only thing you can probably achieve by disrupting encyclopedia to make a point is to get yourself blocked. Please think about doing things differently. If I can, I would try to help, but please edit in good faith Alex Bakharev (talk) 00:54, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll try harder to restrain myself. But it gets so difficult. Ostap 03:45, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks! Alex Bakharev (talk) 06:15, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Elektronna Poshta

Ostape, I have changed my email. Please check your junk folder just in case it went there. Thanks, Horlo (talk) 06:31, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Indeed bizarre to say the least. The whole "Slavic" categories thingy needs to be looked at.--Molobo (talk) 11:57, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Stalking

Please don't stalk me and revert my well-sourced edit as you did here [8].--Miyokan (talk) 02:18, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Bah. Get over it. I was trying to see if you responded or reverted after you removed sourced material on the Ukrainian nationalism page. By the way, how did you find out about that page? Did you just suddenly have the urge to make some unilateral deletions about the topic? Ostap 02:21, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
"Unilateral"? Irpen made the same edit.--Miyokan (talk) 02:28, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
No. Irpen removed a theory that the Rus princes were the guardians of Ukrainian statehood. I left that part out and added back the facts that he removed when reverting. Please read the content before making reverts. Look what he took out [9] and look what I added. Ostap 02:30, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
"I was trying to see if you responded or reverted"?? Unacceptable. Stalking another editor to another article just to get a rise out of them is uncivil and simple creepy. It is also governed by the Wikipedia behavioral guidelines.You can be blocked for doing that, and all your subsequent edits would be reviewed for any similar incivility. It isn't tolerated here in Wikipedia, no matter how much you feel put upon by the other editor. Use AN/I to complain about them if you feel they have violated the rules. Following them around to berate or revert their edits elsewhere is only going to get you in trouble, and I would urge you to reconsider doing such in the future. Play nicely, or play somewhere else. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 15:02, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
How exactly did you end up here? And do not call me "creepy". That is a clear personal attack. I suggest you take your own advice and play nicely, or play somewhere else.Ostap 16:32, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
No one specifically called you creepy, unless you admit to following another user to a page and revert them to get a rise out of them. If you didn't do this then no one called you creepy. If you did do this, you are wiki-stalking, which is inherently creepy. One or the other, please. I am playing nicely, and not personally attacking you - trust me, you'd really know the difference were I being uncivil. I have simply advised you of the rules, so that if you further follow and revert a user who you have a problem with on one page to another, you can be reported for wikistalking to AN/I, and you haying been warned of the policy regarding this behavior will be documented. See? There's a big difference. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 17:01, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
I do not need you to advise me of the rules. I am aware of wikipedia policies. If you have some sort of problem with me, take your own advice and go to AN/I and report me. Ostap 17:06, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Okay. You consider yourself properly advised as to the policy, so if it happens again, you won't be surprised if reported.. I don't have any problem with you at all, and I hope we don't encounter such an issue. I am glad to have been of advisory service to you. :) - Arcayne (cast a spell) 17:31, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I think Ostap is being pulled here not actually for stalking but for honesty. I am so used to stalkers that I just pity the poor folk that does not have anything better to do than scrutinize my edits. BTW, judging by the vigor of some, next time I like an RfAdm candidate, I will vote "oppose", watch the support votes casted for "spite" and will switch in the end. No Ostap, you've done no such thing but someone who've done, would recognize himself here, as he would read this entry as well. --Irpen 17:45, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Ostap, my friend, editing contentious topics requires learning a skill to take it easy. Please have a laugh of all this and, similar to what Alex wrote, I would be happy to help you in editing if you ask (you are free not to.) Wikipedia has no "consistency", "justice" or "injustice". Editing it should be fun and when it's no more, the best thing is to take a break. Ask me how I know and I do know as I have many "fans". Take a cup of tee or whatever fits your age and preference, take it easy and please stay cool from now on. It ain't so bad :) --Irpen 21:30, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Sounds good. I'll be back later, and I will think of an article to write. I guess it has been a while since I've actually added anything. Thanks, Ostap 21:58, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
And your apology on my talk page is heartily accepted. If I was at all unkind, I tender my apology as well. As for the convo with No Consequence, it wasn't an angry matter; I may have a less than perfect understanding of how user talk pages are handled, and it would behoove me to clarify matters for when the issue next arises.. See my comment on his page. As far as I knew things were pretty calm. :)
And again, thank you for your apology. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 22:14, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re:AK question

As a non-native English speaker I will simply reply: I don't know :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 03:14, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ukrainian cabal

I'd be very proud to be recognized as part of the Ukrainian cabal; it would prove that I am doing something right :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 03:16, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Provocations and such

Remember about WP:AE and applicable WP:SANCTIONS. Harassing editors is now quite dangerous in EE topics, and we should not allow ourselves to be harassed as we had to in the past. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 07:28, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Polish-Ukrainian relations

I think we should be able to DYK it. Btw, interesting reading: [10] --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 22:40, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Because you are still here... and because you can use something nice on your userpage

The Optimist's Star
The Optimistic's Star is for those who have had to put up with so much but still believed that there was light at the end of the tunnel. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
Hey, thanks! Ostap 06:31, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Two questions

Since you are an expert on Ukrainian issues-could you check Ukrainian nationalism article. I think it misses core ideas-like what were the concepts of Ukrainian state by Ukrainian nationalists, how did they view their history etc. Wasn't one idea that Ukraine was true legacy of Kievan Rus, while Muscovy was a Mongolian tainted creation(as at least I read it so once). Also if you could check Danylo_Shumuk for neutrality and expand if possible. Recent edits there have been strange, for example Soviet occupation and invasion is named as "Unification of Ukraine", if you would comment if that is how Ukrainians refer to this I would be interested.--Molobo (talk) 22:19, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

The first part about Mongol-tainted does not even need a comment. About "unification", I suggest to check Subtelny, who discusses the fundamental meaning of these events for Ukraine as a national unification it achieved for the first time in its history. Remember, we are talking about the Ukrainian context here. I wonder what scholarly books on history of Russia or Ukraine did Molobo read. --Irpen 22:26, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Irpen, how did you get here ? As for the Mongolian-I heard it during Ukraine's parliamentary elections and supposedly one of the groups supporting Tymoshenko has had such ideas. If it is true I have no idea, that is why I am asking if the mix of Mongolian, Germanic and East Slavic cultures in Muscovy was determined to too far away from Kievan Rus for Ukrainian nationalists.--Molobo (talk) 22:29, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Expert? :) Molobo, I have very little confidence in this nationalism article. Last time I edited it, I was labeled creepy (see discussion above). I will look at the article about Shumuk later if I have time. But I have a question of my own for Irpen. Why did you remove the part about Yanukovych learning Ukrainian after taking office? It comes from his profile on BBC News. Ostap 23:45, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Ostap, this was simply not a stuff for a lead section, that's all.

Molobo, Ostap and I talked a lot in the past. That's how I saw the change to his page. It may disappoint you, but despite your following my edits, I don't return you this favor. Still looking to hear about a single book you read (note a difference with the "source" for the article.) --Irpen 03:57, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Its strange he learned the only state language after becoming prime minister. On a related note, I want to write about the hilarious egg incident. Do you think it would work to add a section to the current article, or could I write a new one on Viktor Yanukovych egg incident? Or Viktor Yanukovych eggssassination attempt? :) Ostap 04:57, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I think this material (if properly written) can be added to the presidential election article. Don't you agree? See, there is a compromise solution for most everything. --Irpen 05:04, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

This will never get old. Ok, the compromise sounds good, there is good material here about how the silly incident was manipulated. Ostap 05:14, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

Updated DYK query On 24 March 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Polish-Ukrainian relations, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
--Maxim(talk) 19:50, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Updated DYK query On 25 March 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ukrainian folklore, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
--Daniel Case (talk) 04:05, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dealing with vandals

When dealing with persistent vandals, like user:Stepan Bandera and his IP socks, it is best to wait ~10 minutes before reverting. That way chances are that the troll is blocked by then or left. This Drohobych-loving IP also went to Holodomor and falsified referenced data. If you don't plan to turn off your PC immediately, waiting for 10 minutes saves an effort. Cheers, --Irpen 04:56, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I see. I have reverted IPs removal of the Poles and Jews from that article before. At least he created an account. Ostap 05:01, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Holodomor numbers

Please take a look at the Faustian's talk. --Irpen 05:08, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] UPA reference

Can you check out this site: http://www.cdvr.org.ua/index.php. My understanding of Ukrainian is somewhat limited. Would you consider it a reliable source. Thanks Bobanni (talk) 07:21, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, use it. Ostap 18:27, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Editing

Ти правильно замітив що ситуація з Голодомором є стара проблема. Можливо у когось є помилкове бачення що хохли плюнуть і дозволять якомусь лоху сунути халтуру. З цим можна боротися тільки з невідступним терпіння та розумінням що цей статус кво можливо буде з нами на довгий час. Я знову дякую за твою підтримку.--Riurik(discuss) 18:34, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Це моє задоволення. Разом нас багато, нас не подолати :) Ostap 23:07, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Любі друзі :) ! Нажаль нас не так багато, як хотілося б, щоб будувати статті, але колись "нас" було ще менше ніж зараз. Нічого, пережили і дочекалися вас. Дочекаємось і ще. Але давайте, краще англійською на публічних сторінках.
The Holodomor-article, while certainly deficient is by far not as bad as most Wikipedia articles whose subject is politically charged to a similar extent. It needs more cleanup and, perhaps, even a partial rewrite, but it's mostly factual and, relatively (for such topics) well sourced. Speaking of Holodomor theme, its various forks (see Horlo's creations) are by far a greater mess despite being much shorter.
Coverage of some topics, however, is clearly deficient. 1915-1925 period is in pity shape. We have 3 rival articles about the civil war and almost no coverage of the Ukrainian-Polish war. Perhaps a task force on this time could be a good idea? Also, I would not object to the Holodomor task force but at least the topic has a rather detailed article unlike the others I mentioned. Thoughts? --Irpen 07:43, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Sounds exciting, but I don't want to see the Ukrainian Soviet war deleted as a "rather ridiculously" and "ill-named" POV fork. It is a valid article. And I certainly would not support renaming to the "Ukrainian theatre of the Russian Civil War", as was suggested. Ostap 19:13, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
As a rule, I prefer to correspond in English. However, I don't feel bound to it. The comments were made in public domain, with full understanding that these are available for scrutiny by anyone. I agree that Holodomor is rather well sourced, and more or less in good shape, but that is only because timeless hours were spent by people like us to purge it of vandalism by other users. I am cynical about the creation of a task-force on Holodomor, mostly because I think it will be another empty project without participation beyond short-term, and also because any work you put through it trying to get an encyclopedic entry to some measure of quality can be destroyed or degraded overtime.
Regarding the 1915-1925 period, I don't understand why are people writing "off the cuff" on this? The work on the topic has been done for us. What have historians written about it? That's what we should have as an article. The problem is picking the "right" or I should say balanced history books, a task complicated by fragmentation experienced during that period.
Finally, it shouldn't be our job as editors to be engaged 24/7 in constant warring over content, pouring hours on talk pages rather than on the main space. Horlo, like others, is symptomatic of incentives provided by the current structure of wikipedia which permits such volunteering to take place.--Riurik(discuss) 05:39, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Honestly, i don't see vandalism as a big problem now. Tendentious editing is by far more headache. I spent by far more time dealing with their activity than with vandals. --Irpen 06:28, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism is a problem. Look at the UPA page. It gets vandalized daily. What can be done about this? Ostap 20:02, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
At some point "tendentious" editing turns into vandalism.--Riurik(discuss) 15:31, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Something really needs to be done about the UPA page. Ostap 18:17, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bud' Laska

A new article has appeared here [[11]]. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Bud'mo. Horlo (talk) 08:06, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll do what I can. Ostap 18:37, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] re: unbelievable

Because somebody has too. Writing content is fun, and it helps. Suffering through flaming and harassment is not, but the alternative is to see the great gift to humankind that is wikipedia destroyed by trolls. I do my best to prove that my optimism - that Wikipedia is great and will be greater - will be proven right, and I hope my actions contribute to the eventual success of the project. Thank you for the award. Perhaps you would like to comment at Talk:Armia Krajowa from the perspective of the Ukrainian editor, form whom AK were much less heroes than for us Poles. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 00:55, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ukrainian National Assembly – Ukrainian National Self Defence, who are those people

Thanks for your help with Racism and discrimination in Ukraine! Any change you know something about Ukrainian National Assembly – Ukrainian National Self Defence? The article confuses me (see Talk:Ukrainian National Assembly – Ukrainian National Self Defence) and it makes BYuT looks like semi-neo-nazi (so I suspect a Russian editor at work who is afraid of Yulia Tymoshenko), makes a change from editors who are trying to make Yulia Jewish (see:[12])..... Mariah-Yulia (talk) 17:09, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WP:Sarcasm

I think this essay says it all :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:33, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Why this is erroneous

Re: [13] I'd like you to revert yourself; the section is also about the terrorist tactics of OUN. Should we add this to the heading, too? I think not, but neither should the "oppression". --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 02:49, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't see what the problem with the word "oppression" really is. That seems like saying that the article's title should be changed because the article describes the oppression of the Ukrainian minority. Ostap 02:56, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
I believe that the neutral title "Ukrainian minority in the Second Polish Republic" is the best. The section should show the opression, yes, but the violent tactics the UPA turned towards to as well. They were two sides of the same coin, or as Davies put its - vicious spiral, which wouldn't exist with only one of those.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 16:44, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
I find it bemusing to see the talk about "neutral titles" given the title of the article. --Irpen 17:55, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your question

It is simple. One board (the main one) is only updated manually and includes articles we wrote and found. Alex's "new article bot" posts her findings to the board_2. Or more specifically, the bot's findings page is transcluded into board_2.

Ideally, we should go through all those bot-found articles, remove false positives, move articles of any importance and relevance to board_1 and keep the rest at board two. I was doing it for a while but lost steam. Still, we need a separate board to transclude the bot's findings. Otherwise, the main one would be overcrowded. Just check the text on the top of board 2. Hope this helps, --Irpen 04:44, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I see.

[edit] DYK

Updated DYK query On 22 April 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Vasyl Krychevsky, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
--Gatoclass (talk) 08:25, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: AfD

I have no experience closing AfD, but it looks like it will be deleted in a day or two.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 18:56, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] IPs

Curiously, the Banach IP reminds me of Drohobych one. You're right though, but as for the Repin analogy, remember that the WP lacks consistency. You keep forgetting. --Irpen 07:04, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Because he is incredibly persistant, to the point of being annoying? Ironic, its really not often that I end up arguing someone isn't a Ukrainain.
And I didn't see the category, that's good to know. I looked at the talk page. Ostap 07:13, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Again, I never said that Banach was a Ukrainian. Neither was Repin, btw. --Irpen 07:19, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Yes, but Gogol wasn't Russian either. Ostap 07:25, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Check category:Ukrainian people. Relax, man. --Irpen 07:27, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Music

Thanks for the song, I did not know this band, are they Polish? Check this, Lao Che is a band from Plock and they recorded a very popular album based on songs from Warsaw Uprising. Good stuff, hope you will like it. If you want more of the music I like, let me know, and keep those songs coming to me. here it is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlGgfMNiH5E&feature=related Tymek (talk) 17:56, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] UNR

Can you paste this to user:Ostap R/template:UNR? It would be more convenient to discuss. --Irpen 06:17, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Yay, you got a DYK.

Updated DYK query On 27 April 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Yevhen Hrebinka, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
--Hersfold (t/a/c) 23:09, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Happy Easter!

Mykola Pymonenko, "Easter morning prayer in Little Russia", 1891, Oil on canvas, 133x193 cm, Rybinsk Museum-Preserve of History, Architecture and Art, Rybinsk, Russia.
Mykola Pymonenko, "Easter morning prayer in Little Russia", 1891, Oil on canvas, 133x193 cm, Rybinsk Museum-Preserve of History, Architecture and Art, Rybinsk, Russia.

Happy Easter from the homeland! --Irpen 08:06, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Victory!

Happy Victory Day! Mariah-Yulia (talk) 15:44, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Happy Victory Day! Mariah-Yulia (talk) 15:44, 9 May 2008 (UTC)