Talk:Slavic Europe
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Poland
Ghirla like it or not but Poland is third biggest country when it comes to population that is listed here. Personaly I don't believe such thing as "Slavic" world exists, since we have various countries and nations that are unique. But since Poland is listed here, then opinions of its people have to be presented as well, especially since Poles are the third biggest group(if not the second). --Molobo 18:28, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
- Dear Molobo, please stop your anti-Slavic crusade. Like it or not, the words "Slav" and "Slavic" exist not for nothing. Next time check the dictionary before striking these whereever you can find them. --Ghirla -трёп- 18:38, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
Ghirla-care to explain what do you mean ? What is this anti-Slavic Crusade ? I don't deny such groups existed 1500 years ago, or that they are languages with Slavic words or origins. But this is all there is, and it needs to be explained, in order not to confuse the readers. --Molobo 18:41, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
Since Ghirla refuses to state what he considers POV or OR in the article, and simply re-adds the tags, I will ask on the policy in such matters. --Molobo 23:47, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
- The article is indeed imbalanced. While there is a total political discord, there has been more common things than Molobo wrote. There is a section about the controversy (i.e., I made it into a section). I am expecting the section about the Slavic unity from the supporters of this POV. mikka (t) 00:58, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
I think that if citizens of Poland don’t want to be part of Slavic Eurasia (I think it should be entitled this way, because main part of Russia and the Slavic world as well, is in Asia), then they should be willfully excluded from it and should be mentioned here only from a historical point of view. But this doesn’t mean that population of all other Slavic countries think this way. Dreambringer 13:42, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- Apologies, but this is one of the most pathetic things I've ever read on Wikipedia. Are you one of those Russian Eurasianists of Dugin's clique? There's less than 1/3 of Russian population living on its Asian territories, and most of them settled there after the 19th century. It's less than 1/10 of Slavic population in the world. Seriously, the main reason why Pan-Slavism is so unpopular among many Slavs is because people such as yourself are attempting to use it to justify Russian imperialism and authoritarianism, which is supposed to be a part of its "Eurasian" nature. The most mysterious part is why ordinary Russian folk sometimes follows this thought pattern. Must be Soviet nostalgia. I think that if certain citizens of Russia don't want to be a part of Slavic Europe (which certainly includes both the Poles and the Russians), then they should make a separate Russo-Turko-Altaic state somewhere in Southern Siberia, then join Turkey in its futile claims on European identity. Humanophage 16:49, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
- Indeed, the main part if the Slavic world is certainly not in Asia. Ostap 02:14, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
- Apologies, but this is one of the most pathetic things I've ever read on Wikipedia. Are you one of those Russian Eurasianists of Dugin's clique? There's less than 1/3 of Russian population living on its Asian territories, and most of them settled there after the 19th century. It's less than 1/10 of Slavic population in the world. Seriously, the main reason why Pan-Slavism is so unpopular among many Slavs is because people such as yourself are attempting to use it to justify Russian imperialism and authoritarianism, which is supposed to be a part of its "Eurasian" nature. The most mysterious part is why ordinary Russian folk sometimes follows this thought pattern. Must be Soviet nostalgia. I think that if certain citizens of Russia don't want to be a part of Slavic Europe (which certainly includes both the Poles and the Russians), then they should make a separate Russo-Turko-Altaic state somewhere in Southern Siberia, then join Turkey in its futile claims on European identity. Humanophage 16:49, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Quotations
Ukrainians collect internatinal-slavic opinions that slavic unity is a myth here. Is there a russian site that tries to prove that slavic unity is alive and kicking? mikka (t) 00:39, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Here are two English-language websites dedicated to Slavic unity :
http://www.nationalism.org/slavic/
Fisenko 16:05, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Here are few more (in Russian):
http://www.otechestvo.org.ua/ Union of Ukrainian Orthodox Citizens (key supporters of Natalia Vitrenko)
http://www.rustrana.ru/ Lots of panslavic articles can be found here
http://www.srpska.ru/ Pan-slavic Russo-Serbian site)
Kuban Cossack 18:27, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Purpose of this article?
This article should not become yet another battlefield about who opressed whom in recent era but should contain chronology and maps how Slavs spread through Europe and about process of Slavicization and de-Slavicization.
It would be better to be deleted than to become yet another rant page. Pavel Vozenilek 00:40, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
-
- I concur, however, the map on official languages could be gleaned for some useful and informative article. - CJ Withers 03:13, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
- I don't know, I don't think that it should be deleted - it does contain some usefull info. It really should focus more on the history, though. It would be a shame if it became a flamefest like some other articles about Slavic issues. Esn 19:14, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] There is no "Slavic language"
There is no Slavic language that is used in all those countries. They are languages with roots in various languages used by diverse East, West and South Slavic tribes thousand of years ago. Giving description that there is some "Slavic language" used in the alledged "Slavic Europe" misinforms the reader. Thus the term imposed by Ghirlandajo is incorrect unless of course he alledges that people in Central and Eastern Europe use some form of Prot-Slavic or Old Church Slavonic which of couse would be absurd. --Molobo 16:15, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- "Countries where a Slavic language is the national language" just means that the languages of these countries are part of the Slavic languages group. I don't think it's ambiguous at all, as it doesn't imply that there is somehow a unified Slavic language, but that there is a Slavic language group shared across these countries.
Ronline ✉ 08:17, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
- I do not see how this is controversial at all. Stop trying to turn this into a nationalist issue - as Ronline said, it is simply a matter of linguistic classification of languages (Polish and Russian ARE related, whether you like it or not). If you don't agree, why don't you go to the Slavic languages article and ask them very nicely to delete it? I'm sure that they will be very supportive of your suggestions. Esn 19:17, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Jews in Slavic Europe before the Holocaust
This article - " There were also over 4 million Jews living in Slavic Europe until the Holocaust..."
Holocaust in Poland - Of Poland's prewar Jewish population of 3 million...
History_of_Ukraine#Ukraine_in_World_War_II - Total civilian losses during the War and German occupation in Ukraine are estimated at seven million, including over a million Jews'...
Already we are over four million Jews in only Poland and Ukraine before the Holocaust.
The number in this article seems too low. What is the correct number? Ostap 02:21, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
