File talk:Ukrainians en.svg

Great pic! But there where no Russians in Crimea at the time? — Mariah-Yulia (talk) 22:43, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

In 1897 Crimean Tatars numbered the majority (35,55%) of the Crimean residents. Russians - 33,11%. --Riwnodennyk (talk) 23:06, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

What's the source for this? Alaexis (talk) 20:34, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Another thing learned by me :) Thanks! — Mariah-Yulia (talk) 21:34, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

I really liked the South Russians touch and official language wrt the spelling of Brest. Since it has been released into PD I might collect it for a future comedy publication on the logic of modern Ukrainian thinking. Do produce more, I look forward to seeing them as the only think they are good for is laughter. --Kuban kazak (talk) 02:22, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

On top of that, just a quick note, that the ISBN of your reference does not pop on any of the search functions. Should I flag it as Original Research and Synthesis. --Kuban kazak (talk) 13:08, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

If you're so interested, it is not a problem to send you the scan from atlas, you can't find--Riwnodennyk (talk) 18:50, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Please do, as well as the credentials, including why places such as Galicia which had (prior to 1940s) strong Polish pockets with no Ukrainian population are not shown. --Kuban kazak (talk) 20:18, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Here you are http://pics.livejournal.com/riwnodennyk/pic/000103k5/ --Riwnodennyk (talk) 13:10, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

a) no sources for the map (using LJ material is rather novel) b) your map's spellings of cities are wrong completely, c) comparing with maps of 1897 census [1], [2], [3], we see a different picture from your impression. However, I think contemporary map is better than that. --Kuban kazak (talk) 18:19, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

@Kuban kazak. The map is fine. I recommand you 2 sources:

• Ukraina. von Stephan Rudnyckyj. Vienna, 1916. It has a great ethnic map of Eastern Europe, but due to the copyright restrictions I will be allowed to upload it only in 2016. However, I can send the scanned map to everbody who wants to have it by email.
• Atlas of Ukraine and adjoining countries. Lviv 1937. Publisher: Ukrajinskyj Vdavnycyj Institut, Lviv --Olahus (talk) 13:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

The maps is not fine, its an author's imagination for drawing out Greater Germany based on his own obvious limited knowledge of the regions he claims are "Ukrainian".--Kuban kazak (talk) 16:32, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

inscriptions

The map itself is fine enough but the inscriptions are imho not quite npov. Territories where Ukrainian was predominantly spoken in 1897 are described as 'traditional spread of Ukrainians and Ukrainian language'. Consider for example Kuban (en:Krasnodar Krai), Ukrainians and Russians came there earliest in the end of 18th century so it can't possibly be part of traditional spread of Ukrainians. The same goes for Ukrainian-inhabited parts of Crimea and some other territories within and outside of modern Ukraine. I propose to change the inscription into something like "Predominantly Ukrainian-speaking territories in 1897".

In the second inscription these territories are called 'Ukrainian ethnic lands'. Again, this might be misleading imho, so I'd argue for something along the lines of 'main settlements of these territories outside of modern Ukrainian borders'.

And, by the way, what was the reason behind writing 'South Russians' and not just Russians? Alaexis (talk) 20:16, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

For the same reason the author uses names versions of language that are archaic: Salske (Sal steppe was always a Don Cossack land). c- I googled both and nothing came up with respect to the current cities of Salsk and Yeysk, Tahanrih (why not Tahanroh if you insist on Ukrainian?) Bierascie - here the Belarusian language is given in the old Lacinka format that is not used anywhere spare some diaspora newspapers, whats more the old Tarashkivitsa is equally unknown, and to an English reader, only an expert will relate that that is the city of Brest. --Kuban kazak (talk) 16:30, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Salske, Yeyske, because Andrew used his own spelling where cities ends -e.--Anatoliy (talk) 18:52, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

POV all over

Podlachians are (at least partially) included – nope, they're not uniform in their ethnic identity. Some declare that they're Ukrainian, but most prefer Podlachian, Belarussian, or Polish identity. Polesians aren't uniform as identity goes either. Carpathian Ruthenians were only forced to function as a part of Ukrainian nation after WW2 – earlier they were a separate ethos within the Hungary (later Czechoslovakia), with a separate uniate church. What are the criteria for inclusion? If they're linguistic rather than ethnic, shouldn't it be explicitly stated? 89.64.80.222 21:28, 27 March 2022 (UTC)