# Talk:Bolokhovians

This is a talk page. Please don't write articles here --Codrin.B (talk) 10:31, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Please read carefully in Spinei: "Vlachs were engaged in the disputes for the Kievan throne, beginning with 1015".(page 105)
If Bolokhoveni are near Kiev, you have to agree that they were Vlachs or Bolokhoveni. I know you are angry but the text is from Spinei. Please do not erase references.
Eurocentral (talk) 13:38, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

"...If Bolokhoveni are near Kiev, you have to agree that they were... Bolokhoveni..." twitter.com/YOMALSIDOROFF (talk) 20:09, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Read these (Hypatian Chronicle is not the only chronicle):
V. Spinei, The Romanians and the Turkic NomadsNorth of the Danube Deltafrom the Tenth to theMid-Thirteenth Century Brill, 2009, pp 104-105
S. H. Cross, “Yaroslav the Wise in Norse tradition,” Speculum 4 (1929), pp 186–191
Eurocentral (talk) 13:41, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Dear Eurocentral, please read what WP:NOR means. Please also read Spinei's view on their identification as Vlachs (Spinei 2009, pp. 161-162): "...controversial is the ethnicity of the Bolokhovens, a population mentioned as living in the Rus region to the northeast from Moldavia..", "..the idea that the Bolokhoveni were Rus is also supported by evidence of relations between Bolokhoven princes and Galician noble families...". Borsoka (talk) 16:58, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Dimnik writes that the land of Bolokhoveni bordered on the principalities of Halych, Volhynia and Kiev in the middle 13th century. What is the problem with a map presenting those three principalities in the same period? Borsoka (talk) 10:42, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

This is the page of Bolokhoveni. Please do not provoke conficts !  Put the map of Galicia to Galicia Wiki page!
Please respect WIKI rules! Only data abot Bolokhoveni are acceptable. If you create a precedent, there be a revolution in all pages. Tomorrow the the users from Kiev will put their map on this page !  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.112.40.169 (talk) 13:40, 14 November 2013 (UTC) 

Please read my remarks before answering them. Borsoka (talk) 13:49, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
Dear Anonym, for the time being the article provides a map which presents a POV of the land of the Bolokhoveni. If you read the text of the article and the referred reliable sources (the works of the historians Dimnik and Spinei) you may understand, that there is a significant POV according to which the Bolokhoveni dwelled somewhere in the lands along the borders of the principalities of Halych, Volhynia and Kiev in the middle 13th century. The map you have been deleting presents this region in the same period. Why should we delete it?  Borsoka (talk) 03:04, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

This is an attack against normal rules. ONLY DOCUMENTS IN CONNECTION WITH THE TOPIC ARE ADMISIBLE. Your document is about GALICIA and from another ERA !  Read the title of the page and bring documents about Bolokhoveni not about Galicians!
Hi, I am surprised to see this fight about maps. Probably user Borsoka wants to say: "I do not agree with Bolokhoveni history" and put his map in a wrong place. Maybe he is from Galicia. If you read in talk page what he wrote you'll understand his negationist position. Obstructioning Bolokhoveni page with maps from other countries is not a good idea.
With best regards, Nicky.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.112.11.92 (talk) 07:49, 15 November 2013 (UTC) 

Would you please specifically refer to the rule of our community which would be "attacked" if this map were added? Please take into account, that the map presents the borderlands of the principalities of Halych, Volhynia and Kiev, where the land of Bolokhoveni was located in the same region, according to a reliable source cited in the article (Dimnik). Borsoka (talk) 14:41, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Reasons why the Rus map is not accepted:
1. It is a map of a foreign state
2. It has No data about Bolokhoveni
3. Has a dubious contour
4. It is useless
If we discuss about technical errors:
a. It has not documented data
b. It overlaps a territory that does not belong to Galicia
c. The contour is not found in medieval documents
d. It missed the Uşiţa entering town in Galicia
e. Old documents showed that Andronicus (future Emperor) entered Galicia through Uşiţa; also Spinei showed that Uşiţa was the most advanced Galician town to Southern. So your map is a caricature. Sorry but this is the situation. Eurocentral (talk) 15:15, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

You are right: the map does not contain any reference to its source, therefore it is not verifiable. Please apply the same rule to the map you designed: it also lacks any reference to a reliable source. It contradicts to the map presented in Dimnik's book (Dimnik 1981, p. 335), which present a much smaller territory along the uppermost courses of the rivers Sluch and Southern Bug. Borsoka (talk) 16:53, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

I've just fully protected this article due to the ongoing edit warring. Please discuss the matter here on the talk page instead of continually reverting. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:42, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Dear Mark Arsten, thank you for your action, even if it protects the status quo instead of the status quo ante. Borsoka (talk) 02:59, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

I am not sure but Borokhov seems to be identical with present-day Borokhiv, Volyns'ka oblast, Ukraine (eastward from city of Lutsk). Fakirbakir (talk) 12:01, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

I do not know. But Borokhiv might be the Ukrainian / modern version of the same name. Borsoka (talk) 13:42, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes, Spinei actually writes of Ushitsa and makes it clear that this town was located on the southern border of Halych / Galicia. However, he writes of the town in connection with a military action by Ivan Berladnik and his Cuman and Berladnik allies in 1159. He does not make any reference to Bolokhoveni in connection with the event. Furthermore, he clearly states that the Bolokhoveni lived somewhere to the north-east of Moldavia, not to the south of Halych / Galicia. It is also clear that Spinei does not identify the Bolokhoveni as Vlachs. Therefore any reference to his work in order to prove that the Bolokhoveni lived to the south of Halych contradicts to WP:SYNTH. (I refer to Spinei 2009, pp. 131., 161-162.) Borsoka (talk) 14:50, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Talk:Bolokhoveni/GA1

@Skirts89:, why do you think the scholarly theory about the Bolokhoveni's association with the Vlachs should not be mentioned in the lead? Please take into account that this is a quite widely accepted theory in Romania. Borsoka (talk) 17:27, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Borsoka, I think it is fine if the theory is in the article somewhere, but as is, it's duplicated. Perhaps we can just keep one mention, otherwise it seems redundant. Skirts89 17:40, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
Please read WP:LEAD: the lead should summarize the core of the main text. It cannot be achieved without "duplications". Borsoka (talk) 00:49, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Bolohoveni land from A.V. Boldur description.PNG
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:09, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

An IP user is adding a quote from Choniates's chronicle about the Vlachs' presence at the borders of Halych. As per WP:NOR and WP:SOURCE, the connection between Choniates's Vlachs and the Bolokhovians should be verified with a reference to reliable sources. Borsoka (talk) 01:30, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

This article does not seem to meet the standards of a GA, especially there are portions of text written by the LTA Iaaasi where the sources do not confirm what is said in the article, it is more of an association of sources over which the said user's conclusions were drawn, for example at "Etymology". Per WP:SYNTH.--Kun Kipcsak (talk) 14:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Please read what WP:SYNTH means before referring to it. Borsoka (talk) 15:16, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
I will continue to wait for other opinions, not just the predictable and defensive ones of the two contributors of the article.--Kun Kipcsak (talk) 15:38, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
If you want to receive other opinions you should quote examples. Borsoka (talk) 01:23, 7 December 2024 (UTC)