Talk:False Dmitry I

message: I don't see any sources cited anywhere. Red Plum 22:47, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources, anyone?

message: THIS REQUEST WAS REJECTED BECAUSE IT IS NOT CLEAR WHAT THE CONSENSUS IS. Philip Baird Shearer 19:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The standard transliteration is Dmitry. This is the spelling used by Britannica, for example. Please find some more useful activity in Wikipedia. Pointless moves are no good. --Ghirla -трёп- 15:01, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "More useful activity?"  "Pointless moves?"  For someone with "a zero tolerance policy towards trolls on Wikipedia," you sure have an interesting way of framing a discussion. Personally, I don't like the fact that the name "Dmitri," is spelled five different ways in Wikipedia, so I am trying to clean it up.  Yes, you are right, Britannica does use "Dmitry," but Americana, Colombia U. Press, American Heritage Dictionary, the BBC, the New York Times, and the London Shostakovich Orchersta, as well as many others, use "Dmitri."  Why not check the link you provided---Dmitry.  Most of the articles there are linked to "Dmitri's."  Dmitri Shostakovich and the False Dmitri have the same name, Britannica's use of the more "antique" transliteration notwhithstanding.   --VonWoland 00:42, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Excellent idea!  I have started a general "Dmitri" discussion on the Dmitri talk page, for those that  disagree with my choice of "Dmitri" as a standard Wikipedia rendering of that name.  Meanwhile, if the objection is to move any specific historical "Dmitri's" that can be addressed here.  Whether we are talking about Sychev or Dmitri of Suzdal, it's the same name in Russian: why should there be four English variants?  --VonWoland 06:17, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested Move 10 June 2006

message: Acording to the Wikipedia:Guidelines for the spelling of names of Polish rulers, I am afraid it is Sigmund. I peronally prefer Zygmunt, but I'd be against rv him to that on any pages not specifically about Poland. I suggest instead of a rv war we have a serious discussion on that and a vote. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 10:48, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sigmund or Zygmunt 

message: began to plot against him, accusing him of homosexuality, - can anyone prove this? I just cannot believe.
: Dmitry was accused of having sodomized young prince Khvorostinin, who followed him day and night. See here, for example. --Ghirlandajo 11:40, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Various sources confirm this. Dmitry I was accused of almost everything one can imagine by his opponents. Good example of 17th century propaganda... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 18:16, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  The text should say, as it is, "accused of" since a notable allegations that played a role in mobilizing avertion to him. It shouldn't and doesn't say whether true or not. Also, "accused" for that time is a correct word for the attitude to homosexuality. Propaganda? May very well be. The fact that his opponents would use anything that could possibly work could also be added in appropriate form. --Irpen 18:41, August 14, 2005 (UTC)
What's the problem? The boy obviously liked him. Some guys really like to be bottoms. To them, it may be addictive. Let the boy decide whomhe wants in his arse, not those ignorant masses. Waimea 21:27, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Homosexuality of Dmitry I 

message: What happened to first proposing a move in discussion?  Furthermore, I understand why Dmitry might not be the best name, but Demetrius??  That form is not used in any modern sources. I would like to see some justification for using it. Balcer 13:13, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps a better place to discuss this would be at Talk:Dmitry?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  17:37, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ghirlandajo's move 

message: I noticed that someone reverted the changed I made. Pity. Why anyone would get rid of a link is a mystery. Also, the first false Dmitry wasn't a pretender. He was ACTUALLY CZAR. This is unique in the history of the Common Era of date numbering. Therefore, I'm going to change it to imposter.User_talk:Ericl 317 Nov. 2006 (UTC)
Indeed, he was an impostor, not a pretender.  The use of "pretender" probably arises out of a misunderstanding of what the term "pretender" means.  john k 21:30, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Dmitri's achievement

message: The current intro mentions the title "Dmitriy II". Wouldn't that be "Dmitriy IV" ? (the first three being Dmitry of Pereslavl, Dmitry of Tver and Dmitry Donskoy) Jean-Jacques Georges (talk) 15:24, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The current title is wrong. He was never named "Dmitry II" in his life or in Russian historiography. ouital77 (talk) 04:27, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dmitriy II 

message: The IP editor 129.237.28.28 added this to the article but did not provide a source: "A recent study of False Dmitri's DNA has demonstrated that he was not false after all. He was in fact the biological son of Ivan the Terrible." A cursory web search didn't show any news about a DNA test, and the addition may well be vandalism, considering the IP's other recent edits. But I thought I should note the addition here. A. Parrot (talk) 19:29, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  DNA test? 

message: Add my voice to the chorus requesting a move (although I'm a bit too busy to corral the multipage mess this is going to be).
The historic name of these people was False Demetrius or Pseudo-Demetrius and that needs to go into the lead. At present, it seems like a toss-up: False Dmitry is a bit more common in particular but Dmitri remains on top in general use. You guys can figure out which you like more. Do we really not have a house style on which romanization of Russian to use? (For what it's worth, the conversation above is off: the historic Britannica use was Dmitri, too.)
No one uses "Dmitriy" except this page. It's got to go. — LlywelynII 15:05, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been bold and made the move, and consequent text changes.  --  Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 22:47, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Move

message: Cyrillic isn't a language. Use  or  for the first instance and  for the ones after that. I'd imagine the Russian word for "imposter" is probably not actually topical (or belongs at the article on the group of imposters), but I'll leave that up to you guys. — LlywelynII 15:15, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Sidenote

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on False Dmitry I. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100528071504/http://www.aquinas.edu/history/research.html to http://www.aquinas.edu/history/research.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:58, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Both the lead and the "Sovereigns of the Vladimir-Suzdal Principality, Grand Principality of Moscow, Tsardom of Russia and the Russian Empire" list at the bottom refer to False Dmitry I as "Dmitry I". Are there any sources for this? If he had a regnal number as Dmitry, it would at least have been II (after Dmitry Donskoy), although I suspect he didn't have a number at all as Dmitry, as numbers were not typically used at the time of the reign (he would've been known as Dmitry Ivanovich, as is also stated in the lead) and after his death he was widely considered an impostor and not an actual Dmitry. The extensive Russian Wikipedia article on False Dmitry I never makes any mention of him as "Dmitry I," either during his reign or afterward; he is mentioned there only as "Dmitry" (with no number) or "False Dmitry I" (Лжедмитрий I; note that in the Russian "false Dmitry" is one word and thus the "I" here means "first of the false Dmitrys" rather than "someone falsely claiming to be Dmitry I"). 167.24.104.150 (talk) 14:52, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed mentions of "Dmitry I" from the article per above (I am the same editor as the one who wrote the above post); the "Sovereigns..." template used at the bottom of the article had already been updated by someone else. 67.11.86.2 (talk) 22:05, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dmitry I? 

message: In the 1911 Encyclopedia, Bain narrates that Dmitry publicly converted to Catholicism in Kraków on 17 April 1604. This article currently suggests he was still assumed to be Orthodox, at least by default, at the time of his marriage in 1606, and neither source suggests any intermediate convenient "conversions". Bain is sometimes criticized for laxity, but he does provide four sources, two of which are about Catholicism. Can anyone access a primary source? David Brooks (talk) 20:33, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Catholic conversion?