Talk:Cossacks/Archive 3

message: Genltemen, may I ask you both to format the discussion above, with dates, sigs, indents, etc. I assume that anon is user:KKonstantin. If so, please don't forget to always sign in, as it makes it easier to discuss things with you. Kuban, would you please format the discussion asap?
Now, the contention point: Cossacks vs the Orthodox Church. There is no denial that the registered Cossacks fought for the PLC as it was their duty in return to personal freedoms and regular payments. However, they fought for the state as regular military units, just as other units as well. However, the notion that Cossacks were ever protectors of Catholicism is rather novel, smells like OR and does not follow directly from the fact that they fought for the Polish king. OTOH, the notion that Cossacks were the protectors of the Orthodox Church is widespread and one can find that assertion, eg. in many historic books and in Britannica too. So, while one car rightly say about the service of the Registered Cossacks to the Catholic dominated Polish State (and not just against Turks but also against the Russia-leaning Cossack factions), in no way this implies that Cossacks were defenders of the Catholicism. 
Anonymous, please log in before editing/discussing this further. KK, please format the discussion. It is unreadable. --Irpen 03:29, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Side view to the discussion above

message: "According to Michael Kort, "During 1919 and 1920, out of a population of approximately 3 million, the Bolshevik regime killed or deported an estimated 300,000 to 500,000 Cossacks"
This is total bullshit. The number of deported Cossacks did not exceed 45,000. This book reveals deportations in the history of Soviet Russia:
http://www.memo.ru/history/deport/add1.htm
English translation:
http://www.online-translator.com/url/tran_url.asp?lang=en&direction=re&template=General&transliterate=&autotranslate=on&url=http://www.memo.ru/history/deport/add1.htm#_VPID_44
Nowhere will you find a figure there which exceeds 45,000 Cossacks.
*What was the total number of Cossacks (Don and Kuban) during 1917-1941?--Alex Kov 16:37, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outrageous Claim 

message: I would suggest reclassfying the Cossacks as a social class rather than trying to sort out what modern ethnic term is best fitted for the Cossacks (as KK pointed out - the meaning of the words "Russian", "Ukrainian" and Cossak" has changed drastically in the past century). I think the Samurai are a sound historical parallel, or at the very least a good comparison to use to explain the situation to Western readers who most likely can't follow the arguments on this page.
24.62.63.6 01:24, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Possible Workaround for the Ethnicity Issue 

message: How is cossack spelled in Russian? Козак?  Is this not the same word for those from Kazakhstan? --NEMT 14:53, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is spelled as Казак and it has NO relationship to Kazakhs and Kazakhstanis. --Kuban Cossack  13:00, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Russian spelling?

message: Recent edit summary: there were no Russian or Ukrainian Cossacks before the emergence of national states.
I don't know about the historical national identity of the Don Cossacks, but I believe most Zaporozhian nobles were Orthodox Ruthenians or Polonized Catholic Ruthenians.  They weren't called Ukrainians at the time, but Ukraïna was their poetic homeland, and this is the same nation that was called Ruski by the Poles and Malorossy by the Russians.  Keeping in mind that the modern idea of national self-identity didn't exist anywhere at the time, calling them Ukrainian Cossacks today is appropriate. —Michael Z. 2006-10-22 17:06 Z
:Disagree on one point, Muscouvy did not call Malorossy Zaporozhian Cossacks, but they called Malorussy non-Cossacks Ukrainians. I.e. dwellers of the Sloboda, Volyn Podolia...etc. Ethnically they still considered them to Ruthenians, just like the Don Cossacks. With Don, it was always the same Orthodox Ruthenians. So ethinically there are more similarities between the modern Kuban and Don Cossacks then there are between Don Cossacks and Velikorussians. The same can be said wrt to Malorussians (ethnic Ukrainians) and Kuban. In such  a case I do agree with Michael about calling Zaporozhian Cossacks Ukrainian, and the same can be said about Ryzan and Don Cossacks being Russian. In this case I propose to keep the article the way it always was before the recent attacks, as there is no POV since Russian Cossack impact on history (and I am not saying European Asian or whatever, i am just generalising) is greater since the mid 13th century until present day. Whilst Ukrainian Cossack impact on history ends with the dissolution of the Zaporozhian Host. --Kuban Cossack  17:19, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  National identity 

message: Cossacks were not our usual peasants, of course, but I wonder if :Category:Cossack uprisings should be a subcat of :Category:Peasant revolts?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  03:48, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Most cossack uprisings were also peasant revolts, true. But was this true in all cases? --Irpen 05:37, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, szlachta did considered them 'peasants' :/ My goal here is not to force a definition, but to make browsing relevant categories easier.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  20:10, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Peasants...

message: According to Michael Kort, "During 1919 and 1920, out of a population of approximately 3 million, the Bolshevik regime killed or deported an estimated 300,000 to 500,000 Cossacks"
There is no basis to this. First, Kort is incorrect about the population of the Cossacks. In 1917, there were 4.5 million Cossacks of which a whopping 300 thousand served in the the Tsar's imperialist war. Next, Kort's claim that 300 to 500 Cossacks were killed or deported has no basis. Pavel Polyan's study on Soviet deportations shows that only 45 thousand Cossacks were deported in 1920. Since a large portion of the Cossacks brutally opposed the soviet workers' councils, they would of course endure casualties but there is no evidence that they endured 250 to 450 thousand losses since the White armies and Poles combined endured only some 200 thousand casualties. I'm afraid this will have to be removed since its lacks any factual basis in favour of Pavel Polyan's archival study. 
Furthermore, the Cossacks were oppressive, brutal, imperialist lackies. In the Don, Cossacks were only 42% of the population yet owned 65% of the land. In contrast, the oppressed Kalmyks owned only 4% of the land. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.110.129.77 (talk) 20:53, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  300 to 500 thousand Cossacks killed 

message: I know we already have a bunch of good pictures on this article but I just started digitizing some of my old family Cossack photos and was curious if anyone thought they would be of any use to this article or any other Cossack article. You can see all of them here if you'd like. Some of them are poor quality and need some retouching which I could do if the pic is wanted for an article. I'll be uploading more periodically onto Commons so just ask if there is a specific picture you want to use, I have dozens more so ask I'll see what I can come up with.~ Joe Jklin (T C) 22:44, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Your pictures are great even if we end up not using them all. First, there are other articles. Second, there is always room in Commons. Just an advice, please remember to give dates of the pictures you upload. --Irpen 02:27, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I've uploaded them all to Commons (more will be coming). I don't know all the dates exactly, but have tried to at least give a decade. ~ Joe Jklin (T C) 19:04, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures 

message: The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
*The lead of this article may be too long, or may contain too many paragraphs.  Please follow guidelines at WP:LEAD; be aware that the lead should adequately summarize the article.
*The lead is for summarizing the rest of the article, and should not introduce new topics not discussed in the rest of the article, as per WP:LEAD. Please ensure that the lead adequately summarizes the article.See footnote
*Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.
*There may be an applicable infobox for this article.See footnote (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
*Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally should not repeat the title of the article. For example, if the article was Ferdinand Magellan, instead of using the heading ==Magellan's journey==, use ==Journey==.
*Please reorder/rename the last few sections to follow guidelines at Wikipedia:Guide to layout. 
*There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view.  {{#if:allege|**might be weasel words, and should be provided with proper citations
*Please make the spelling of English words consistent with either American or British spelling, depending upon the subject of the article. Examples include: neighbour (B) (American: neighbor), organize (A) (British: organise), organise (B) (American: organize), recognize (A) (British: recognise), recognise (B) (American: recognize), colonise (B) (American: colonize), ization (A) (British: isation), isation (B) (American: ization),  grey (B) (American:  gray), curb (A) (British: kerb).
*Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
**Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant -  “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
*Avoid using contractions like: didn't.
*As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space inbetween. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]
*Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.See footnote
You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, ~ Joe Jklin (T C) 21:59, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  AndyZ peerreviewer 

message: I wanted to post here first to let people who watch this page know that I plan on making some format changes for organizational and readability reasons. I haven't removed any major portion of the text, maybe just a few redundancies here and there, and will be adding some text. This also will include a template that I created (feel free to fix that up too it needs work, especially the image). You can see that at Template:Cossacks. I still want to make a few minor changes before I put it up so for the sake of the history of the page I have been working on it in my sandbox. Anyone can edit my sandbox so make changes if you want. I don't think this will raise any issues I just wanted to make sure that nobody freaked out when they saw the changes. Thanks.~ Joe Jklin (T C) 06:24, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you remove that Russian Empire coat of arms image from the Template? It might be appropriate for Russian cossacks, but it is not  appropriate in relation to Ukrainian cossacks. --Tigga en 08:06, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the coat of arms but to be honest it was just a temporary fix until I could find a better image. The template looks somewhat blank now so if you or anyone else has a good alternative let me know or add it yourself. Same thing goes for any articles which should be in the template.~ Joe Jklin (T C) 08:11, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I added a new image but still am not really satisfied with it. Feel free to revert or replace it with your own. ~ Joe Jklin (T C) 08:34, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Format changes 

message: Comment by banned user removed
I have no idea whether any of the above is true or not, but why are comments on the talk page being deleted?radek 05:06, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The comments on the talk page keep getting deleted because they are being posted by a sockpuppet of a banned user.--Iosef 18:50, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Decossackization 

message: The long tag was on this previously, but the article is only 43 KB, which sounds fine as far as size goes, and it seems quite a bit has been split off into more specific subarticles already.  A "real" encyclopedia would likely have an even longer entry, albeit it with articles like the History article integrated in.
Anyway, if this article could use more splitting, there's always the  tag.  I'm inclined to agree with a comment on the  talk page which suggests that that template should only go on talk pages, if anywhere.  SnowFire 23:11, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this article too long? 

message: An anonymous user repeatedly removes the fragment about the human losses of cossacks during collectivization. While the exact numbers of human losses seem to be a subject of discussions the numbers in the articles are at least referenced. If you have better sources please provide them. If there are problems with the source please indicate them. Otherwise the fact is relevant and sourced and we simply cannot remove it Alex Bakharev 09:49, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Collectivization 

message: Did any significant Cossack group lived outside PLC before the Treaty of Andrusovo?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  20:48, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Don Cossacks, Ryazan Cossacks, we had Yermak already make his conquest of Siberia. Terek Cossacks, Ural Cossacks, Astrakhan Cossacks. The answer is YES! --Kuban Cossack 22:43, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ryazans need stub or redirect. Would you have any population estimates on early numbers for the others? The relevant sections seem very stubbish.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  15:06, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cossacks outside PLC before Andrusovo 

message: Shouldn't this be under :Cossacks - plural for people is our usuall naming convention (Ukrainians, Russians, Poles, Tatars, etc.)?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  15:03, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, I am going to move this article if there is no objection soon.~ Joe Jklin (T C) 03:41, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This was my exact thought, as well. What's odd is that the article has survived under this title since its creation in June 2002! (There's been a redirect from :Cossacks since April 2003.) Hard to believe that nobody made the change before now. In any event, it has my blessing, so I think you should feel free to make the change. Cgingold 12:41, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Name change to Cossacks

message: At the same time many attempts were made to increase the Cossack impact on Russian society and throughout the 1990s many regional authorities agreed to hand over some local administration and policing duties to the Cossacks. However in April 2005, Russian President Vladimir Putin introduced a bill "On the State Service of the Russian Cossacks" (O gosudarstvennoy sluzhbe rossiyskogo kazachestva) to the State Duma, which was passed in the first reading on May 18, 2005. For the first time in decades the Cossacks were recognised as not only a distinct ethnocultural entity but also as a potent military service. Although their full ambition to administer wholly the territory stretching from Transdniester all the way along the steppe to the Ural River might be distant, the bill made a significant step towards achieving it.
I've read the law and I did not really see any increased military role for Cossacks. Yes, the State and the Cossack Organisations participate in patriotic education of cossack children. Yes, cossack conscripts are sent to units of primarily cossack heritage. Yes, the law foresees that the Cossacks can be involved in various law enforcement duties. Yes, they have the right to wear various uniforms that are approved by the President of Russia.
However. There are also such things in Russia as voluntary youth patrols, military cadet organisations, patriotic organisations and others that often take on similar "duties". I do not speak of various private uniforms and all that.
As such, in what way does this law promote a Cossack State from the Dniestr to the Ural? Or this law a firs step to the return of the Imperial way of organising Cossack Hosts? Can anyone please explain? Russoswiss 02:54, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I put a ref to an article about Putin seeking help from Cossacks and how it is a perceived step. Here is a quick link Putin sends for Cossacks in fight against terrorism. Hope this helps~ Joe Jklin (T C) 00:31, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Military Service

message: Hi, I'm the GA reviewer of this article. If you have any questions don't hesitate to ask them. You can post questions either on this page, or if you want me to get it sooner, you could post them on my talk page. Daimanta 22:57, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: GA review (see here for criteria)
#It is reasonably well written.
#:a (prose):  b (MoS): 
#It is factually accurate and verifiable.
#:a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
#It is broad in its coverage.
#:a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
#It follows the neutral point of view policy.
#:Fair representation without bias: 
#It is stable.
#:No edit wars etc.: 
#It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
#:a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 
#Overall:
#:Pass/Fail: 
This article needs a lot of improvement if it wants to reach GA level. Regards, Daimanta 00:36, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA review 

message: Although it really does border on WP:LAME is there any particular reason why include Ukrainian prior to Russian? The word itslef is of Circassian origin. What is important is that I have suggested that if we write about the parrallel time periods with Ukrainian first, and then Russian, before re-unting them in 18th century, then we have Russian first, Ukrainain second in the lead? Would you like it vice versa, fine by me. --Kuban Cossack 14:45, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Was there any particular reason for you changing the status quo and starting the revert war? If you were concerned about this issue, you should have started the discussion instead of sneakily changing it. You know better than that. Knowing your fabled aversion to anything Ukrainian, I do not insist on including any modern language pronunciation in the lead. Let's include the Tatar quazaq and leave it at that. The word originated from there, so let's remove politics from it. --Hillock65 15:22, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: From WP:NCGN: quote:Relevant foreign language names (one used by at least 10% of sources in the English language or is used by a group of people which used to inhabit this geographical place) are permitted and should be listed in alphabetic order of their respective languages, R does come before U...:)--Kuban Cossack 20:06, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Besides the Russian name appeared before the Ukrainian one (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cossacks&diff=prev&oldid=138317157). So the status quo was changed to the Ukrainian-first version. Alæxis¿question? 21:11, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: lead

message: i would like to read about the martial art(s) developed by the Cossacks.  I saw it performed in the Go Warrior TV show.  Is this art different than systema? Tkjazzer (talk) 06:34, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It is stylized as a Cossack art, but was developed quite recently. There is very little about it here. There is more on the Ukrainian page of that article. --Hillock65 (talk) 12:13, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I do not understand the "ukranian page."  Does that mean the Ukranian version of wikipedia? Thank you for your time.  Should we link Combat Hopak in this article? Tkjazzer (talk) 00:35, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  martial art 

message: A source attributed to this name was inserted in the article. I failed to find any information on this historian. There is however a Russian journalist Alexander Sidorov, purveyor of Russian slang. Can someone, please clarify? Thanks. --Hillock65 (talk) 16:48, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well with a surname that ranks in the top 10 common Russian surmanes and an equally common first name, I would think that narrowing down the amount of Sidorovs there are is quite an impossible task. Although the same site shows a number of his works . How about adding refrence for the text you are reverting?--Kuban Cossack 17:10, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Then, perhaps you should call him by his present name Fima Zhiganets? I advise you to read again about WP:SOURCE and especially WP:V, please pay special attention to academic, published sources, not articles written by a journalist specializing in prison jargon. As to the other sources, given your tendency to support your POV statements with unknown and nonacademic sources, I have serious doubts about Shambarov source too. Would you care to provide more information? Thanks. --Hillock65 (talk) 17:34, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  There is no need to be paranoid about sources, moreover it seems all of the text I insert you have to question, per WP:AX that is quite silly, moreover what is it exactly that you find POV in my additions? I think there is simple logic, the area was inhabited by different people prior to slavs moving there. Are you arguing now that the regions were unhabited and noone ever dwelled there, well there is certain archeological evidence that would dissapoint you there. Or just have a look at maps of 1st century all the way through to the 12th. In both cases you will find someone living there, and they were not Slavs. Now considering that it is geography and the enviroment that determines the lifestyle of the people there is nothing ORish or certainly POV here. --Kuban Cossack 17:41, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Please mind WP:NPA, consider this a warning. You are not new to WP and are quite aware that everything you insert into established articles have to be supported by published, academic sources. You instead, give reference to a prison jargon journalist, who happened to write an article on Don Cossacks. Once again, consult WP:V. As to the other source, I have no way of verifying it, so I tagged the section appropriately. Please do not insert fringe theories, or I will have to refer it to Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard. This article has been written by a number of editors using established academic sources. Now you are inserting fringe theories to suit your POV. Please do not wage revert wars. I know you feel energized after a lengthy break, but it was so peaceful in your absence. --Hillock65 (talk) 17:58, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Please mind WP:NPA yourself, and you failed to answer what exactly about my additions do you not like? What exactly do you consider fringe theory? Please point it out. --Kuban Cossack 18:04, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

text:  Where did you find an insult in my last post? Did I call you paranoid or was it you? As far as the fringe theories, please do not insert stuff about Kassogs or other ethnic groups. Their relation to Cossacks has to be established on the basis of respectable, published, academic sources, preferrably in English so they can be verified by other editors. According to all established literature, Cossacks do not represent a separate ethnic group and never have, they were comprised of many ethnicities who assumed this name later. --Hillock65 (talk) 18:12, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: http://cossackia.com/ its all there, published in 1968 in California... Happy? The word they use is Kassak, which Shambarov reffers as a version of the Circassian Kassog (also gives versions such as Kasag, Kazog etc.). There is no fringe theory in that, and yes it is true that the pre-mongolian groups were indeed a mixture. --Kuban Cossack 18:27, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who is Alexander Sidorov 

message: Would it make sense to have a :Template:Cossack-stub? If so, it should be proposed at WP:STUBSORT.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  00:03, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Cossack stub