Talk:Lipka Tatars

message: I took the liberty to move this article back to Lipka Tatars. These were and are associated not only with Lithuania, but also with Poland, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and even Russia. Instead of calling them Polish Tatars or Lithuanian Tatars let's stick to the universal name, shall we? Halibutt 12:58, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A good idea, And whoever moved it without discussing, pls do not do it again. No one insists on cumbersome WP:RM every time. But to float the proposed moves at talks for a couple of days and give the interested parties to react is a common courtesy we are used to be expecting. --Irpen 20:27, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To add to this three years later, apparently there's a similar problem with the article right now. The Lipkas inhabit the lands of the former PLC, not just GDL as the article clearly states. Furthermore, they were a military caste in both PLC and GDL, not just PLC. Replacing PLC with GDL is just historical revisionism. I have no idea what the origin of the name has to do with where they reside today or which states they formed a military caste in. Or are they supposedly just "Tatarized Lithuanians"?radek (talk) 20:35, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Name

message: In the article (2008-03-15) is written: their origins can be traced back to the descendant states of the Mongol Empire of Genghis Khan - the White Horde, the Golden Horde, the Crimean Khanate and Kazan Khanate.
Article readers may be missinformed if Kipchaks / Cumans,  Cumania and even Khazaria is not mentioned. --Тимур (talk) 08:30, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin 

message: An anonymous user keeps removing the information on the Abakanowicz family. The inclusion of these individuals is cited. If there are conflicting sources they need to be cited and discussed here on the talk page. The material should not be removed. Additionally the user keeps removing the photo of the Tatar Uhlans for unknown reasons. As a result I've requested protection for this article.radek (talk) 06:32, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In my previous edid I didn't remove the picture. And as far as is publicly known, his family was also abdank which is jewish of course. It should be mentioned.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.210.193.36 (talk) 06:59, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You keep using words like "obvious" and "of course"and asserting that they have "non-Tatar names" and "they don't look Tatar to me" and their roots aren't well known. That's not how you write an encyclopedia. Provide sources. Cite'em. There already are cited sources which reference their Tatar roots. More over, as the page (weak as it is) abdank points out, it was actually a fairly common coat of arms among noble families. I don't know where you get that it was Jewish and in fact that seems highly improbable (though possible for SOME noble family). Furthermore "Abakanowicz" is actually a Tatar sounding name. Maybe the -owicz is throwing you off - often times Jewish names were Polonized in that way but so were Muslim ones. Again, I have no idea where you're getting your notions from. Finally, Bruno Abakanowicz was a close friend of Sienkiewicz, who was also of Tatar descent though that's not what matters here. I don't have the sources with me, so I haven't included it, but Sienkiewicz actually based one of the Tatar characters in one of his stories (Hania) on Bruno. The overall point is that there seems to be a good bit of evidence for their Tatar roots. Again, if you have sources which state otherwise please list them here on the talk page. Otherwise, please do not remove the info. BTW, Bohdan Khmelnytsky was probably an "Abdank" (at least according to Sienkiewicz) - somehow I doubt he was Jewish.radek (talk) 08:41, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Repeated removal of cited info 

message: I semi-protected the article for a week. Please discuss what you disagree about here. Thanks Renata (talk) 13:20, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Protected

message: Some of this is spurious although in other instances inline citations are indeed needed. In reference to the inserted tag, the source quotes a 16th century letter from  Khan Mehmed I Giray to Zygmunt Stary in which he writes: 
Żądamy od krajów lipkowskiego i polskiego 15.000 florenów polskich. Kraj lipkowski i polski obydwa znaczą dla nas to samo, a ich wrogowie są i naszymi wrogami..
Translation: We demand from the country of Poles and Lipkas 15,000 Polish florens. The country of the Lipkas and that of Poles are the same to us and their enemies our enemies.
So there you go. Also removing some of the more spurious tags.radek (talk) 20:29, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Drive by tagging 

message: It'll but it numbered to be easy to distinguish between answers and allegations.
1. Does the user who on several days did put unreferenced information know when Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was founded.?
2. Was Grand Duchy of Lithuania ruled by the Grand Duke of Lithuania Vytautas the Great at the time when Lipka  Tatars/Lithuanian Tatars were invited to Grand Duchy?
Thank you for your answers.--Lokyz (talk) 20:43, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Neither of these questions matter. The point is that they live TODAY in the former lands of the PLC. I.e., some in Poland, some in Lithuanian and some in Belarus. Also I'm having trouble understanding what "It'll but it numbered to be easy" means.radek (talk) 20:47, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Your arguments do lack WP:RS, so please stop removing the tags directed to improving the article, unless you can provide WP:RS.--Lokyz (talk) 20:51, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No they don't. My arguments are supported by other info provided in the article which talk about Lipkas living in Poland today, referenced to several sources provided. Now, obviously Poland is not a former part of Grand Duchy of Lithuania, but a former part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, hence the Lipkas today live in the former lands of the PLC not GDL. The tags were placed there not to improve the article - as sometimes their placement didn't even make sense - but rather as a form of drive-by-tagging.radek (talk) 21:24, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

text: Maybe, though I can't understand the "It'll but it numbered to be easy" part so I don't know what his intentions are. Anyway, what he's changing is the info on where the Lipkas live today. And today, they are not confined to the lands of the former GDL, but they live in lands of the former PLC.radek (talk) 21:38, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some serious questons 

message: This article seems to say that most muslim communities do not treat women as liberated because of islam but lipka tatars do because of the influence of Christianity!It is attack　on Islam and against neutrality policy of Wikipedia!114.158.78.167 (talk)
:so please fix it in the article rather than scream.Iulius (talk) 07:56, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's part of an uncited sentence, so it's completely unclear what the original source (if any) was trying to communicate. Should the sentence just be removed? 2601:244:82:4E90:59FA:600F:4774:F8CF (talk) 16:33, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: This page is highly based on Christian POV!

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Lipka Tatars. 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/20160101225136/http://db1.stat.gov.lt/statbank/selectvarval/saveselections.asp?MainTable=M3010215&PLanguage=1&TableStyle=&Buttons=&PXSId=3236&IQY=&TC=&ST=ST&rvar0=&rvar1=&rvar2=&rvar3=&rvar4=&rvar5=&rvar6=&rvar7=&rvar8=&rvar9=&rvar10=&rvar11=&rvar12=&rvar13=&rvar14= to http://db1.stat.gov.lt/statbank/selectvarval/saveselections.asp?MainTable=M3010215&PLanguage=1&TableStyle=&Buttons=&PXSId=3236&IQY=&TC=&ST=ST&rvar0=&rvar1=&rvar2=&rvar3=&rvar4=&rvar5=&rvar6=&rvar7=&rvar8=&rvar9=&rvar10=&rvar11=&rvar12=&rvar13=&rvar14=
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071029035259/http://www.galve.lt/lt/numeriai/2007062225/Trakai%20ir%20pasaulio%20paveldas/koranas to http://www.galve.lt/lt/numeriai/2007062225/Trakai%20ir%20pasaulio%20paveldas/koranas
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060105135019/http://www.szlachta.org/selim.htm to http://www.szlachta.org/selim.htm
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) 16:07, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lipka Tatars. 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/20041021205343/http://www.szlachta.org/2selim.htm to http://www.szlachta.org/2selim.htm
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) 03:45, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Lithuania Tatars which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 21:04, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: Should this article be split into the historical Polish-Lithuania Tatars and the contemporary Polish Tatars/Tatars in Poland? Right now the lead is all about history but we have the Lipka_Tatars#Present_status section. This is also related to the recent creation and ongoing renaming discussion of the Tatars in modern Lithuania article (now under the grammatically incorrect name Lithuania Tatars). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:01, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split?