Talk:Novogrudok

message: The history of the "second prong" of the fork is in Navahrudak/old article. `'mikkanarxi 16:48, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Fork

message: Wikipedia is not a place to evaluate historiography, so I've changed wording that disputes lithianian  historian works, keeping all the statements intact. 
Truthseeker 85.5 - it's not a place of national pride or disgust. It's aplace for facts - i you care to participate, provide reference to Maciej Strijkowki's work, and do not delete facts, you don't like - for example that stone castle was built in 14 century.--Lokyz 19:45, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't "like" or dislike any "facts" related to this settlement. What makes you think that I don't like castles built in the 14th century? I must confess that I don't like "the Mendog's castle", because it doesn't make much sense from a grammatical point of view. --Ghirla -трёп- 11:07, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Such statements as and make it the capital of his expanding state is only proof of editors lack of skills in this period. The best thing that contemporary Mindaugas docs suggests is Datum in Lettowia in curia nostra anno domini MCCLIII mense Julio; =Latava stream + hill fort.= some location - capital(?) M.K. 09:47, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I can't parse this gibberish. Could you articulate your arguments (if there are any) more intelligibly? --Ghirla -трёп- 11:07, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

text: So the pagans had a crown, a bishop, and a cathedral? I was not aware of that. --Ghirla -трёп- 14:50, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: you made statement about Mindaugas case and I answer that he built/ordered cathedral, organized bishop matters etc. for his coronation, a little bit more when - meaning and importance of "coronation" is not very clear M.K. 15:07, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ghirlandajo 

message: i don't think it's appropriate to put paragraphs about "old belorussian" written laguage and it's influence on GDL under a topic for a solely city. Nor the language, neither the written word was invented in this city, and seeing it as a former capital is quite disputable.
And "short version of GDL" IMHO does not fit here either, there is a whole article about that.
--Lokyz 23:15, 2005 July 19 (UTC)
I agree. BTW, same story about Navahradak being capital is also repeated on Belarus article. I think these disputes about various national ways to present history of GDL should be on article Grand Duchy of Lithuania and everyone who wants to read more about the Duchy would click the link. DeirYassin 09:46, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  About "old belorusian" 

message: This town has a rather rich Jewish history, e.g. it was the home to Yechiel Michel Epstein and a yeshiva of the Mussar Movement. JFW | T@lk 08:41, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK. I added the Novardok yeshiva and Rabbi Epstein. -- -- --  22:59, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jewish history 

message: Novogrodek is correct English form of that Belarusian city (Navahradak or Navahrudak in Belarusian language). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mibelz on November 15, 2006
:According to which authoritative source is this claim of the "correct English form" based? -- Deborahjay 14:58, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Novogrodek 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Navahrudak. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.world-gazetteer.com/wg.php?x=&men=gcis&lng=en&des=wg&geo=-43&srt=npan&col=abcdefghinoq&msz=1500&pt=c&va=&srt=pnan
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110727031840/http://viduramziu.lietuvos.net/socium/novogrudok-ru.htm to http://viduramziu.lietuvos.net/socium/novogrudok-ru.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070614234631/http://viduramziu.lietuvos.net/etno/gudavicius-en.htm to http://viduramziu.lietuvos.net/etno/gudavicius-en.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) 09:34, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Navahrudak. 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/20100614044603/http://gorod.novogrudok.by/history/ to http://gorod.novogrudok.by/history/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161005204524/http://www.graves.by/cemeteries/novogrudok-christian-cemetery.html to http://www.graves.by/cemeteries/novogrudok-christian-cemetery.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) 19:53, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (February 2018) 

message: Sentence (this: "Some researchers identified Novogrudok as the first capital of Lithuania...") in this article includes references to non-online English books, thus it is not possible to verify if they really support such dubious statements which are not supported by reliable sources such as Encyclopedia Britannica. Because of that, it is certain that these non-online sources were added on purpose to defend WP:OR. The claim that Novogrudok was capital of Lithuania is supported mostly by Belarusian tourism websites (definitely fails as WP:V, WP:RS in an encyclopedia: Wikipedia:Here to build an encyclopedia) and by some questionable late sources (which obviously can be false and does not automatically qualify as truth, especially Belarusian sources which often includes original research and the opposite theories about the Lithuanian history, thus are not recognized internationally). We even do not know the exact location of the Lithuanian King Mindaugas capital city (Voruta is the only mention and it has many, many possible locations; some theories even suggests that he had no capital at all), so attempts to prove that somebody exactly knew where Mindaugas was crowned while writing the late sources is even more ridiculous and is an obvious case of WP:OR (late authors were simply guessing and that is not an encyclopedia-level material), so pushing of a 19th century illustration Mindoŭh. Міндоўг (1824).jpg into this article, which depicts the crowning of Mindaugas, is a yet another obvious case of WP:OR. Consequently, I request to completely and permanently remove all the dubious, non-verifiable claims from this article because articles of Wikipedia (an encyclopedia) is not an internet forum where we could discuss pseudoscience theories. Ping user Sabbatino who was involved in this dispute for a long time already.
These articles of Encyclopedia Britannica (the most reliable encyclopedia) do not mention such pseudo theories and I can't see why Wikipedia should include them as it also seeks equally high-level reliability standards: https://www.britannica.com/place/Lithuania, https://www.britannica.com/place/grand-duchy-of-Lithuania, https://www.britannica.com/biography/Mindaugas. But the first Britannica's article does mention other recognized capitals of Lithuania: Kernavė, Trakai, Vilnius.
Discussion at the AN about this: Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard#Original research at Novogrudok since 17 June 2021. -- Pofka (talk) 16:25, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article includes dubious statements: Novogrudok never was capital of Lithuania and no reliable sources support statements that Mindaugas was crowned in Novogrudok 

message: Quotes from sources. 
Due to the religious fervor and proselytism of an active part of urban elites, cultural activities of some emigrants from the Balkans (in particular a well-known metropolite Gregory Camblak), evident tolerance of Lithuanian power, Orthodoxy tended to make a triumphal march in the land of Navahrudak in the fourteenth-fifteenth century.  As early as the first half of the fourteenth-century, the positions of Orthodoxy in the region were considered so strong that a Lithuanian Orthodox metropolitan seat was established albeit temporarily in Navahrudak at that time. A result was significant: by the middle of the sixteenth century there were about 650 Orthodox parish churches in the newly established palatinate of Navahrudak. A city’s particular ecclesiastic status was sealed by the establishment of an Orthodox bishopric seat. Also the Orthodox Metropolitan of Kyiv and All Rus actually resided in Navahrudak. (Heroes and Villains: Politics and Historical Memory in Late Medieval East Europe The Case Study of the Land of Navahrudak, P. 33–34) --Лобачев Владимир (talk) 15:54, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Metropolitanate of Lithuania|Orthodox metropolitan]] in Navahrudak 

message: Quotes from sources.
He then proceeded to conquer his homeland in the 1240s, rather than the other way around: that is, Mindaugas attacked Lithuania from Navahrudak, rather than attacking Navahrudak from Lithuania (Andrew Wilson. Belarus. 2 Litva)  
support from the people of Navahrudak, Mindaugas conquered Lithuania – the enclave of the Baltic population on the Belarusian lands – and subjugated it to himself, ie to the land of Navahrudak. (The Discourse on Identity in a Global Consumption–Based Society: Between Myth and Reality) 
The need to resist the pressure of Tatars and German crusaders forced the people of Belarus to consolidate around the rapidly expanding principality with the capital of Navahrudak (Novogrudok) ruled by a Lithuanian prince Mindaugas. By the middle of the 14th century, all the territory of modern Belarus was attached to The Great Principality of Lithuania, Russia and Zhamoytiya (GPL). By the 15th century, the territory of the GPL expanded from Brest to Smolensk and from Baltic to the Black Sea. The origin of the Belarusian language, the Belarusian culture and the Belarusian nation itself should be looked for in the GPL where 90% of the population were Slavonic and the state language was old Belarusian. The current borders of Belarus in the East, the South and the West almost coincide with that of the GPL in 16th century. (THE NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR SOVIET AND EAST EUROPEAN RESEARCH, 1994) --Лобачев Владимир (talk) 16:23, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Novogrudok is the first capital of GDL 

message: What do you think about creating an article focused on the topic of the WW2 ghetto located in this town? GhettoInvestigator (talk) 15:18, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Novohrudek ghetto 

message: === Requested move 6 March 2024 ===
:The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: no consensus. The RM discussion boiled down to the following idea: if "Novogrudok" is the WP:COMMONNAME, it should remain the article title, but if not, then "Navahrudak" is preferable per WP:BELARUSIANNAMES. However, participants were divided over whether "Novogrudok" was the common name; with comparable numbers and similar strength of argument, I don't see the debate as having resulted in a consensus in either direction. (closed by non-admin page mover)  ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 16:16, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Novogrudok →  – Belarusian is the native language of Belarus, so the name should be transliterated from that native language. --W (talk) 13:06, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

text: I've requested closure for this at Wikipedia:Closure requests. Natg 19 (talk) 05:02, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Navahrudak is the right transliteration from the native languge of Belarus 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: no consensus. The RM discussion boiled down to the following idea: if "Novogrudok" is the WP:COMMONNAME, it should remain the article title, but if not, then "Navahrudak" is preferable per WP:BELARUSIANNAMES. However, participants were divided over whether "Novogrudok" was the common name; with comparable numbers and similar strength of argument, I don't see the debate as having resulted in a consensus in either direction. (closed by non-admin page mover)  ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 16:16, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Novogrudok →  – Belarusian is the native language of Belarus, so the name should be transliterated from that native language. --W (talk) 13:06, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

text: I've requested closure for this at Wikipedia:Closure requests. Natg 19 (talk) 05:02, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 6 March 2024