Talk:Slavic studies

message: It should be usefull to have a better list of contemporary slavists... --Millosh 08:08, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: contemporary Slavists

message: The article states that Slavistics is interested only in language, culture and literature. That seems rather limited to me - what about history? Similary, I think that not only  linguist or philologist can classify as a Slavist. Comments?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 03:33, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, sure, just like any humanist, a Slavist could be a professional semiologist, philosopher, archaeologist or sociologist. However, the studies are primarily associated with language studies, while historical studies on early Slavs are just that: a branch of history rather than branch of Slavistics. At times such studies are considered a part of Slavistics, at times they're not. Or am I wrong? //Halibutt 04:55, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Halibutt here. --Ghirla -трёп- 08:31, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Perhaps there is confusion between more linguistic focuses slavistics and broader slavic studies, and a split is needed?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 14:48, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: history

message: Add "# Support" or "# Oppose" in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
# Support. Generaly, we don't capitalize article names, do we? Why should we vote about this? Compare English studies, German studies, etc. Daniel Šebesta (talk • contribs) 03:08, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Survey 

message: As the adjective "Slavonic" is more common in British and Irish English than "Slavic", I am adding it to the beginning of the article. Iain (talk) 22:57, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slavic and Slavonic 

message: Reference #1 has a broken link to the target document. The correct link, as of 220220, is: https://porownania.amu.edu.pl/archiwum/porownania-nr-162015/slavic-but-not-russian-invisible-and-mute/
I'm sadly illiterate in how to make this change, so I apologize in advance for the inconvenience to whomever authors the reference.
DannChic (talk) 22:31, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: The page suggests parity of the languages and cultures. 
:Russian studies dominate US universities. 
:Canada has a strong Ukrainian minority.Xx236 (talk) 07:57, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Numbers are needed 

message: This article is marked as needing wikilink cleanup. On review, it seems that the tags, while definitely omnipresent, are useful for navigating to relevant pages, and fit within the context of the article. Any more experienced editors have input here? Fireboltsilver (talk) 17:44, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  I had the same thought. I did go ahead and unlink most of the country names, on the theory that anyone interested in Slavic studies has surely heard of Russia, Ukraine and Poland. I left some that someone might want to look up, such as Galicia. I looked at all the department/institute names in the list of schools, and the ones I sampled were external links. These are, as a rule, frowned upon within the body of the article, but, as you say, this is information. My thought would be that the external links could become references to the fact that such and such a university has a Slavic studies department. This would improve compliance with the Manual of Style, retain the useful information, and open up some white space in the article. But I don't feel moved to do this particular bit of fiddly wikignoming just this moment. It is however a suggestion for anyone who comes by here before I come back. Another idea might be to see if we have a page for Germanic studies, Romance language studies, etc, and see how it is handled on those pages. It somes likely, given that this is wikipedia, that someone has instituted a policy for how to handle this. Elinruby (talk) 01:11, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

text: I feel like the tag may have been added due to the exhaustive list of related studies at the bottom, which you don't see very often. But to my eyes it is helpful and thoughtfully put together. I will go ahead and remove the tag. 184.67.135.194 (talk) 19:26, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussing Wikilink Tag