Talk:Polish invasion of Russia

message: Let this disambig be, although 120 Google hits doesn't prove this concept is popular, it's definelty not worth the effort of discussing it. For a tiny disambig, such a large discussion page is...foolish, simply. Go do some positive work - if youw want to play with redirects and disambigs, why not help with something like Talk:Boleslaus_II_of_Poland?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 02:46, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gigantic waste of time 

message: You reverted my changes to this page. Please explain why. As I've mentioned there, Kievan Rus is not Russia, which was formed several centuries later, out of part of Rus only, which was, additionally, not subject to the said invasion of 1018, which concerned lands that are Ukraine now. Do you disagree with these basic historical facts? As far as I know, reverts are to be used with care. Please refrain from such actions in fields that are not your expertise. If you do not provide any convincing arguments for your revert, I will reintroduce my changes. Yours, Heresson (talk) 11:23, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: - this is a disambiguation page, i.e., a page for navigation between articles. If something was called in publications "invasion of Russia" then it is listed here. Please keep in mind that in English language the word Rus is routinely translated as Russia. Staszek Lem (talk) 16:06, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see any difference if it's a page or disambiguation page. A page should provide proper information, and calling Kievan Rus "Russia" is not correct. A colloquial and erroneous use should not be basis of any wiki article. Especially that it's a minority one. You mentioned google search. Lets see: erroneous Kievan Russia 25 300 results, correct Kievan Rus: 764 000 results. Kievan Ruthenia alternative: 1 640. Let us add that up: 790940 altogether. Only 3,3% of people called this state "Russia". This is clearly a minority usage, compared to "Rus". Far from being "routine", which is what you claimed. And it's factually incorrect. Unless you provide a proof from a respected and up-to-date dictionary showing one of the meaning of Russia is Rus, or from a respected up-to-date (that is not from before the 70s or so) encyclopaedia using "Kievan Russia" instead, or apart from, Kievan Rus, I will re-introduce my changes. If you, however, produce some actual evidence to back up your claim, I will simply add a description to this disambiguation page mentioning that while a minority calls it Russia, it was actually Rus. But this would clutter the page, so I think deleting this link is a better choice. Also for other reasons: calling Rus/Ruthenia "Russia" can be seen as perpetuating 19th century Russian cultural imperialism towards Belarusians and Ukrainians and Rusyns, as well as it is making people believe that Russia is a direct (and only) heritor of the Kievan Rus. Which is misleading. Yours, Heresson (talk) 09:12, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: If you do not see the difference, then you probably have to learn Wikipedia rules better. It does not matter that "Rus" is not Russia. I know this rather well. The point is that one may find them used synonymously regardless google count ratios, which, by the way, may be highly misleading.  As for "up-to-date dictionaries", this is irrelevant. People read old books as well and must know the terminology used there.  Staszek Lem (talk) 19:53, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Your edit was a lazy one. Instead of just deleting my change, you could have edited this page in order to make it less misleading. I will do it now. If you do know that Rus is not Russia, you could have added this info there, to avoid confusion. Sorry, but one may find many things used, which does not make them correct. Please provide me with examples of books using "Polish invasion of Russia" to describe 1018 expedition, if you claim there are some. Perhaps there are - I don't know. You suggest there are some, so provide a proof for your claim. Google ratios may be misleading of course, but why do you think they are misleading in this very case? Do you have any better idea to check which expression is more often used? If so, provide it. Because as of yet, you do not provide any constructive input. Your claims that current usage is not more important than antiquated one remains your own opinion. Also, according to disambiguation pages' rules, the main link should be put on top, which was not respected in this case. Yours, Heresson (talk) 22:11, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: "Boleslau ... invaded Russia" Staszek Lem (talk) 22:34, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moved out of [[user talk:Staszek Lem]]