Talk:Christianization of Kievan Rus'

message: Christianity was accepted at Kyiv/Kiev before the Catholic/Orthodox split.  Much of the behavior of the rulers and hierarchs around Kiev, document continued contacts with the West.  That's why the general term was used, to underline this acceptance before the creation of separate Catholic and Orthodox jurisdictions.  And this "ecumenical" behavior often continued after the Great Schism.  See all five or so links for a broad, balanced overview.
Genyo 17:57, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: the Ioakim Chronicle is cited to give the "aftermath" of the baptism of the Rus a very violent connotation.
 While violence probably existed, it is a bit shoddy to be quoting a 18th century chronicle of shady authenticity.
 Come on! Why not cite more reliable chronicles?!
--165.123.133.200 (talk) 13:45, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Ioakim Chronicle!

message: Dunking of Kiev was but an episode of the Baptism of Kievan Rus' as a whole. The whole idea of Vladimir was to christianize the whole state. And there is much more to be said about this important process. Vladimir dunked Novgorod and many others as well, by the way. So I suggest to expand the article and move it to Baptism of Kievan Rus'. (Of course, if someone dares to write a detailed account on the Kiev dunk, welcome...) Votes? Mikkalai 00:51, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Baptism of Kievan Rus 

message: Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style: "If possible, make the title the subject of the first sentence of the article...". Logically the article must start with the words "Baptism of Kievan Rus'". If this article is about the baptism of Kiev, as Ghirlandajo suggests (the name of the article does not reflect its content), then the article must be moved to the appropriate title. Beit Or 06:47, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wouldn't make a fuzz at the moment. This is a minor point. When I have time, I will write sections about the baptism of areas other than Kiev. --Ghirla -трёп- 07:00, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see how it matters. The article's intro must comply with the style guide and common sense, even if the article is underdeveloped now. Beit Or 08:58, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Artcile's name 

message: I propose merging of Christianization of Kievan Rus' and Christianization of the Rus' Khaganate to Christianization of the Rus'.  There's too much overlap (Christianization of the Rus' Khaganate is a short-term snapshot of part of the historical timeline given in Christianization of Kievan Rus'), it's confusing and misleading to have Christianization of the Rus' redirect to Christianization of the Rus' Khaganate, and the entire situation confuses the reader about the difference between the Rus' Khaganate and the Kievan Rus'. It seems to me that the matters will be clearer if the entire history of the efforts to convert the Rus' people to Christianity were covered in a single, orderly article.  Some other articles, e.g. Varangians, are already linking to Christianization of Kievan Rus' as if the main/only article on the topic, since it is more comprehensive.  I would suggest that the Khaganate stub can be merged into the Khaganate section at this article; this article moved to Christianization of the Rus' and its lead adjusted; and both longer titles (plus any incoming redirects to them) redirected to the short title Christianization of the Rus' (and to specific sections in it if necessary).  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  06:01, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Which 'two different states' are you referring to? There are three articles, two of which are POV forks, the third (Rus' Khaganate) is theoretical/borderline WP:FRINGE at best which 'borrows' events from the single, mainstream supported subject. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 21:06, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: As noted to Ghirlandajo, the Rus' Khaganate has been the centre of attention as WP:FRINGE by editors who are actually well versed in the history of the (Kievan) Rus' state. The entire "Christianization of the Rus' Khaganate" article is an WP:OR borrowing of mainstream research applied as WP:SYNTH to create an equally fringe article. I agree that it should be bypassed, but what remains is not two distinct narratives in Christianization of the Rus' and Christianization of Kievan Rus': they are one and the same subject. Duplication of a single subject (a three-way split at that) is not edifying for the reader. There simply isn't a legitimate argument for maintaining three articles on the self-same subject. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 21:26, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposed 

message: Changing from Paganism to Christianity is just another form of paganism 2A02:C7C:4445:3300:2192:DE3:4E07:9A1E (talk) 13:39, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Christianity v paganism