the problem with this disambig is michael that it links to events in history that barely can be called a polish invasion on russia for instance as there was no russia in today meaning of the word and they show rather a russian ghirlandajo's pov without any disclamer term used in russian historiography a reader can think we claim that they were polish invasions on russia what is not exactly my view that's the main problem and ghirlandajo's insults and his weak explanations afterwards that he was understood wrongly yeah right only make finding a good solution more difficult best