This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norse history and culture, a WikiProject related to all activities of the NorthGermanic peoples, both in Scandinavia and abroad, prior to the formation of the Kalmar Union in 1397. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Norse history and cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Norse history and cultureTemplate:WikiProject Norse history and cultureNorse history and culture articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ukraine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ukraine on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.UkraineWikipedia:WikiProject UkraineTemplate:WikiProject UkraineUkraine articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belarus, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belarus on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BelarusWikipedia:WikiProject BelarusTemplate:WikiProject BelarusBelarus articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
The name is indeed misleading and just plain wrong. Not to bring any conflict in here, I'm going to change it to "the Wise" as he is known among the Eastern Slavs. Fatty Strider (talk) 12:28, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hey! Good thing you mentioned WP:COMMONNAME! Now, a search through sources clearly shows that Oleg the Wise is in fact the common name for the historical figure. At least it had been until very recent time, namely until 2012. As to your argument about Holmgard, it's so far-fetched, it starts to seem like POV-pushing. Let me try and follow this logic. We know about a semi-legendary ruler Oleg that may or may not have ruled in Kiev, in the 9th or 10th century. In the same time, there may or may not have existed a town called Novgorod (the archaeologic findings do not show any presence of a town before mid-10th century in its place). And certain Scandinavian sagas refer to a city named Holmgard, which may or may not have been Novgorod. Oh, and obviously, the area nearby was settled. I don't really see how on Earth, from all this, you arrive to the conclusion that this historical figure should be named Oleg of Novgorod. It's not a tradition of the chronicles, it's not the common name used ubiquitously in historical literature, it doesn't correspond with any historical evidence. So why Novgorod, again? --Fatty Strider (talk) 14:17, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And the reason he is called as such is because Novgorod is mentioned in the chronicles (and the area is still referred to as Novgorod land). Mellk (talk) 15:05, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I believe, this is a pointless debate now. You are right that a lot of results for "Oleg the Wise" are actually referencing the poem's name and not the historical figure. And I don't know if it counts for common name. If it is true that both names are used throughout historical literature (I also found that a lot of historical works just plainly say "Oleg", without any titles or nicknames), then I believe it appropriate to use both in the article lead. What do you say to that?
P.S. I understand what you're trying to say about Novgorod, but there must be a real reason. I mean, there were a number of historical/legendary figures who supposedly came from Novgorod and settled in Kiev to rule there, but none of them is nicknamed "of Novgorod" in English, except this one. And the tradition goes to the beginning of the 20th century, so I am wondering, how it came to be and who was first to call him that. Best regards, Fatty Strider (talk) 13:52, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I think often he is simply called "Oleg" or "Prince Oleg" in English (with the context of the text being enough). But as an article title I don't think those meet WP:CRITERIA, specifically recognizability and precision. And "Oleg the Prophet" seems to be rarely used in English. I suppose "Oleg the Wise" could be included as an WP:ALTNAME in the lead.
I do not know about the origins of this title in particular but the history of this time is primarily based on the chronicles. So for a long time Oleg has been referred to as a duke of Novgorod etc, see for example[1]. Mellk (talk) 14:52, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I see. The title seems to have been in use for some time indeed. And although I believe it to be a misnomer, it's not for me to decide, but for historians. Otherwise, I'm glad we came to an agreement. I would also argue for including "according to the Primary Chronicle" / "according to the Rus' chronicles" in the lead, as this figure is only known from the chronicles (if we don't count the Schechter letter, which is a more reliable source, but only confuses things even more). Fatty Strider (talk) 14:56, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As he is considered as a semi-legendary figure, some details will forever be unknown (maybe this Oleg of the chronicles never existed). In terms of the wording, from what I am aware of it is the Primary Chronicle that describes Oleg as a relative of Rurik and that he died in 912, but the Novgorod First Chronicle describes him differently and that he died in 922, not 912. I think there is too much detail on the Schechter Letter, and not enough about his life as described in the chronicles (this figure after all is based on the chronicles). So I think some changes are needed in that regard. Probably a standalone section on alternative theories/views instead. I do not see the letter mentioned in other encyclopedias articles about Oleg for example so maybe it is undue. Mellk (talk) 16:24, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I see what you were trying to say now, I suppose that makes sense about the wording, I guess he could also be called semi-legendary in the first sentence instead. Mellk (talk) 16:32, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"Oleg of Novgorod" indirectly conveys a pro-Russian POV, while "Oleg of Kiev" indirectly conveys a pro-Ukrainian POV. The previous talk page section #Missleading name [sic] demonstrates this implicitly (see also Talk:Kievan Rus'#Novgorod). "Oleg the Wise" doesn't have this problem.
Wikidata shows that all three names are used in various language versions of Wikipedia with no clear majority, but the relevant East Slavic languages all name him "Oleg the Wise": Belarusian: Алег Вешчы, Russian: Олег Вещий, Ukrainian: Олег Віщий.
A Google Books word search (like the one Fatty Strider did in December 2022, but plus some extra names) for "oleg of novgorod,oleg the wise,oleg the prophet,oleg of kiev,oleg the seer,oleh of kyiv," has telling results: in English literature findable on Google Books, "Oleg the Wise" has consistently been by far the most frequently used name until 2012, only briefly challenged by "Oleg of Novgorod" and "Oleg of Kiev" in the late 1950s, and by "Oleg the Seer" in the early 1980s. The rise of "Oleg of Novgorod" and the fall of "Oleg the Wise" in the 2000s and 2010s could in part be explained by the fact that this English Wikipedia article was created in 2002 under the name "Oleg of Novgorod" (and hasn't been moved since; the opening sentence named him "Oleg of Kiev" until "of Kiev" was removed in 2005). In that same time, English Wikipedia broke through as the no. #1 online English-language reference work, setting a certain standard that could have influenced later authors in the way that we observe on Google Books. This may well be a case of WP:CITOGENESIS.
Conclusion: Although "Oleg of Novgorod" isn't an incorrect name, it wasn't the WP:COMMONNAME when created in 2002, and overall probably still isn't when compared to the total amount of "Oleg the Wise" (despite the latter being overtaken in frequency in new publications in the past 11 years, probaby due to WP:CITOGENESIS). "Oleg of Novgorod" is a legitimate WP:ALTNAME, but no more legitimate than "Oleg of Kiev" (or "Oleh of Kyiv"), "Oleg the Seer" or "Oleg the Prophet". And per WP:NPOV, there is a compelling reason to go for a neutral name such as "Oleg the Wise", and the relevant language-Wikipedias in question also use it already. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 12:35, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This needs a proper analysis because some of the results for "Oleg the Wise" are references to a ballad by Pushkin. Mellk (talk) 13:52, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is a fair and interesting point, although the ballad's title is also known as "The Song of the Wise Oleg" and other variants, which needs to be taken into account. Google Ngrams shows interesting variation, but for most of the last 100+ years "oleg the wise" was far more common than "the wise oleg". But this can't tell us how often it was part of the title phrase. This is what I got in Google:
"song of the wise oleg" 5,260 results (compare: "the wise oleg" 7.490 results)
"song of oleg the wise" 4,550 results (compare: "oleg the wise" 20.300 results)
"song of wise oleg" 1,990 results
"ballad of oleg the wise" 10 results
"ballad of the wise oleg" 1 result
Conclusion: in English, the ballad's title is somewhat better known under the name "The Song of (the) Wise Oleg", and the total percentage of search results of "oleg the wise" which refer to "song of oleg the wise" is less than 25% (22.4% to be exact). Subtracting these from our Google Ngram results above, "oleg the wise" still remains by far the WP:COMMONNAME before "oleg of novgorod". Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 23:13, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
PS: One could argue that Pushkin has indirectly made the name "Oleg the Wise" even more popular by writing this song under this name about thim. In some sense, we actually shouldn't subtract these results. But for the sake of argument, even if we do, it looks like the name remains the most popular one. Also: "oleh of kyiv" is still very rare, I can find it almost nowhere (4 results in Google), and "oleh the wise" got 30 results, so traditional spelling should be favoured in this case. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 23:23, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The other thing to consider is WP:AGEMATTERS. If recent sources are preferring one name then this must be also be considered (and also to see how reliable these sources are). I am not yet opposed to moving to "Oleg the Wise" but I think it needs more discussion first. Mellk (talk) 09:26, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To add, I get about 1,550 results for "Oleg the Wise" and 1,540 results for "Oleg of Novgorod" on Google Books. If set to 21st century only, then 686 and 1,230 results, respectively. I am not sure about the reliability of the number of results but this is just an observation. Mellk (talk) 09:30, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am also not sure if such a basic Google search is good enough. For example I get 5,320 results for "song of oleg the wise" and 7,570 results for "oleg the wise". Mellk (talk) 09:32, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Valid points. I've done a Google Scholar search limited to 2000–2023:
"oleg the wise" 53 results (21 of which were "song of oleg the wise")
"the wise oleg" 37 results (22 of which were "song of the wise oleg")
"oleg the seer" 21 results (3 of which were "song of oleg the seer")
"song of the seer oleg" 1 result
"oleg the prophet" 36 results (0 of which were "song of oleg the prophet")
"the prophet oleg" 3 results (1 of which was "song of the prophet oleg")
"oleg of novgorod" 53 results (at least 2 of which are plagiarised from Wikipedia)
"oleg of kiev" 15 results
"oleh of kyiv" 0 results
When written as "the wise oleg", it usually refers to the ballad, but when written as "oleg the wise", it usually means the historical person. "oleg of novgorod" always refers to the historical person because it obviously doesn't follow from a translation of the song's title, and in that sense it is unambiguous. However, I think we should keep in mind that "the wise/seer/prophet" are all English translations of the same East Slavic root word Вешчы/Вещий/Віщий used in the relevant native-language Wikipedias, and when combined, they easily overmatch "oleg of novgorod", even if we leave out all the song references ("the prophet/seer" almost never refer to the song, regardless of word order). It's also notable that none of the 3 relevant native-language Wikipedias ever call him "aleg/oleg/oleh of nouharad/novgorod/novhorod" or "kijeu/kiev/kyiv"; it seems the East Slavic languages don't really connect him to either city, and steadily go for "the Wise". Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 21:25, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
PS: I am seeing some, if limited, evidence of WP:CITOGENESIS in the results. Oualaalou (2021) wrote Around 882 BP, Prince Oleg of Novgorod seized power in Kiev, laying the foundation for the powerful state of Kievan Rus’. The prince’s ambition did not stop there. He launched an attack on the city of Constantinople... That is almost verbatim copied from how this Wikipedia article stated for over a decade: ..seizing power in Kiev (Kyiv) from Askold and Dir, and, by doing so, laying the foundation of the powerful state of Kievan Rus'. He also launched an attack on Constantinople... This author unmistakably read this Wikipedia article and partially 'plagiarised' it, and opted for "Oleg of Novgorod" as the guy's name, which wouldn't have been a coincidence. That means the 2 Oualaalou results for "oleg of novgorod" are CITOGENESIS. However, I can't find much other direct evidence of this. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 21:49, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Mellk are you okay with it if we change the title of this page to Oleg the Wise? TylerBurden below has also voiced support. We could also go for a formal WP:RM if you'd like to bring other users into this review. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 09:16, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
.svg)
.svg){kind=small}
Done Added the altname in the opening sentence, it is indeed clearly significant enough as an altname and may be displayed as such. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 01:22, 4 May 2023 (UTC)