Talk:Ruslan and Ludmila

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Russia / Language & literature / Demographics & ethnography (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the language and literature of Russia task force.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the demographics and ethnography of Russia task force.
 
WikiProject Poetry (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poetry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poetry 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Comment[edit]

I intend to expand this article soon.Gr8white 01:35, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

OK, I expanded the article and it should no longer be considered Stub class. I will be adding some illustrations soon. Any suggestions on how to further improve the article are appreciated. Gr8white 21:08, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I have rerated it as B. Any higher rating should be preceded by either a GA-review (for GA-grade), peer review (for A-grade) or FA-review (for FA-grade). While the illustrations are beautiful, I would suggest scaling them down a bit (a lot); Wikipedia is not a picture book. Furthermore, I am afraid the acknowledgement should go; the place for acknowledgements is on the page for the image itself. Errabee 15:13, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the suggestions. I reduced all the images to thumbnails and removed the acknowledgment. Gr8white 23:34, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Ludmila vs. Lyudmila[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was no consensus to move -- Aervanath (talk) 06:56, 28 April 2009 (UTC)


I originally chose Lyudmila to be consistent with the existing article dealing with the opera though I wouldn't argue against either option. "Lyudmila" comes up more frequently in a Google search and seems to be more consistent with transliteration guidelines. Any particular reason for moving to "Ludmila"? Should the opera article be moved to be consistent? I changed "Lyudmila" to "Ludmila" in all instances so at least the article would be internally consistent. Gr8white 16:33, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

As an opera editor, I think I should admit straightaway that none of us have any Russian. Any authoritative advice about romanized spellings would be most appreciated. In the absence of any advice we adopt the spellings used in the Macmillan/Oxford New Grove Dictionary of Opera which in this case gives Lyudmila. Thanks. --Kleinzach 03:54, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Romanization of Russian spells out the Romanization guidelines. Following that it should be rendered Lyudmila, which is what I used when I created the article. (Exceptions would be justified if a different spelling is conventionally used in English.) However someone with no explanation moved it to the current ("...Ludmila"). I may go ahead and try to move it back. Gr8white (talk) 00:04, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Tried to move with no success. Need to have an administrator do it. Gr8white (talk) 00:20, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

Ruslan and Ludmila → Ruslan and Lyudmila

I think after discussion above that this is an uncontroversial move, so I'm happy to move it back without waiting the five days if there are no objections. Andrewa (talk) 02:39, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

This should be controversial; Ludmila is the form in both the translations linked to; Ludmilla is the other usual English spelling, as represented, for example, by Nancy Dargel's translation (ISBN 0930267397 ). Septentrionalis PMAnderson 03:07, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
OK, let's go the full five days then. Andrewa (talk) 05:27, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

As I stated above I have no strong preference for one or the other. But I think we should be consistent: it doesn't make much sense to say the opera "Ruslan and Lyudmila" was based on the poem "Ruslan and Ludmila". Any argument based on "conventional name" should include the derivative works. English-language references to the poem aren't that common relative to the opera and use a mixture of spellings in any event as noted. Since the authoritative opera reference cited above uses "Lyudmila" and most other sources follow that (and imdb uses that for the film) I think that in the absence of any overriding reason not to it should be used for this article also. There probably should be a note along the lines of "(also rendered as 'Ruslan and Ludmila' or 'Ruslan and Ludmilla')". Gr8white (talk) 21:21, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

  • I also prefer consistency between the two since it seems that the romanizations of both are all over the place in the linked sources. WP:Romanization of Russian should probably not apply here since both usages are significant in English outside of Wikipedia. Support a move of both articles to Ludmila (used in Karl Haas and Milton Cross) which seems marginally more common than Ludmilla (used in Kobbé) and in turn more common than Lyudmila (used in New Grove but which often avoids English forms) although all are common in English. — AjaxSmack 00:52, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
AjaxSmack, I don't understand your logic. It seems to me the absence of a consensus among sources would argue in favor of applying WP:RUS. In any event "marginally more common" (debatable) doesn't translate to "conventional name".Gr8white (talk) 16:59, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
My argument wasn't based on logic. I don't think that guidelines such as WP:RUS should trump WP:UCN. — AjaxSmack 05:57, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
I don't think it should either. But when the name both meets WP:RUS and (arguably) WP:UCN I would argue in favor of it. I haven't really seen any evidence that Ludmila is clearly more common than Lyudmila. That being said I don't feel strongly one way or the other and have no problem with keeping the current name IF the other articles are changed to match. It's the inconsistency that bothers me. Gr8white (talk) 17:33, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

New Section[edit]

Aaarrgghh! Now we're right back where we started: Ludmila the poem, Lyudmila the opera and Lyudmila the film. No one has proposed moving those articles or given any compelling reason not to move this one to be consistent (and basically to put things back to where they were before someone moved this with no explanation). And I'm sure there would be no consensus to move those others either. Gr8white (talk) 15:07, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure that consistency is necessary but I would support moving the opera to Ruslan and Ludmila (opera) for reasons I gave above. The film should also be at that spelling per WP:NC(F) ("Use the title ... under which it has been released in cinemas or on video in the English-speaking world"). See the poster used in the article and this source for evidence of usage. I think some other participants above might agree. — AjaxSmack 19:58, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't know that consistency is necessary but it makes sense to me that if a work is based on a poem of the same name it should actually have the same name. I've proposed moving the film article (which currently is just a stub) based on the rationale above and assuming there are no objections (but I've been wrong before) I should be able to move it. Then we can go from there. Gr8white (talk) 17:26, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Cat the Storyteller[edit]

The story-telling cat is also a part of the old Russian folklore, he's called Kot Bayun (Кот Баюн) meaning "Cat the Teller" in the Old Slavic. In the tale of Ivan Tsarevitch the cat has an enchanting voice of a serene and can be catched only with the iron gloves, obviously a later substitution of a Sirin bird with Bayun, who has a little common with him. Why Bayun is a teller it is simple: a cat's purring sounds like murmuring words. Actually Bayun is a representation of "kaliky pereshozhiye" (wandering bards) since their attributes are similar: slowly walking, lonely, mysterious people, probably practicing some word magic like sheptuns (whisperers) -- all similar to a cat. I think all that should it be mentioned in the article; or better do some research on Kot Bayun and make a separate article on him. Efenstor (talk) 20:13, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I'll try to dig something up on Kot Bayun and maybe add a footnote to this article. If you think an article on him is worthwhile - why not research and create it? Gr8white (talk) 00:33, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
I note there is a ru:Кот Баюн, which might provide a start. 4pq1injbok (talk) 02:03, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Fisherman woman?[edit]

If you think Rathmir leaves the castle and meets a "fisherman woman" in song 4 please cite the lines that lead you to believe that. First of all there is no such thing as a "fisherman woman"; a fisherman by definition is a man. A young woman comes to Rathmir and wakens him with kisses while he is still in the castle. That's where "we leave him" until song 5, where we find he has found his true love and become a fisherman. Gr8white (talk) 03:05, 12 November 2010 (UTC)