Template talk:Cossacks

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Russia / History / Military / Demographics & ethnography (Rated Template-class)
WikiProject icon This template 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.
 Template  This template does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This template is supported by the history of Russia task force.
Taskforce icon
This template is supported by the Russian, Soviet, and CIS military history task force.
Taskforce icon
This template is supported by the demographics and ethnography of Russia task force.
 

To Alex Kov and his anon sock[edit]

Please what is this obsession with such historical revisionism? Why is Repin's image better than a Kubanka? Why should Zaporozhia, a host that ceased to exist since late 18th century go before the hosts that exist right NOW! Why should the alphabetical order of the terms and people be ignored? I thought you were the one who was advocating for the removal of "significance" from the Russian Cossacks vs. Ukrainian Cossacks. In that case, WP:DICK and follow your advocations. --Kuban Cossack 11:42, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Stop personal attacks with revisionism! Kubanka is too streotypical. Like Kazachok dance... I prefer Repin or something that glorifies Cossacks. Famous pictures are beter then parts of a clothing.
  • Zaporozhia and Don should be first because of chnronological correctness. "NOW"-things must be at the end of the list, while the "historical" staff should be placed at the begining. Haven't you study history at school? So WP:DICK yourself.--Alex Kov 17:02, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
You are revisionising with WP:POINT, or would you like a mediation. Kubanka hat is a representetive of many Cossacks, unlike a painting which exists in three articles already. What's the point in that? And is Famous pictures are beter then parts of a clothing. not a POV which you claim to remove? As for hosts, then Zaporozhia was never part of the Cossack Hosts when they became standardised in the Russian Empire. Besides the direct descendor of Zaporozhia is the Kuban Cossack Host...enough revisionism, double standards and Original Research. --Kuban Cossack 17:58, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
I have to agree with the above statements that Kubanka is inappropriate to represent all Cossacks. Even within modern Russian Cossacks it is not universal. If this template is supposed to represent all Cossacks, including historical Ukrainian hosts then a neutral symbol should be selected. Kubanka for all Cossacks is way too POVish.--171.161.160.10 20:51, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
I am sorry, but I do not follow your argument, Kubanka is used by the largest hosts and is an iconic piece of dress (like Cherkesska) for ALL Cossacks.--Kuban Cossack 23:55, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Hey guys, I was the one who added the Kubanka picture. While I'm sure there is a better picture I can't find it. A piece of artwork, that is already in every article that mentions Zaporozhia, is not something that someone reading the article will immediately understand and identify with Cossacks. Remember, many people who read this article are not experts on who Cossacks are and will not understand what the painting means. However, while it may be stereotypical, people will see the Kubanka and identify it with Cossacks. Furthermore, Kubanka's are a very widely used piece of dress among Cossacks, the only others that are as notable and were ever as widely used are probably Papakhi, Shashka (which will be often confused with every other type of hilt), and Cherkesska.~ Joe Jklin (T C) 16:52, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Cossacks from Ukraine[edit]

It seems that someone have forgotten that there were also Cossacks in Ukraine, putting them with other smaller groups ... If this is to be the specific template for russian cossacks, remove all the other one, otherwise accept not to present Cossack history and host just through the scope of russian history... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.249.22.134 (talk) 21:36, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Please explain what is your concern, the template is based on active Hosts, not formerly disbanded ones, the template has it all: Danubian, Azov, Zaporozhian, Hetmanate, Khmeltnitsky, Mazepa... --Kuban Cossack 08:03, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
There are lots of problems :
your explanation are not coherent with what is written, I mean
* it's written Cossacks host not active host
* it's written other groups and not disbanded host
Other problem : if you check Ural Cossacks, they are not active since 1917. Same is for Orenburg Cossacks which ceased to exit in 1920 ; Siberian Cossacks is a group (and no more a host) within Russian army And you can just visit other. Except Kuban and some Terek ond one organisation of Ussuri, others do not realy exists...
Why did you remove Petro Konashevych-Sahaidachny without any explanation ....
Hetmanate deserve to be in history oor in Host, not in "others groups"

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.2.29.42 (talk) 16:41, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Chokan Valikhanov[edit]

Great work on the Cossack-related articles, but I wanted to let know that I finally wrote an article to replace the stub of Chokan Valikhanov, only to find that someone had place the -Cossack- template box there, after adding Valikhanov's name to the list of Cossacks. This the first time I've seen someone confuse a Kazak with a Cossack at such a strange level. Even anyone would like to prove to me that Valikhanov was actually a Cossack, let me know so I can document the argument for future entertainment. Michael Hancock (talk) 05:00, 28 November 2010 (UTC)