Talk:Cossacks

Wikipedia 1.0 — (talk) FAQ — To do
Release version tools Guide — (talk) — (stats)
Article selection process (talk) Version 0.8 bot selection Version 0.8 feedback
IRC channel (IRC)
Release criteria
Review team (FAQ)
Version 0.8 release (manual selection) (t)
"Selection" project (Talk) schools selection Offline WP for Indian Schools
CORE TOPICS CORE SUPPLEMENT Core topics - 1,000 (Talk) (COTF) (bot)
TORRENT (Talk)
"Selection" project for kids ((t))
WORK VIA WIKI PROJECTS (talk)
Pushing to 1.0 (talk)
Static content subcom.

This is the Version 1.0 Editorial Team page.

General background

Article ratings assessment scheme

In late 2003, Jimmy Wales had proposed making an offline release version of Wikipedia. This group was formed in late 2004 to meet this challenge. Our work involves identifying and organizing articles, and improving and maintaining a core set. Our work does not hinder the existing wiki process for creating and editing articles, but rather it supports that work by providing additional organization. We aim to produce collections that can be used in places where the internet coverage is expensive or non-existent. Our early collections were distributed via DVD; now these are shared via download, then distributed on hardware such as a Raspberry Pi. Originally, only a fixed selection was available, but there is now much flexibility in how selections can be made. This project is now mainly one point in a network of groups who collect and distribute open educational resources from the Internet in an offline form.

See these more detailed related articles:

• Guide to Wikipedia Release Version tools
• Wikipedia 1.0 FAQs
• Wikipedia 1.0 Release Version Criteria
• Broad overview of Wikimedia's Offline Project

How you can help

Main page: Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/To do

You are encouraged to join us and help out with one of the projects, or to discuss Wikipedia 1.0 on the talk page. A significant part of our work centers around maintaining the assessment scheme, which is now used on more than seven million articles by over 1000 active WikiProjects on the English Wikipedia. It is also being used on other language projects. Generally work on this team is sporadic – periods of hectic activity followed by long periods of waiting! Often work is long and tedious – checking through a list of 22,000 instances of profanities one by one, organizing 10,000 keywords taken from category names, or dealing with technical bugs when the assessment bot fails for no apparent reason. However, it is all worth it in the end.

Our strategy has been intensely debated, but the group has reached a consensus. We elected not to follow the German model. Instead we chose to start with a core of quality articles on key subjects and expand from there. We have produced three test versions: Version 0.5, Version 0.7, and Version 0.8 with the goal of releasing better collections of articles in due course. The next general release is generically referred to as "Release Version" while our first "official" comprehensive release will be called Version 1.0. These collections are then made available for offline use using a reader such as Kiwix, which was chosen as Sourceforge project of the month. The project was on hiatus for several years because of the loss of our main developer. However, as of February 2016, a new group of developers has begun work on upgrading the code and the process, in order to start producing new collections again, especially collections for schools.

Current needs

Although we have much of the requisite system automated, there are still some outstanding tasks:

• Preparation of a reliable index. If you can write code and you're interested in how to map category trees into a useful index (not as easy as it sounds!) please contact Walkerma.
• Reviewing manual nominations. Whenever there is a new release being planned, we need volunteers to review a few articles and process them.
• Propose useful "guide" pages to be added, such as lists and disambiguation pages.
• Check for vandalism in the selected version-IDs of the articles.
• Develop nice pages for navigation through the content, such as subject portals.
• Test the reader software, and find and report bugs.
• Help with distribution, especially in remote areas without Internet access.

Please let us know on the Talk page if you can help with any of these.

A page read offline in Kiwix

Status

At present, the main activities are:

• The assessment scheme, which is used by WikiProjects for organizing their content, using talk page tags and the WP1.0 bot. The bot was updated with completely new Perl code in 2020–2021, and it is currently maintained by User:Audiodude. Technical problems with the bot should be reported here. Related to this work is the WP1.0 server (previously called "Release Version Tools) which provides ways for WikiProjects to analyze article lists and data relating to their work.
• Collaborations to produce offline collections are done in collaboration with various people from Kiwix and Internet-in-a-Box. Please contact Walkerma if you wish to help.

To select articles, we are mainly using a bot-assisted selection process based on assessment by individual WikiProjects, where articles are selected automatically based on quality and importance project rankings.

RevID selection

Based on discussions (at the 2017 Potsdam hackathon and since), we plan to reactivate RevID selection. Previously code based on WikiTrust was used in Version 0.8, and this appeared to produce a largely vandalism-free collection of articles. This worked by scoring each RevID based on the edits remaining in it, and choosing the most "trustworthy" recent RevID based on the WikiTrust algorithm.

Wikipedia 1.0 projects

Active projects

If you would like to start a new project, please discuss it on the talk page first before adding it here.

Wikipedia 1.0 Projects
Name	Summary of overall strategy	Coordinator	Description of activities
School selection	Put together selections of 1–10 GB sizes for use in high schools and elementary schools	User:Walkerma and others	Uses new code that starts with a seed and works out, guided by the WP 1 selection ranking to guide it
Work via WikiProjects (WVWP)	Use "networking" to mobilise our existing subject specialists	User:Walkerma	Organise and facilitate compilation of article lists from the WikiProjects and seek to identify important topics within each WikiProject's area of expertise. Locate important topics that are currently not being managed by projects. In conjunction with WP:COUNCIL, the project serves as a link with the editing community, and may later help locate expert reviewers.

Past releases

Past Wikipedia 1.0 Projects
Name	Summary of overall strategy	Month of release	Description of activities	Website	Next release
Version 0.5	A test release prior to release of Version 1.0 above.	April 2007	A test release designed to pave the way for Version 1.0. Used manual nominations and approval based on importance and quality. Approval was by only one person, from the review team.	Okawix	Version 0.7
Version 0.7	A test release of automated article selections, prior to release of Version 1.0 above.	Early 2010	A test release designed to pave the way for Version 1.0. Used SelectionBot to make an article selection based on importance and quality. Vandalism prevention used a script, with manual checks, which delayed the release significantly. [1]	Kiwix reader, ZIM download	Version 0.8
Version 0.8	A test release of automated article selections, prior to release of Version 1.0 above.	March 2011	A test release designed to pave the way for Version 1.0. Version 0.8 used bot-assisted article selection, with manual adjustments based on feedback from WikiProjects. Used as a test of the WikiTrust revisionID selection code - this worked well.	Wikipedia:Version 0.8/downloads.	Version 0.9
2006 Wikipedia CD Selection (previously called "Test Version")	Work with release version done off site that was coordinated by BozMo	April 2006	2000 articles with content filtered/selected for use by children (see Wikipedia:Wikipedia CD Selection).	No longer available - see 2008/9 release below	2007 Wikipedia CD Selection (below)
2007 Wikipedia CD Selection	Work with release version done off site that was coordinated by BozMo	May 2007	4655 articles with content filtered/selected for use by children (see Wikipedia:Wikipedia CD Selection).	No longer available - see 2008/9 release below	2008/9 Wikipedia CD Selection (below)
2008/9 Wikipedia CD Selection	Work with release version done off site that was coordinated by BozMo	October 2008	5502 articles with content filtered/selected for use by children (see Wikipedia:Wikipedia CD Selection).	http://schools-wikipedia.org	Not yet known

Inactive projects

Inactive Wikipedia 1.0 Projects
Name	Summary of overall strategy	Coordinator	Description of activities
Authoritative Editions	Gives experts in each field the tools to review suitable articles in their area of expertise and give their okay to particular revisions.	Sj, Jeff Keller, Gnp	Allow editors to propose new groups; for example: "Featured Article review" or "American Physical Society peer review". Each blessing group would have a set of review guidelines. Each blessing group would consist of this set of guidelines, and a set of users who could bless a revision of an article as satisfying them. Articles with blessed revisions would display icons or links to last-blessed revisions.
Featured Articles First	reviewing older or problem FAs to ensure that quality is maintained, ready for inclusion of these articles in Wikipedia 1.0.		(Now a standard part of the FA system)
Geography project	to produce a descriptive gazetteer of the world for publication.		This could include an atlas, continents, countries and major cities. This would serve as a test bed for publishing Wikipedia 1.0, but could also be a valuable stand-alone product.
Three Level Editing	Users participate in a three part editing process to assure that pages are up to quality standards.		The first level is just a general check, the second level is a factual check, and the third level is a last "just in case" check. This process would assure that articles would be up to standards without putting too much responsibility on one user.
Biographies	Improve and assess biographical articles		Focus especially on the 200 Core Biographies, in conjunction with Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography. .
Dynamic Pocket Cyclopedia	Lists most important FAs, FLs, and GAs.		An evolving list of no more than half of Wikipedia's most important featured articles, featured lists, and designated good articles.
WikiSort	Integrate the sifting process into the Wiki.		Aims to use data from the planned user rating scheme to provide rankings of articles, such that important quality articles can be automatically identified for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0. This project has been rendered obsolete by WikiProject-based assessments (see above).
Article assessment	To assess articles		This project has been rendered obsolete by WikiProject-based assessments (see above).

Publishing steps

The process of generating an offline version of a sub-selection of Wikipedia article is multistage. It needs many dedicated and singled-purposed operations. The following chart show how the WP1 project envisioned things in 2010.

The general process for producing an offline release

Even if this chart is still, to a large extend, valid; we practice and envision things slightly differently nowadays. One of the most important paradigm change we had to make is to remove as much as possible human based manual activity because the amount of work is simply too high to be achieved in a reasonable amount of time. We tend now to automatize as much as possible the whole process. As a consequence the project is now predominantly focused on technology.

Technical approach

Support Wikiproject assessment effort

The first software created to support the WP1 project has been the User:WP_1.0_bot. First written in Perl by User:CBM and then slighly modified and maintained by a few other volunteers. In 2020 the bot has been totally rewritten in Python following modern development standards (API, automated tests, etc.) by User:Audiodude. The code base is available en developed on Github.

The WP1bot had and still have three traditional purposes:

• gather assessments (via categories introduced on main namespace articles talk pages),
• upload on Wikipedia logs & stats
• provide key information & tools to Wikiproject on a dedicated Web service. The data can also be accessed through an API at api.wp1.openzim.org

Select article titles

...

Select article revision

...

Scrape selected articles for offline usage

...

Orchestrate periodic and multiple scraping

...

Publish and distribute offline snapshots

...

Statistics

The WP 1.0 bot tracks assessment data (article quality and importance data for individual WikiProjects) assigned via Talk page banners. If you would like to add a new WikiProject to the bot's list, please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Using the bot.

The global summary table below is computed by taking the highest quality and importance rating for each assessed article in the main namespace.

All rated articles by quality and importance Quality Importance Top High Mid Low ??? Total FA 1,569 2,478 2,395 1,923 179 8,544 FL 180 673 775 701 104 2,433 A 363 681 789 578 93 2,504 GA 3,204 7,280 14,665 19,330 1,744 46,223 B 16,815 32,583 53,870 67,594 22,189 193,051 C 16,750 53,671 134,196 304,244 88,466 597,327 Start 18,517 92,219 414,378 1,602,279 404,447 2,531,840 Stub 4,197 31,567 278,439 2,793,119 760,941 3,868,263 List 4,818 17,011 53,566 191,967 67,528 334,890 Assessed 66,413 238,163 953,073 4,981,735 1,345,691 7,585,075 Unassessed 121 489 1,263 18,556 425,299 445,728 Total 66,534 238,652 954,336 5,000,291 1,770,990 8,030,803 About this table

Related pages

General

• Jimbo's proposal, Chicago Meetup - Jimbo's Oct 2004 ideas on how to get to 1.0.
• Wikipedia:Pushing to 1.0 Early discussion page for brainstorming ideas, before this team was created.
• meta:Wikipedia 1.0
• meta:Static content group

Assessment and validation

• Wikipedia:Article assessment
• meta:Article validation and Wikipedia:Pushing to validation - argue the benefit of article validation and possible implementations
• Wikipedia:Flagged revisions (similar to the older "stable versions")
  • Wikipedia:Flagged revisions/Sighted versions
  • Wikipedia:Flagged revisions/Quality versions
  • Wikipedia:Flagged revisions/reliable revisions
  • Wikipedia:Flagged revisions/Checkpoints and grading
  • Demo version of flagged revisions
• Wikipedia:Footnotes
• Wikipedia:Peer review
• Wikipedia:Request for comment
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Fact and Reference Check

Wikipedia books

• Wikipedia:Books & meta:WikiReader - Wikipedia books are collections of articles from Wikipedia on a certain topic, in the form of PDFs published for download and intended to be printed, and also to be sold in printed form.
• The Book Tool, and Wiki to print, a collaboration between the Foundation and OSI/PediaPress.

Article selections

• Wikipedia:Vital articles
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles - Filling the gaps.
• Wikipedia:Good articles
• Featured Articles
  • Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
  • Wikipedia:Featured articles
  • Wikipedia:What is a featured article
  • Wikipedia:Featured article removal candidates
• Wikipedia:Stable versions

See also

• List of online encyclopedias - compare Wikipedia with other projects

GA review

Hi, I'm the GA reviewer of this article. If you have any questions don't hesitate to ask them. You can post questions either on this page, or if you want me to get it sooner, you could post them on my talk page. Daimanta 22:57, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I am having some major difficulties with this article. The article is very poorly sourced. Entire sections of the article are without any sources. This absolutely needs to be improved. You will have the legal WP:GAN time to improve this article. Daimanta 11:47, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok, this article has failed:

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

This article needs a lot of improvement if it wants to reach GA level. Regards, Daimanta 00:36, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

First Cossack (Kasakka) Attack to Finland

Can any Cossack expert say which Tatar Cossacks were those who crossed in winter 1577, 25 years after the fall of Kazan in 1552, by ice from Estonia the Gulf of Finland and robbed Helsinki (Helsingfors) area with a troops whose strenght were 2.000 Tatar Cossacks?

JN

Cossacks and Jews?

As a Jew (by birth rather than religion, of which I have none) I was astounded to see so little (only one fleeting reference) about the Cossack brutality toward Jews. I have a great deal of respect for the democratic aspects of Cossack society, but their role, under various regimes, in suppressing the democratic aspirations of other groups (including Jews) should have been described in more detail. I might add that, in the past, one of the most insulting things that a Jew could say about a person would be to call him a Cossack. Too Old 22:06, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

In the context of the 15th-18th centuries, the Jews often served as middlemen between the oppressive landlords and the peasants, often working as tax collectors or some such jobs. This was not their choice, the laws forbade them from owning property and the Jews certainly did not create this system, they just survived in it. But when peasants and cossacks revolted, this frequently made the Jews a target of assault and they suffered significant casualties. You are correct that a heading belongs on this subject. Faustian 22:40, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I too was astonished to find only a single fleeting reference to this subject in both this article and History of the Cossacks. I haven't gone through the edit history, but I would not be surprised if there was material dealing with this subject that was removed at some point. In any event, the article is seriously defective without a section devoted to this issue. I hope it will be rectified sooner rather than later. Cgingold 12:48, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Cossacks outside PLC before Andrusovo

Did any significant Cossack group lived outside PLC before the Treaty of Andrusovo?-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  20:48, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Don Cossacks, Ryazan Cossacks, we had Yermak already make his conquest of Siberia. Terek Cossacks, Ural Cossacks, Astrakhan Cossacks. The answer is YES! --Kuban Cossack 22:43, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Ryazans need stub or redirect. Would you have any population estimates on early numbers for the others? The relevant sections seem very stubbish.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  15:06, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Name change to Cossacks

Shouldn't this be under Cossacks - plural for people is our usuall naming convention (Ukrainians, Russians, Poles, Tatars, etc.)?-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  15:03, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, I am going to move this article if there is no objection soon.~ Joe Jklin (T C) 03:41, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

This was my exact thought, as well. What's odd is that the article has survived under this title since its creation in June 2002! (There's been a redirect from Cossacks since April 2003.) Hard to believe that nobody made the change before now. In any event, it has my blessing, so I think you should feel free to make the change. Cgingold 12:41, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Military Service

At the same time many attempts were made to increase the Cossack impact on Russian society and throughout the 1990s many regional authorities agreed to hand over some local administration and policing duties to the Cossacks. However in April 2005, Russian President Vladimir Putin introduced a bill "On the State Service of the Russian Cossacks" (O gosudarstvennoy sluzhbe rossiyskogo kazachestva) to the State Duma, which was passed in the first reading on May 18, 2005. For the first time in decades the Cossacks were recognised as not only a distinct ethnocultural entity but also as a potent military service. Although their full ambition to administer wholly the territory stretching from Transdniester all the way along the steppe to the Ural River might be distant, the bill made a significant step towards achieving it.

I've read the law and I did not really see any increased military role for Cossacks. Yes, the State and the Cossack Organisations participate in patriotic education of cossack children. Yes, cossack conscripts are sent to units of primarily cossack heritage. Yes, the law foresees that the Cossacks can be involved in various law enforcement duties. Yes, they have the right to wear various uniforms that are approved by the President of Russia.

However. There are also such things in Russia as voluntary youth patrols, military cadet organisations, patriotic organisations and others that often take on similar "duties". I do not speak of various private uniforms and all that.

As such, in what way does this law promote a Cossack State from the Dniestr to the Ural? Or this law a firs step to the return of the Imperial way of organising Cossack Hosts? Can anyone please explain? Russoswiss 02:54, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I put a ref to an article about Putin seeking help from Cossacks and how it is a perceived step. Here is a quick link Putin sends for Cossacks in fight against terrorism. Hope this helps~ Joe Jklin (T C) 00:31, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Article Structure

I feel that the article is too poorly strctured in its headings, here is what I think should be done, first of all there should be a clear definition of what a Cossack is, as it can be ethnical, cultural, military and all three togethere, then it should show the early history of the Cossacks, both Ukrainian and Russian together. Then I feel the Ukrainian Cossack history, in its important points should be laid out first, in a similar manner, the parrallel hisotory of the Russian Cossacks should go, after the 18th century begins, effectively a new chapter of the Cossacks begins and this follows, then revolution WWII, modern... Next culture, organisation. Right now the article loosely follows this but the text does not. A major re-write is necessary? Any suggestions? --Kuban Cossack 15:32, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I am too busy to offer much or any assistance now, but your idea sounds quite good.Faustian 15:37, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough, is just right now the article is but a lump of facts put together. Try reading it and you will understand what I mean. --Kuban Cossack 15:45, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree, the article is a mess. All things are mixed together and out of chronological order. For example, there are two entries on Russian Cossacks 2.2 and 3. Cannot they be joined together? As well, it would also help, if someone would stop juggling the Russian/Ukrainian text with wrong stress in the lead. --Hillock65 17:23, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

From the start the article had first Russian then Ukrainian, that's how it existed for god knows how long, why change it?

To answer your question the point 3 is about organisation whilst point 2 is history. The former needs a complete rewrite. --Kuban Cossack 17:25, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Also I hope noone minds me removing the passage about the Cossacks being runaway peasents. The initial groups were actually formed by indeginous Slavic migrants around rivers such as Don, Yaik and Dnepr, only in the 15th century did the peasents began to fuel their numbers. --Kuban Cossack 17:38, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Cossacks originated from what is Ukraine now, they are generally regarded as the progenitors of the Ukrainian nation, so Ukrainian is obviously a better choice. In regards to Russian Cossacks. I think it is a bad idea to mesh it all up. It would be much better to start the Russian Cossacks section that would chronologically fit after the destruction of the Sich. Ermak and other earlier Russian Cossacks could be metioned there as well.--Hillock65 17:35, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually the name Cossack comes from Circassian коссаг. And the Russian Cossacks do not begin in 1775. Don Cossacks existed since the Kievan Rus, as early recordsd show, Ivan the Terrible times was when they became a major player in Russian affairs. Terek Cossacks migrated in the 14th century as well. In fact Dnepr Cossacks were only a Cossack group. --Kuban Cossack 17:38, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

...existed since the Kievan Rus? This is new. A source of this amazing discovery would help. Otherwise, I suggest we clean the article from POV from both sides. The Encyclopedia Britannica might be a good place to look at how to arrange this article. --Hillock65 17:44, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

...More correctly the Don community was an осколок of the Kievan Rus that grew into the mighty Don Cossack Host. For example А еще известно, что Донские казаки в 1380 преподнесли князю Дмитрию Донскому накануне Куликовской битвы икону Божией Матери. So by that point the community was well known and significant. Zaporozhia had a few centuries to go...Also as for POV, then progenitors of Ukrainian nation is not? (I don't mean Zaporozhian Cossacks, I mean just Cossacks)--Kuban Cossack 17:50, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Somehow, that source sounds funny. So they presented him with an icon and stood by while the battle went on? That doesn't sound like Cossacks, I am sure they didn't even call themselves that. The word itself originates from the Tatar language, I find it mildly strange for them to be calling themselves Cossacks even before the first Cossack host was established on Khortysia. Anyway, there is a lot to do besides this. It is not important now. --Hillock65 18:03, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Kuban - you are reinventing history with your POV's based on myth and inuendo. Tell me another one. 19:17, 7 November 2007 (UTC)