Jump to content

Talk:Belarus

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Vadzim (talk | contribs) at 22:59, 11 December 2020 (→‎Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 December 2020: unanswered). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Featured articleBelarus is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 27, 2010.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 6, 2005Peer reviewReviewed
September 18, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted
October 5, 2005Peer reviewReviewed
November 29, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
February 24, 2007Good article nomineeListed
March 26, 2007Featured article candidateNot promoted
June 13, 2007Featured topic candidateNot promoted
July 30, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
December 10, 2007Featured article candidateNot promoted
December 27, 2007Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article

Template:Outline of knowledge coverage

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Saraherixson, Bruton-Sarah, Kvesquer24 (article contribs).

Dinner? Do you mean "lunch"? Or "supper"?

"Typically, Belarusians eat a light breakfast and two hearty meals, with dinner being the largest meal of the day" Considering that "dinner" generally means "the largest meal of the day", this sentence is completely unhelpful. I know many people who use the word "dinner" for the midday meal and many others who use it for the evening meal. Does anyone know which is meant here?

Visa-free entrance to Belarus

From the 26th of October 2016 residents of 80 countries can travel to Grodno and the Grodno District and from the 9th of January 2017 to the whole territory of Belarus, from the 1st of January 2018 also to Brest and some districts of Brest Province without a visa and stay there for up to 10 (Grodno and Brest regions) or 30 (the whole Belarus) days. [1] [2] [3] [4]


Good afternoon, dear colleagues! Please, allow the following important information to be added onto the wikipedia article about Belarus. Thank you! Herasimchyk, 13:08, 30.04.2019

References

  1. ^ "Grodno visa-free in Belarus". grodnovisafree.by. How to come to Grodno, the Awgustow Channel and Grodno District
  2. ^ "Visiting Belarus without visas". belarus.by/en/. Thirty-day visa-free travel to Belarus and ten-day visa-free regime to visit two tourist zones of Belarus
  3. ^ "Visa-free travel". mfa.gov.by/en/. Visa-free travel (general information)
  4. ^ "Brest visa-free in Belarus". bezviz.by.

Incorrect flag

Cordyceps-Zombie has repeatedly changed the flag of the country to the opposition-used white-red-white flag. As I noted, this is not the country's current flag. Despite this, they have persisted on the change. ArbDardh (talk) 20:12, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Who are you to say what is correct or not Cordyceps-Zombie (talk) 20:17, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Belarussia's flag is what it is. Fact don't care about your feelings. --Comrade-yutyo (talk) 08:39, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A ban is needed. 217.209.1.128 (talk) 20:34, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have reported Cordyceps-Zombie at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. NedFausa (talk) 20:41, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
he is doing it for bragging rights on discord, i have seen him brag about it on a server i frequent. Mrwillard02 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:32, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Cordyceps-Zombie is currently blocked for 72 hours. He is not the least bit contrite. NedFausa (talk) 00:42, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
NedFausa, pinging blocking admin: OhNoitsJamie I don't doubt what Mrwillard02 is saying. I'm here from a thread on Twitter - absolutely a WP:NOTHERE. Should we move this to a better venue? Ed talk! 00:46, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe anyone is going to overrule the blocking administrator, who in effect applied a slap on the wrist. NedFausa (talk) 01:05, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The block duration is based on the user's previous history of constructive edits, otherwise it would've been an indef block. As I noted here, any further hijinks will result in a swift indef block. OhNoitsJamie Talk 02:22, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The current flag recognised by the state is disputed and should be presented alongside the opposition flag, being the widely recognised flag by the people. Tcrvocbth (talk) 15:19, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Belarus history

Belarus only emerged as an independent nation in 1918, gaining independence from the Russian Republic (de jure) or the Russian Soviet Republic (de facto). The earlier events, described in the infobox, are also part of Belarusian history, but they are not directly connected with the establishment of Belarusian state. CapLiber (talk) 14:09, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A "sudden" independence from Russia would mean a weird act of separatism. Modern Belarus emerged as a consequence of historic events such as Prinsipality of Polotsk and Grand Duchy of Lithuania, as they influenced formation of separate Belarusian language and identity.--Dƶoxar (talk) 05:46, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This article is about the state, and that portion of the infobox is about the sovereignty status of the polity in question, not the people or ethnic identity. Most states have clear moments of "sudden" independence, which I suspect in very few if any cases lines up with a specific moment of ethnogenesis. CMD (talk) 06:00, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Modern Poland gained independence in 1918, it is not "directly connected" with medieval Kingdom of Poland and Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, however they are mentioned in the infobox. The same logic works in articles about other countries (e.g. Lithuania, Serbia, Romania, Bulgaria, Croatia).--Dƶoxar (talk) 06:09, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Just because other articles do something wrong doesn't mean this article should. The field descriptions are |sovereignty_type = <!--Brief description of country/territory's status ("Independence [from...]", "Autonomous province [of...]", etc)--> and |established_event1 = <!--First key event in history of country/territory's status or formation-->. The sovereignty type field provides the reader a quick understanding of the polity's status. Often key pre-independence polities/developments are included in the established events when they lead to the state, but a set of 11 varying events lacking context is not an easily accessible list of key events. CMD (talk) 06:29, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In very many articles about sovereign states the infobox is used this way. If this is wrong, this should be disscussed on the project level and changed in all those articles (not to confuse users and not to provoke edit wars). Removing this information from separate articles looks not neutrally, as there's always a political context of this topic.--Dƶoxar (talk) 06:05, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Again, that is WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. I provided to you the descriptions on the infobox documentation, which is as close as there is to a project level consensus. Referring to the infobox documentation is not a "political" act. CMD (talk) 09:16, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The user like in other pages making OR connections and falsely claim other pages would follow his way of thinking, on the contrary.(KIENGIR (talk) 10:12, 23 August 2020 (UTC))[reply]

"Falsely" according to you, KIENGIR, but correctly according to the common sense. I'll continue my argumentation at Talk:Ukraine.--Dƶoxar (talk) 07:47, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, by far the fallacious argumentation of yours has been already demonstrated, it's not according to anyone.(KIENGIR (talk) 22:21, 27 August 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 10 September 2020

PLEASE Replace Flag Photo (green) with Belarus White-Red-White Flag Prior(1991, & 1918) to Lukashenko Reign Currently listed as "Variant flag of Belarus" should be switched with white red flag and the green is the variant Flag forced upon the people. SocialRebelAgency (talk) 21:46, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. The flag in the infobox currently matches the flag at Flag of Belarus. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:20, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

what the flag of a certain country is should be a matter of fact, not consensus, the БЧБ is widely used around the world as the flag of belarus unlike the green which has become exclusively synonymous with support for the illegitimate government, which is already marked as disputed in the infobox. the logical consequences of this are to either remove the flag completely, as done with the current president of belarus, or to put both flags on the same altitude. 2A00:1028:96D0:CDA2:D898:B246:F5C5:63AB (talk) 11:41, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We just reflect what reliable sources say. Reliable sources do mention that the white-red-white flag is becoming popular in certain regions, but they don't yet call it the flag of the country. – Thjarkur (talk) 13:21, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 October 2020

change "Over 40% of its 207,600 square kilometres (80,200 sq mi) is forested." to "Over 40% of its 207,600 square kilometres (80,200 sq mi) of land area is forested." Aldicom (talk) 16:33, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 19:42, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Languages of Belarus

Census results from 2019 have been reported in Russian. Could the percentages be updated to reflect the new numbers? For "Mother Tongue", Belarusian = 54.1%, and Russian is 42.3%. For languages spoken at home, Belarusian has gone up slightly, to 26%, while Russian is used by 71.3%. <ref>https://www.belstat.gov.by/upload/iblock/345/34515eeb3bb5f4ea5ca53b72290e9595.pdf<ref> Snd3054 (talk) 00:24, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

FA criteria

The article has considerable unsourced content; several sections are afflicted by recentism, including the "Public health" section which is exclusively devoted to COVID-19, and Etymology section which is too detailed and should be spun off into its own article, Etymology of Belarus or Names of Belarus. (t · c) buidhe 05:59, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 December 2020

Remove the arms from 1581 as they are NOT those of Belarus (see my Discussion on the image page: "This is not arms of "White Russia (Belarus)," but instead the arms of one of the Reuss principalities: Hinter Reuss, Recht Reuss, Roth (red) Reuss, Weiss (white) Reuss, etc - in the Schrot book the arms are located within precisely the arms of states of the Holy Roman Empire ("Wappenbuch des Heiligen Römischen Reichs"). The fact that it is a Reuss family arms can be further seen from the Swan and the Lion. As you know, such arms were never used in any sources in reference to actual Belarusian lands - thus, I will go ahead and remove them from all Belarus-related pages on Wikipedia the file is associated with. Also, for future reference, the Latin words "Ruthenia, Ruthenorum, Ruthenus" are not only applied to anything "Russian/Ruthenian/Belarusian/etc" but also to Latin form of the German place/family name Reuss (Reuß). Best wishes, A" Anchorite (talk) 21:54, 1 December 2020 (UTC) Anchorite (talk) 21:54, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:54, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, wait, wait! Are you kidding us? First of all, this nonsensical image in the article isn't accompanied by any sources stating it has anything to do with Belarus (hint: it doesn't). Second: even the description of that file states: "English: Coat of arms of Reuss-Weida branch of Reuss family". It's like placing image of Australian coats of arms into article about Austria because it has some "a", "u", "s", "t" and "r" letters in it, and then asking for proofs that Australian coats of arms has nothing to do with Austria, LOL. Someone with editing rights, please remove this nonsense as soon as possible. Vadzim (talk) 22:42, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]