Talk:Little Russians

Term

Little Russians was a name for the people in 19th century context. Not all who were called such back than would be correct to call Ukrainians. Additionally, many who would be called today Ukrainians were never called Little Russians, like Galician and Bukovinians. Little Russia gives a good explanation of shifting terminology. Ukrainians, OTOH, is the article about people who may or may not have been Little Russians in 19th century. --Irpen 00:27, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are right that Galician and Bukovinians were not known as Little Russians. Nonetheless, Ukrainians article provides superior information on the ethnic group which was back in Russian Empire times known as Little Russians. Not all who were living in Little Russia belonged to Little Russians ethnic group (see 1897 Russian census). --Greggerr (talk) 01:01, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The census also listed residents of Kuban as Little Russians. It is clearly a POV to call them Ukrainians in any context. The redirect forces a POV over a complex debate. To give you an example, redirecting Ukrainian Nazis to SS Galicia or UPA would make just as much sense. --Irpen 01:16, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes ... they are related, but different terms. The Little Russia article has, as far as I can see atm, more relevant information. One could start another article at the redirect; elsewhere on wiki that would be regarded as bad, but as certain examples remind me, eastern European articles have different standards on forking and this at least would solve the dispute (if a few days tiredness doesn't). Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 01:28, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Residents of Kuban, known as Little Russians were identified as such based on their language and culture. I didn't find Kuban region mentioned anywhere in the Little Russia article. --Greggerr (talk) 01:37, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Point is that it is wrong to call residents of Kuban "Ukrainians" in any context. At least it is POV, referenced or not. Your redirect implies that. If not were i busy with Kiev Gov, I would have started the article here to end this silliness. Point is that while there is no article, the redirect should be to a term than to a people. Because Little Russians and Ukrainians is simply not one and the same. Just like Ukrainian Nazis are not the same as UPA. --Irpen 01:44, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, many residents of Kuban were Ukrainians (indicated by their language and culture), and there are tons of published sources in support.

Your redirect is simply wrong. You attempt to redirect it to Little Russia, but the people were living in Kuban. --Greggerr (talk) 01:55, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

These and other regions lie on the same dialect continuum, so you can't just randomly pick and choose which anachronistic identity you give 'em. Best to let readers make up their own mind than deciding for them. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 02:09, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It would be the best to provide an explanation to the readers, rather than a redirect. But if there is a redirect it should point to the closest term. And it's not just me, other users also questioned Irpen's redirect. Why? Because it was a misleading redirect. --Greggerr (talk) 17:32, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Again, It's a mistake to redirect Little Russians to Little Russia. In Little Russia (Malorossia) in the times of Russian Empire there were different ethnic groups known at that time as Belarusians, Little Russians, Great Russians, Poles, Jews. The ethnic group, which was known as Little Russians, is now known as Ukrainians. -- 17:32, 27 April 2008 (UTC)