Talk:Chronology of Ukrainian language suppression

This article was nominated for deletion on 29 December 2022. The result of the discussion was keep.

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

"Путівник з історії утисків української мови". chytomo.com (in Ukrainian). 2022-11-09. Retrieved 2023-01-05.

Sourse?

I checked the the sources of the article. I found some independent sources on the events of 17th and partially 18th century, but it seems that everything else is copypasted from some Russian internet journal (* Как уничтожали украинский язык: хроника запретов за 400 лет ). The article in this journal in it's turn was translated from Ukrainian journal here. So this whole article is mostly verified (especially 19th and 20th century sections) by something written in a Ukrainian internet journal that does not provide any further verification or even any other citation. I checked the original text of "Resolution of the Central Committee and the Council of Ministers "On further improvement of secondary education for young people and improve working conditions of secondary school." (here) and it doesn't say anything about any sort of language ban or Ukrainian language ban specifically. It's just a bunch of instructions on how a school system should be organized, thus I'm deleting this information. Can someone, please, provide some unbiased sources for this matter as well as check a veracity of information provided in 19th and 20th century sections?--Эрг (talk) 22:21, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Items in the list

I understand your concern with Russification of Ukraine. The same happened in Russian Empire with Polish and lithuanian languages: books banned, schools closed, etc. However you have to respect wikipedia rules: to not leave unreferencet text taffes for more than a year. And sources cited must explicitly say that books were banned because of language. For example the reference for the 1627 item says the books were banned because of heresy, not because of language. Staszek Lem (talk) 20:15, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

At that time all education was under church so under those policy it was declared heresy but reason was its language. This is also sourced with wikilinked articles. So this is case of WP:NEL. Also subject is described in general sources section. (Didactic gospels at the Encyclopedia of Ukraine: "The translations of chapters from the Gospels into the ordinary language of the 16th–18th century are particularly important for the history of the Ukrainian language.")--PsichoPuzo (talk) 08:23, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide the ref that the accusation in heresy was in fact because of language. Staszek Lem (talk) 21:25, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is provided: Тест на державність: Музей рідкісної книги у Ніжині подає приклад іншим and per source mentioned before.--PsichoPuzo (talk) 11:50, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The ref you cited does say "Що ж так обурило московського святійшого у збірці проповідей про життя згідно з Божими настановами? – Українська мова! " But I doubt this statement, given without any detail. The authors, Ірина Костенко, Марина Остапенко are clearly propagandists, not historians of the period. Therefore the source is not reliable for this particular fact. Staszek Lem (talk) 17:22, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Any proof of this statement? Nevertheless it is proved by Didactic gospels at the Encyclopedia of Ukraine.--PsichoPuzo (talk) 18:33, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not independent sources

Clearly, the weblinks

«Документи про заборону української мови» / Documents on prohibition of the Ukrainian language". "Ridivira"
"Хроніка заборон української мови / Chronicle of prohibitions of the Ukrainian language". zaxid.net. zaxid.net. 2012-06-18

are plagiarized from the book:

Сушко Роман, Левицький Мирослав // «Хроніка нищення Української мови» (від доби Романових до сьогодення), видання четверте виправлене й доповнене, вид. Б. МММ «Таля», м. Київ, 2012 р., 80 с. – ISBN 978-966-2995-50-3

Therefore references to these must be replaced with the references to the book. Staszek Lem (talk) 17:22, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No, this book covers only part of period but subject is wider described in other sources. So it could be supplemented.--PsichoPuzo (talk) 18:36, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am not going to exactly compare the lists, but references to zaxid.net and Ridivira are out of question, because they are not reliable sources. No evidence that these lists are compiled by historians. They are good as a source of possible facts, but each fact mentioned in these lists must be double-checked from reliable sources. Staszek Lem (talk) 21:36, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I see you are added many references to the online lists. Please replace them with the references to the book. Staszek Lem (talk) 21:40, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In a any case, the webpage is a blog post and can not reference any material. I would like to know if the book is a reliable source. Usually we require academic publishers.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:14, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

Hi all, is anyone able to provide an unbiased source for the 18th,19th, and 20th-century sections? The source cited there comes from www.ridivira.com which is clearly a biased source that doesn't even have sources for its claims. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Minion198 (talk • contribs) 20:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's very hard to find an purely objective source for previous centuries due to suppression and propaganda aimed at destruction of Ukrainian identity. 109.87.36.102 (talk) 06:08, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Poor translation

A lot of the content on this page was crudely translated from Ukrainian, with some meaning being lost, which creates confusion and misunderstanding of the facts stated. 109.54.180.104 (talk) 11:38, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]