Talk:Ukrainians/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5

Collage in infobox (again)

There is some controversy about the collage in infobox again:
It has been removed twice by User:95.199.23.18 tonight. I must admit I have a distrust about the reasons this editor did this for: at first he pointed out to a non-existing discussion on this talkpage and then he mentioned a rule that can not exist since if a rule prevents us from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, we should ignore it and the new picture is an improvement since the majority wanted a new picture (see above) + didn't protest the new picture that has been here since weeks. If somebody wants to save bandwidth (within Wikipedia) make a new picture yourself and leave the old one until you placed that new picture. Lastly the wikipage Russians has the same collage-set up and nobody complained about too much data to the article there. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 21:11, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

I've reverted again and hopefully the IP user can start a discussion here. It's best to come to a consensus here first and then make the changes. Närking (talk) 21:16, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

For security late me state: I think the collage 95.199.23.18 protests against is a big improvement in this article. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 21:23, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

As for as I can see IP is not interested in reaching consensus and acts like a vandalist. I requested a page protection here. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 16:06, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Kievan Rus' historical map 980 1054.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Kievan Rus' historical map 980 1054.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:10, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Kievan Rus' Kyivan Rus' early formation 862 912.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Kievan Rus' Kyivan Rus' early formation 862 912.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:12, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Ukrainian Cossack state Zaporizhian Host 1649 1653.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Ukrainian Cossack state Zaporizhian Host 1649 1653.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:13, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Ukrainian National Republic map 1917 1920.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Ukrainian National Republic map 1917 1920.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:15, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

New collage proposal

File:Great Ukrainians.jpg

I have designed a new collage of undisputedly great Ukrainians. It lacks noname sportsmen, one-hit pop stars, marginal American actors, dubious politicians and medieval varangians. Feedback is welcome. --Voyevoda (talk) 19:13, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Konstanty Ostrogski - From Lithuanian territory, now a national hero of Belarus....why is he Uke #1?--Львівське (говорити) 05:34, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
Can we replace a couple of "dubious people" from my first montage and throw out the first line of people who are maybe of half-varangian origin. Women and men should be more or less equally present, and it is necessary to leave a few people well known today such as Farmiga, Ruslana, Bondarenko. On the other side; I don't know for Blohin, he is maybe of Russian ethnicity. Never heard for Pulyui. Mazepa should stay, and Sirko is not so relevant. Please, write 5 dubious people from my first photo, and your replacement suggestion. Bezborodko, Rozumovsky and Borovikovsky are good for me. Maybe two prominent women? First line will be throw up. For now, you do not have to draw a picture.--SeikoEn (talk) 19:45, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
Paskevich is also good.--SeikoEn (talk) 19:47, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello Seiko. I'm glad you want to cooperate. I would like to read your argument-backed answer on Ukraine's etymology. But back to the collage: I think, Mazepa is too controversial, also within Ukraine. Unfortunately, there are not as many prominent and important women to justify an equal representation. This would mean that other really notable people would fall out. Ivan Sirko is an undisputedly hero in Ukraine. Pulyui is a notable Western Ukrainian physicist. Blokhin's mother was Ukrainian. Can you accept this collage? I tried to construct it without any controversial figures like Bandera or Mazepa. In exchange, I ignored Brezhnev, Kovpak and others. On the other hand, I accepted the controversial historian Hrushevskyi. --Voyevoda (talk) 19:58, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

OK, Mazepa can be also out, but to my opinion he is real patriot. Now I am making new photo with your suggestions included, don't forget that photo must have background license. Please wait for ten minutes, my proposal will be finished then.--SeikoEn (talk) 20:11, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Mazepa must be in, and so is Bandera. The criteria in NOTABLITY, rather than ~being acceptable to someone. --Galassi (talk) 20:39, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
Hehe, I wonder how our Georgian and German/Austrian friends will react when we try to put Stalin or Hitler into their collages. --Voyevoda (talk) 20:45, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
I agree that Bandera is a must when discussing Ukrainians. Mazepa...sure, his labeling as a "patriot" is just historical revisionism, but I guess he counts by contemporary standards.--Львівське (говорити) 21:52, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
As far as I can see Joseph Stalin is indeed among the pictured Georgians. Närking (talk) 21:25, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Voyevoda, if you want to make agreement with me - don't do edits on page. Your photo will not be replacement for mine, without tricks or we will stop this work and back to unnecessary war editing.--SeikoEn (talk) 20:47, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

The problem is that our dispute over the illustration is only one of the many problems. You still don't answer on etymology and many other things. So far you want to keep your version without answering or justifying. Until you bring facts and convincing arguments on my objections, my version should stay. And POV tags can't be simply removed! --Voyevoda (talk) 20:55, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Galassi, I agree with you, Mazepa should stay. ... Voyevoda, your photo is a bad copy of mine and it can't be good replacement because there is no license or summary for every person on the montage!! Do you understand that! You disappoint me, I thought you want a truce ... Return all photos on other pages or I will do it, but then we are finished with our agreement! Good night!--SeikoEn (talk) 20:59, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

To exclude Mazepa would be like excluding Louis XIV of France among the French people. Whether he is seen as a patriot or traitor, Mazepa is undoubtedly a very important person in the Ukrainian history. Närking (talk) 21:01, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
I agree, Mazepa is important. Voyevoda is not a subject any more. His intentions here are obviously not honest.--SeikoEn (talk) 21:08, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
Lets scrap the names from the bottom, its a real pain to have to enlarge the pic to see who it is. Names should be in wiki links.--Львівське (говорити) 21:53, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Nobody noticed that Lyudmila Pavlichenko is much more famous then Ivan Kozhedub? — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 17:52, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Look below ... --Olexiy Parker (talk) 19:40, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Not a poll

  • We could try to identify some of the most popular Ukrainian persons by poll, but we must be very careful before inserting them into the lead image - simply polling them in won't do. For example, medieval rulers are highly problematic here because they lived before any kind of Ukrainian identity existed. Oleg of Novgorod, in particular, most likely was ethnically Norse, not even Slavic.
  • Another problem is related to Bandera and similar controversial figures. Please note how the article Russians avoids featuring Lenin, Austrians avoids featuring Hitler, and other ethnic group articles avoid controversial persons. Bandera, who is hated and despised by Poland, Belarus, Russia and half of Ukraine itself, who was recently stripped of the Hero of Ukraine title, is clearly a very bad candidate. I wouldn't use him as an advertisment of Ukrainians, especially when there are so many less controversial and positive figures who achieved something substantial unlike Bandera. His inclusion would likely cause more arguments and edit warring. GreyHood Talk 13:40, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a tool for promoting anything.... so that is not the way to appose this picture... I personal think that about 93% of Ukraine does not care about Bandera and 95% of Poland, Belarus and Russia idem dito (if they ever heard his name anyway...). I think he simply is not noticeable enough... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 18:07, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

  • Overall, I find recent Voyevoda's collage decent enough: it avoids controversial cases like mentioned above, doesn't fall into recentism and has a proper size (not overblown with persons like the current lead image). I think that while it could be improved, it is already definitely better than the current image and that's why I intend to replace the old collage with the new one unless there are better variants proposed soon and unless there are substantial arguments against. GreyHood Talk 14:08, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Must admit this picture is better then the previous on... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 18:07, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

I think with polling we can at least achieve consensus on this and move on. If I'm the only one who thinks Bandera should be on there, so be it, he doesn't make the cut. Better than mentioning someone and getting lost in text and fighting about inclusion later. Bear in mind though, this infobox picture isn't for "Great Ukrainians" but just Ukrainians in general based on notability. Controversial or not not, we shouldn't be thinking that this is a form of promotion--Львівське (говорити) 19:28, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Principles

Are possible several principles of the 'Great Ukrainians' definition:

Malevich spoke ukrainian and self-identified (at times) as Ukrainian, although he was of ethnic Polish descent.Faustian (talk) 02:00, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
As an ethnic Ukrainian or as Ukrainian by the place of birth? And Malevich was not only "ethnic Polish descent" but he was a Pole born in Ukraine. The same with the millions of Ukrainian Jews - a lot of then spoke Ukrainian, were born in Ukraine, using a 'place of birth' definition we need add them to the article/collage, isn't it? Bogomolov.PL (talk) 06:51, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
Although I aplaud your open aditude; except for Vladimir the Great the people you mention had not much impact on Ukraine... Of course Brezhnev had an impact on Ukraine but that seems more because Ukraine was part of the USSR then that he had a personal interest in Ukraine... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 18:42, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
I didn't tell Vladimir the Great had no impact on Ukraine, but he was not any ethnic Ukrainian. We need a 'Great Ukrainians' list so if we are using ethnic principle even Vladimir the Great is not valid. Bogomolov.PL (talk) 19:08, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
The principles are good. This puts medieval guys aside, as well as not clear cases like Tchaikovsky and Brezhnev. GreyHood Talk 19:13, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
While he wasn't Ukrainian, he was a prototypical figure and a good starting point. By many articles he is considered a "Ukrainian ruler" and so forth, so while I don't think we should pad it with too many medieval figures, 1 or 2 of the most relevant ones would help give breadth to the candidates (the state and historians talk of Rus' as a starting point for Ukrainians, so it stands to reason that they follow this lineage. If the etymology didn't change and Ukrainians still called themselves Rusyny this wouldn't even be up for discussion. I also have no issue with Russians doing the same). Also, in regards to your other comments, Tchaikovsky was of Ukrainian descent and frequented Ukraine so he counts by some definition of the rule. Brezhnev was Ukrainian and self-identified as so (the comment that he had both Russian parents is incorrect). Also, we are doing ethnic Ukrainians, not people born in Ukraine, so Meir, Trotsky, and Melevich don't count.--Львівське (говорити) 19:21, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
If you mentioned Vladimir the Great - I think this person is the best as 'a starting point for Ukrainians' but not an Ukrainian properly as 1000 AD this nation didn't exist at all. With Brezhnev: he was not of Ukrainian descent, but born in Ukraine and at Korenizatsiya period declaring Ukrainian ethnicity but later Russian ethnicity only, you see. He is not a valid person using Ukrainian descent principle, isn't it?. Bogomolov.PL (talk) 19:34, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
Is this just original research or assumptions on your part? The sources seem to state otherwise. --Львівське (говорити) 22:58, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
What you mean as an "original research"? That mr Brezhnev was not of Ukrainian descent? Bogomolov.PL (talk) 08:03, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
Yes, if we have proof that he was Ukrainian / self-identified as such, where are you getting this notion that he was 100% Russian and only pretended to be Ukrainian? --Львівське (говорити) 13:18, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
You are missing the discussion topic: mr Brezhnev was a person with no Ukrainian descent and so he is not a valid person using the Ukrainian descent principle. And mr Brezhnev changed his self-determination to Russian, you see. I mean using the principles I've listed makes several candidates not valid, I guess. Bogomolov.PL (talk) 13:51, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
What am I missing? Sources confirm he was Ukrainian / self-identified as a Ukrainian. You're just claiming things without backing things up (ie. that he "was a person with NO Ukrainian descent"). That he changed his nationality later is hardly unusual. Russian & Ukrainian ethnicity/nationality can be pretty fluid; as a Russian-speaker, that he decided to call himself Russian as he moved up the CP ranks while working in Russia is hardly unusual, I'd do the same.--Львівське (говорити) 16:54, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
One more time again: mr Brezhnev is an invalid person if we will use a descent principle as mr Brezhnev had Russian parents (both father and mother). You, dear Львівське, are talking about his self-identification, but he changed this self-identification to Russian and is not an ethnic Ukrainian as he was a Russian descent and rejected his Ukrainian self-identification. But your idea "Russian & Ukrainian ethnicity/nationality can be pretty fluid" makes much more difficult to precise any Russian or Ukrainian person ethnicity. But mr Brezhnev is valid using place of birth principle (along with Golda Meir, Leon Trotsky and Kazimir Malevich) I guess. Bogomolov.PL (talk) 17:53, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
Unless you can prove your claim that both of his parents were ethnic Russians and he was only pretending to be Ukrainian, your statements are void.--Львівське (говорити) 19:10, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
I didn't claim mr Brezhnev "was only pretending to be Ukrainian" - this is your idea, you see, I never told about it. I was talking about his changing of self-identification, isn't it? And your principle is if a person has an Ukrainian name and was born in Ukraine - this person is Ukrainian [1], so if Ilya Brezhnev (father) and Natalya Mazalova (mother) both born in Brezhnevo village in Russian Kursk region are not Russians - you need correct your own principle, I guess. Bogomolov.PL (talk) 19:46, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
Tchaikovsky - he was born in Russia and is wellknown as a Russian composer but his grandfather was (possibly) an Ukrainian, but second grandfather - French. So can Tchaikovsky be listed as a French composer? We don't need a list of curious facts concerning persons wellknown as non-Ukrainians, but related to Ukraine, but a list of definitely Ukrainian great persons, I guess. Bogomolov.PL (talk) 19:43, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
"possibly"? Again with the OR.--Львівське (говорити) 22:58, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
"Possibly" as an information concerning Tchaikovsky's garndfather in Ukrainian Wiki is unsourced, you see, but I guess it is possible as Chaikovsky is a common name for Ukrainians, Ukrainian Jews and Poles. Bogomolov.PL (talk) 08:03, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
Seems sourced to me by looking at his article...--Львівське (говорити) 19:10, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
  • Seems be possible Tchaikovsky's grandgrandfather could be an Ukrainian Cossack. Two sites (cited in this article) are claiming this idea, but not a fact. That is why I was talking about probable Tchaikovsky's Ukrainian grandgrandfather. But it is too weak relation to claim Tchaikovsky was an ethnic Ukrainian, I see. Bogomolov.PL (talk) 11:28, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

I want to state an obvious thing: Ukrainians are a big nation, plenty of people to choose from, and we easily could make a list of Great Ukrainians without sticking to controversial cases. Suggest take an example of Russians, Austrians and many other ethnic groups, forget about early medieval princes and people like Bandera/Mazepa, and choose from truly ethnic Ukrainians of 17th-21st centuries. GreyHood Talk 19:13, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Possibly. I think its better to spread things around from start to end and not just from the latter span of history. Just my take.--Львівське (говорити) 19:21, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Mazepa is not a controversial figure (at least not compared to Bandera) and played a big role in Ukrainian history... and obviously has suport to be in the picture... This picture is not a popularity contest or forbiden for people who killed people or did controversial things. Margaret Thatcher was also controversial in her lifetime but is stil a part of the picture with English people. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 19:35, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

He is controversial in that there are competing historiographies as to whether he was a patriot or villain. He is certainly an important figure, like him or not.--Львівське (говорити) 19:41, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
Somehow other articles on the ethnic groups try to avoid controversies. And that's a good practice I believe: collage is really not that important afterall, and reducing the amount of stuff in the article that prompts to be challenged is always nice. GreyHood Talk 20:21, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
I don't know if others are really a precedent. I mean, I checked out the Austria talk page and though Hitler was brought up twice, one was by an IP and there was barely any discussion on the matter from either side. We're a fervent, diligent bunch in eastern europe, it seems.--Львівське (говорити) 22:49, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Curent state of picture (9-12-2011)

Although I appreciate the efforts of Greyhood to create a new infobox picture; to me it looks strange that after 1962 Ukrainians are only known for there sport achievements.... What about Viacheslav Chornovil, who seems to be a good symbol of the struggle for independence and his death seems to reflect the "Mafioso" style of politics in Ukraine in the 1990's, to replace 1 sport dude (I sugest Sergey Bubka).

By the way: what will happen if Vitali Klitschko becomes big in Ukrainian politics? That would violate the unwritten rule of "no current politicians" we have created (and also seems to exist on similar pages).... Will he have to be removed from the picture? — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 22:55, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

The rest of the picture looks fine to me (with in mind the unwritten rule of "no current politicians"). In the future with all dust settled Yulia Tymoshenko will make a good candidate (in my opinion). — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 23:11, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Milla Jovovich

Perhaps we need to segregate the discussion of each individual to add to a separate section. Milla Jovovich should be counted as Ukrainian. 1) Her mother was raised in Dnipropetrovsk, 2) She was born in Kiev, 3) She self-identifies as Ukrainian here, 4) She spoke Ukrainian to classmates once she immigrated to the US. --Taivo (talk) 22:03, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

She seems Ukrainian enough for me to be in the collage. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 22:08, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

PS I am more interested in getting Pavel Popovich out of the collage then in getting Yulia Tymoshenko into it.... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 22:17, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

OK, so let's switch Popovich for Jovovich. (I would do it myself, but I'm not confident that I would do it correctly.) --Taivo (talk) 15:50, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

 Done; since Jovovich did learn to speak Ukrainian I suspect her mothers mother spoke Ukrainian and thus is of Ukrainian decent. I did read that at the time that Jovovich left the Ukrainian SSR there where close to none Ukrainian speaking schools in Kyiv (and Mila Kunis left Ukraine when she was 2 years older then Jovovich and Kunis never learned Ukrainian; but I also have read that Jews In the USSR almost all spoke Russian rather then the other languages of the USSR). But this is all WP:SYNTH.... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 17:26, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Roxelana Vs. Anne of Kiev

They where swapped today. I propose to have Roxelana in there for now but Anne to replace her in some months and then rotate her with Roxelana again etc., etc., etc. Both look interesting, although I think that for the average reader of English Wikipedia Roxelana is a more intersesting person. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 14:26, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, and I can add it's also interesting for Turkish readers who not always know about her ancestry. And by the way I think a film about her was aired on Russian TV this winter. Närking (talk) 14:45, 19 April 2012

Are you sure? To my knowledge Russian TV only shows films about WWII 24 hours a day.... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 17:32, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that's surely partly true, but this winter they also were showing a new TV drama made after Bulgakov's The White Guard and it's still available to watch online! [2]. Närking (talk) 17:57, 19 April 2012 (UTC)


Speaking of Anne of Kiev, Yaroslav the Wise should be on the list, he garnered significant support on this talk page (whereas these 2 did not) --Львівське (говорити) 18:08, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Dmitry Bortniansky & Ivan Kotlyarevsky next to go?

I am not trying to make this a rush job but since we are on a roll now... We could replace them with Jack Palance, Randy Bachman, Karina Smirnoff (don't think her fame will last long though...), Rachael Finch (interesting for Australian readers of Wikipedia), or Yulia Tymoshenko or Yana Klochkova (not sure how many people still know who that is though...). Pity that Ruslana never became as big as Shakira now... With Jovovich and Farmiga we already have 2 actresses in the collage now; placing Mila Kunis in there too is I think a bit to much... I would prefer only 1 new diaspora Ukrainian in the collage + 1 not dead Ukrainian living in Ukraine (Tymoshenko or Klochkova (or somebody else); tough Tymo is much more famous...). — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 18:10, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Women-wise I'd lean toward Tymoshenko. The Olympics are in less than 100 days, so depending on Klochkova's performance (I'm assuming she is participating) she could wind up in the public eye again. On the other, I'd probably choose Kotlyarevsky over Borniansky. Just thinking out loud... VєсrumЬа ►TALK 19:47, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
I would rule out Randy Bachman because he was born in Canada and is only 1/2 Ukrainian, unlike Jack Palance, both of whose parents were Ukrainian. I would add Palance. Even though he's another actor, 1) he's male, so contrasts with two actresses, and 2) his fame is much more solidified with a long film career and awards. --Taivo (talk) 20:11, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
Yes, although he surely is a great guitarist, Randy Bachman is more known as a Canadian than a Ukrainian. Närking (talk) 20:21, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Klochkova retired 3 years ago. If I get it right the consensus is now Tymoshenko and Palance swapping with Kotlyarevsky and Borniansky.... Right? — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 19:07, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Seems to be. --Taivo (talk) 20:45, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

collage proposal (again...)

Names Poll

(sign beside the name and lets run a tally)

Statesmen

Politician or other notable public figures who has had a long and respected career in politics or government at the national and international level

Medieval Rulers

Figures of Culture & Science

Athletes

Military man/woman

Others

Note: This page is about Ukrainians; not Ukrainian Americans etc.... There is (was???) a consensus on this talkpage, see Talk:Ukrainians#Principles, that people not born in Ukraine can not be in the infobox picture... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 18:50, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

I don't know why is that. Vera Farmiga sead that she is Ukrainian by her ethnicity. Nationality is something else. To say that Farmiga is not Ukrainian and that Blokhin is Ukrainian - it is simply not right! I am not born in Ukraine, but I am Ukrainian and nothing else. I have two different citizenships but one ethnicity. Everything is a matter of agreement!--Olexiy Parker (talk) 19:11, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

You might want to remove parts of the above; it might get you in trouble... The decision on involuntary termination of Ukrainian citizenship can be taken by the President of Ukraine. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 21:07, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Korolyuk

Paraska Korolyuk is a total unknown, even among Ukrainians. I see it as a partisan push on your part to overinflate the importance of some protester that doesn't represent "Ukrainians" as a people. --Львівське (говорити) 19:13, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Please read WP:AVOIDYOU Львівське. I just wanted not only sportspeople to represent Ukrainians in the infobox. And because we had consensus no living politicians would be included into the infobox I had limited choices... + I wanted more woman in the infobox... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 20:19, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
Fine if nobody suports here (this was done in the past); we will leave her out of the picture; I do not see Wikipedia as my blog.... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 21:01, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
There were no personal attacks, what are you talking about? And let's not start POV pushing (which you admit you are doing to include more women in the article for the sake of them being women)--Львівське (говорити) 06:46, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

NEW PRINCIPLES

Medieval rulers are part of Ukrainian history - it is quite clear! The person must have a Ukrainian background on his/her fathers side (for example, Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky or Vera Farmiga) or publicly declared (or showed) to belong to the Ukrainian culture (for example Milla Jovovich or Yulia Tymoshenko). This seems fair to everyone. Sometimes people are afraid to declare ... In particular, this happened in history. --Olexiy Parker (talk) 19:37, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Consensus is Wikipedia's fundamental model for editorial decision-making. Any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source Ten points for guessing what wp:weight we should give to your own opinions. I think Yulia Tymoshenko should be in the infobox, then the consensus came that no living or controversial politicians should be in the infobox.... So I ended up editing somebody in the infobox who in my view belongs there a lot less then Tymoshenko... I have accepted that you can not always get what you want on Wikipedia... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 20:37, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

FAMOUS UKRAINIANS

What about Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky (Ukrainian father), Igor Stravinsky (of Ukrainian family from Volyn), Andy Warhol (with Ukrainian subethnic name Rusyn) and others?! What about Sviatoslav I of Kiev who was first warrior with specific Ukrainian Cossack look ... They are all related to Ukrainian ethnicity more then to Russian or American. I think they can be included in photo montage more than Blokhin and some other people?!--Olexiy Parker (talk) 16:52, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:CYCLE says: Do not accept "Policy" , "consensus", or "procedure" as valid reasons for a revert. So what was this edit all about... Are you ready to make a compromise? Or are you just using make-up-rules to get what you want and to scare other editors in doing what you want? Farmiga and Kurylenko are not Iconic figures for Ukraine... That they are now in the infobox I find to be silly... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 17:02, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
Count the votes that are up and there will be no problem! There are many more important people than those you advocate and who received more votes. I want, you and I to have a good relationship, and respectful. In the future you do not delete content without prior agreement.--Olexiy Parker (talk) 17:13, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Well no problem; I usually have good relations with Ukrainians . I am sure we would have talked this out sooner if we would have been in the same room all the time… Can we at least get rid of Farmiga and Kurylenko today? Mila Kunis has at least had mayor roles in worldwide successful films... Kurylenko only in one and Vera Farmiga in none. To represent these 2 as "being iconic Ukrainians". I find a bit insulting for Ukrainians... Kunis is not being “an iconic Ukrainian" either by the way…. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 17:24, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Please reconsider few new women names ... UP!! Thanks!--Olexiy Parker (talk) 17:30, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Why can't Paraska Korolyuk and Lyudmila Pavlichenko not be in the infobox? Korolyuk is an icon from the Orange Revolution and Pavlichenko one of the most famous WWII snippers. Pavlichenko will be remembered long after Kurylenko and Farmiga will be forgotten (not sure about Korolyuk...) — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 17:43, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Think a bit about how you represent Ukrainians. Do you think that an older politician is a better example than an famous actress. The choice should be mixed. We need to show people from Kievan Rus' to the present day that are known, respected or very important for Ukraine. For example, Mila Kunis did not express a nice opinion about Ukraine. On the other side, Milla Jovovich loves Ukraine and a Ukrainian flag was shown in one of her films. For other example, Tchaikovsky and Stravinsky are the world's great musicians and I think we need to show their Ukrainian heritage. We can't give some less important ukrainian names from Russia, and refuse those like Tchaikovsky or Stravinsky! We should also mention some people from Canada and the U.S. where there is a large Ukrainian diaspora. Paraska is a nice person but she is not optimal presenter of Ukrainians. Nor is it Popovych or Makarenko ... We need to post pictures of persons from the old times, from recent and these days. Vladimir the Great or Yaroslav the Wise sholud not be expelled from the photo montage. I had never heard for Lydmila Pavlichenko. Maybe she is important from some reasons but in this case, more important is for example Andrey Yeryomenko. Please, reconsider your choise and look up the voting results for a few days. :)--Olexiy Parker (talk) 19:02, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
Pavlichenko "is regarded as the most successful female sniper in history". I adore Ukrainian actresses etc, but looks like Pavlichenko made a historical achievement. Also, if you intend to present Ukraine through the ages and eras, obviously someone should represent WWII. It would be good to have both Lyudmila Pavlichenko and Andrey Yeryomenko. But if we have to choose between them two, I would prefer Pavlichenko because we need more women and because she set a clear record. GreyHood Talk 22:48, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
I can not recall Mila Kunis saying that antisemitism in the Soviet Union was the fault of the Ukrainian people... I agree with you about Tchaikovsky and (not sure about Stravinsky). I personaly think that diaspora are never a good representation of Ukrainians since they grew up in another culture. Sorry if that hurt your feelings, but that is how I look at things... I am also confused about your intentions.... First you wanted more woman in the picture but now you want to replace Lyudmyla Pavlichenko with Andrey Yeryomenko? Anyhow Consensus is Wikipedia's fundamental model for editorial decision-making; so what you and me think is not the most important thing here.... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 21:01, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

In the present version, I like adding more women and not only sportspeople in the last row. Though I do not know who are some of the recently added persons and I suspect that they are not really more notable than Pavlichenko or Yeryomenko.

One possible solution could be rotating images over time. Why not give more Ukrainian persons a chance to be featured here, afterall? Some controversial cases (such as no clear Ukrainian ancestry and no Ukrainian self-identification), of course, are better to avoid because they would spur edit-warring. GreyHood Talk 22:48, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

I support Greyhood's "rotating images" idea and agree (with him) to leave people with no clear Ukrainian ancestry and no Ukrainian self-identification out of this collage. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 23:08, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
Grey, you say: controversial cases (such as no clear Ukrainian ancestry and no Ukrainian self-identification) ... THIS IS ANTIUKRAINIAN THINKING but I don't have hard feelings for you. UKRAINIANS ARE RUS' PEOPLE and not some new nation from 1917. You are aware of that and please do not say that Tchaikovsky is maybe French. Ukrainian people began to be formed under the name Rus' in the 10th century and used it until the 20th century!! Russians should ask there selfs whether some Ukrainians are of their ethnic origin and not the other way around! We can take Pavlichenko but no without Tchaikovsky, Stravinsky and Warhola. They are ethnic Ukrainians who were abducted in political terms, in the same way some names were changed etc. Ukrainians have built their identity differently from the Russians and Americans, and it should be respected. Nobody can create a nation of 50 million people after the fall of the Russian Empire. Ukrainians were formed for more than 10 centuries under a different name, but still it's the same people. I respect all citizens of Ukraine, but this is about Ukrainians, not Ukraine. Ukrainians have existed prior to the Ukraine, prior to 1917., so please respect the nation in the same way as Ukrainian citizens. Sviatoslav of Kiev, Vladimir the Great, Yaroslav the Wise - they were all people of Rus'-Ukraine and only fasicst politics ignore that truth about Ukrainians. Give us a fair proposal and I will agree with him!:)--Olexiy Parker (talk) 06:00, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
If you mean that Ukrainians and Russians are from one ethnic origin I can only agree with that. But the lack of Ukrainian self-identification until the late middle ages/the early modern era (or even until the 19th century) does not really help. Though, of course, we could and should feature those people who identified themselves as Ruthenian/Malorussian. GreyHood Talk 13:32, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Please do not push politics here. Ukrainians were Ruthenians, the same way Russians were Muscovites, so there is no real subject to discuss.--Olexiy Parker (talk) 15:23, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

PROPOSAL BY OLEXIY PARKER (30 people):

Extended content
  • BELIEVE TO AGREE:
  • NEW PEOPLE:
As we can see, there is the same base of 20 people - allready accepted. My suggestion is to introduce famous people from Russia, such as Tchaikovsky and Stravinsky and the Americas Warhol. Well think about these 10 new people. Almost half of them must be women ... We must be honest, reject the politics and think a little bit about marketing!--Olexiy Parker (talk) 06:35, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Warhol is a tough one. He was born in the US, he self identified as Rusyn...but was also in the Ukrainian community and spoke Ukrainian. I think the self identification might nix him, but then again, many of the older figures on this list self-identified as Rusyn ("Ruthenian") in their time period as well. It's dicey. --Львівське (говорити) 12:53, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
American/Slovak/Rusyn makes him a tough case indeed. If he is ethnically and linguistically Rusyn, and if modern-era Rusyns are considered an ethnic subgroup of Ukrainians, than I suppose we might include him. GreyHood Talk 14:04, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Tchaikovsky looks to have more Russian, specifically Vyatka origin. Only his paternal grandfather look to be born near Poltava, while his paternal grandmother and maternal ancestors look to have Russian and some German ancestry. GreyHood Talk 13:41, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Stravinsky is Russian with Polish ancestry. There is some theory of a distant Ukrainian origin, but that's too weak claim. GreyHood Talk 14:33, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Lina Kostenko and Olena Teliha are way too little known and produced much less cultural impact than other persons in the same eras. Olga Kurylenko looks OK. GreyHood Talk 14:04, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Milla Jovovich is ethnically Serbian/Montenegrin-Russian. Just born in Ukraine. Heidemarie Stefanyshyn-Piper might be OK. GreyHood Talk 14:11, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Recently added Solomiya Krushelnytska seems comparatevely not very famous. Vera Farmiga might be OK. GreyHood Talk 14:31, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

For some reason Wladimir Klitschko seems to have been forgotten in this discussion... He has the same status as his brother in and outside Ukraine and he was next to him in the collage till yesterday. But his name up in NEW PEOPLE; though I think all in favor of his brother in the collage should also agree on Wladimir Klitschko in the collage.... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 14:23, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, both Klitschko brothers are very famous. Not sure if we should have both of them at a time, but if we agree to rotate the persons in the infobox, both Klitschkos should find their way there. GreyHood Talk 14:31, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

I can not help to notice that this discussion is starting to get a rush job.... Suddenly today a lot of Ukrainian people where not up for discussion anymore without any reason given (even people who once had support in past discussions)... Please lets give other editors some time to think about this and to discover this discussion. No need to be impatient.... The collage we have up today in this article is not an insult to Ukraine or anything... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 14:48, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Grey and others, please do not complicate the matter further ... I am also Rusyn from Mukachevo but still I am well aware of antiukrainian movement about Warhol and similiar things or modern bussiness for some people sponsored by Moscow. So please, get to real work here ... In our framework there are 22 people with the most votes. We need 8 more new names. As we see these people have received more votes:
Here we can see that we need 3 more names. By the way, to put two Klitschkos is realy unnecessary! Suggestions? I am suggesting three new women to make a balance!--Olexiy Parker (talk) 15:00, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
This is not a vote and you should not try to vote in persons with dubious Ukrainian ancestry. Note that me and other people have not voted for the recent proposals at all so far, while some of those proposals are identified as problematic. Also if we try voting not only pro, but contra too, I guess, the consensus would be more accurately established. GreyHood Talk 17:12, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Asking for patience is not "complicating things"........ Your rushing to finish this discussion is complicating things.... Lets give others some time to think! And if the majority wants to have two Klitschkos in the collage so it shall be; this Wikipedia article is not your private property. How many times do I have to tell you Wikipedia works with consensus as its main pillar? — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 15:24, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Just to throw in my two cents. If Warhol self identified as Rusyn, then he should not be included here as "Ukrainian". The Rusyns consider themselves to be a separate people and many in the world agree with them. As a linguist myself, Rusyn is no more a dialect of Ukrainian than Belarusian is. Warhol should not be included here because the inclusion of Rusyn in Ukrainian is a Ukrainian political position, not one recognized by the Rusyns and by many in the international community. Warhol should be excluded if he considered himself Rusyn and not Ukrainian. And artists should be included here--Jovovich, etc.--because they are the "face" of Ukraine to the outside world. Few people have ever heard of most of those faces in your collage, but Jovovich is internationally recognized. Why not include her? (This discussion has gone on too fast and long for me to keep up, so you may already have decided to include her.) It is important that any internationally recognized Ukrainians are included in this list--but that Rusyns are excluded. "Famous" does not mean just to a Ukrainian schoolchild--it means people who the world would recognize and be interested to find out that they are Ukrainian. Few, if any, of those people in the current collage are recognizable. The majority of readers of Wikipedia will look at the current collage and say, "So no one famous has ever come from Ukraine." --Taivo (talk) 16:34, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Good points, but it seems that most famous people these days are from the USA/Canada/UK; that Ukraine has not produced many current worldwide famous persons (the same seems to go for Germany by the way) says more about the world we live in then about Ukraine... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 16:53, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

I think this is starting to get a little messy. Which ones are the "old" ones that should stay? And how many names do we really need? In other articles the number vary a lot, from 12-30, or even more. But when the number is getting too high the pictures are getting way too small. Närking (talk) 17:01, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Indeed, that get's messy. GreyHood Talk 17:12, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
"Born in Ukraine" counts in Jovovich's case, because she is almost universally identified in news articles, etc. as "Ukrainian" and she's never (as far as I can tell) denied being "Ukrainian" (as Warhol did). Or are you looking for some sort of ethnic purity here? If so, how the heck does Stravinsky get on this list? I don't see any Ukrainian connection in his bio whatsoever. And right now, Kyrylo Fesenko is an NBA player and quite well-known in the cities he's played/playing in. In Utah, he's a minor celebrity because of his wit and charm. He should be shown. He is certainly more recognizable internationally than some random Orange Revolution activist who is absolutely unknown and unrecognizable beyond the small circle of Ukrainians who have studied the Orange Revolution in any detail. Internationally, the only Orange Revolution personalities anyone knows about are Tymoshenko and Yuschenko. --Taivo (talk) 17:27, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Has Jovovich not only never denied being Ukrainian, but affirmed and self-identified as being Ukrainian (and not just in the sense of the birthplace)? Apparently we cannot avoid talking about ethnic ancestries - we are talking about ethnicity, not nationality or birthplaces here. Otherwise all American Ukrainians would be excluded from Ukrainians as non-nationals, and Tatars etc. would be included into Russians as nationals. GreyHood Talk 17:58, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
I can not stretch enough that Paraska Korolyuk is a suggestion of mine; not an ultimation (that a past bold-move of putting her picture in the collage was not reverted is not my fault... I would not have mined). If Jovovich is allowed into the picture so should Milla Kunis (we are not sure where here parents are born but we are sure Jovovich's parents are not born in Ukraine....). I am not a fan of the NBA... so I never heard of Kyrylo Fesenko. But if we will start to rotate the pictures I will applause the inclusion of Jovovich, Kunnis and Fesenko at one point in time... Or some other noticable celebrities with Ukrainian roots wsho have not denied being "Ukrainian" — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 17:53, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Procedural note: Olexiy Parker (talk · contribs) and UAKasper (talk · contribs), who have both participated in the above discussion, have both been blocked as ban-evading socks of SeikoEn (talk · contribs) and of each other. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:39, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

I had the feeling that Olexiy Parker and UAKasper where the same person all the time.... Thanks for the help Fut.Perf. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 17:42, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

What is Milla Jovovich doing here?

Milla Jovovich isn't even an ethnic Ukrainian. She's half Russian half Serbian, but simply born in Ukraine. Jeeezus. She's only Ukrainian by nationality not ethnicity. I'm going to remove her. PacificWarrior101 (talk) 04:34, 28 April 2012 (UTC)PacificWarrior101

I'll indulge you...but what do you call a person of 'Russian' descent who was born in, speaks, and identifies as 'Ukrainian'?--Львівське (говорити) 06:40, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Russian-Ukrainian or how about this, "ethnic Russian in Ukraine" if they speak Russian as a native language. If not, then yes of course...simply a Ukrainian of Russian ancestry.PacificWarrior101 (talk) 01:12, 29 April 2012 (UTC)PacificWarrior101
Lvivske, there is no such thing as "ethnic purity". Are you going to do genetic testing on everyone who claims to be Ukrainian? That's ridiculous. Her mother was raised in Dnipropetrovsk. She was born in Kyiv. After coming to the US she identified herself as Ukrainian and spoke Ukrainian. That's Ukrainian. If you have a drop of Polish blood in you does that make you "not Ukrainian". Eastern Europe has plenty of genetic mixing, so trying to claim that someone is not Ukrainian because they've got something else mixed in their DNA is unreasonable. There's not a "Ukrainian" in Lviv without some Polish ancestry and there's not a "Ukrainian" in the east without some Tatar or Mongol or "Russian" ancestry. --Taivo (talk) 11:12, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Taivo, what the hell are you talking about. I was pretty clearly eluding that she is clearly Ukrainian by any metric. --Львівське (говорити) 17:59, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Agreed, no one in Eastern Europe is "pure" anything or entirely "1/2 this and 1/2 that"... VєсrumЬа ►TALK 13:58, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
This simply isn't true, however.--Львівське (говорити) 17:59, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Lvivske, sorry, but I got totally confused by Pacific Warrior's comment and thought it was yours. My error. Sorry. My eye caught that bold Lvivske and my brain attributed everything above it to you. --Taivo (talk) 20:04, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
I'm aware that nobody's half this half that. But her parents aren't even ethnic Ukrainians! Maybe if she continues to live in Ukraine and has children there her descendants would be considered ethnic Ukrainians. I'm being fed hypocritical BS here. People told me Mila Kunis wasn't Ukrainian just because her parents were Jews. Now I'm being told that Milla Jovovich is Ukrainian, just because she's born there? PacificWarrior101 (talk) 01:11, 29 April 2012 (UTC)PacificWarrior101
Personally, and this is just me, but Jews cannot become Ukrainian just by 'being here' (just as a Ukrainian is not a Jew by being born in Israel). Russians on the other hand, since they technically are descendants of Rus', I feel there is a 'law of return' there where one can re-assimilate. Now, I'm not going by that in this discussion, however. Mila is a Jew, possibly a Russian Jew, who happened to be born in Ukraine, but does not self identify as Ukrainian. Jovovich, aside from being 100% slavic, speaks and self identifies as Ukrainian. She has, for intents of this discussion, assimilated into the ethnos. Kunis, on the other hand's, only connection is place of birth.--Львівське (говорити) 01:49, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
For those Ukrainians living outside Ukraine, the self-identification is all-important as Lvivske points out. Jovovich identifies herself as Ukrainian and speaks Ukrainian. Kunis, on the other hand, in this interview simply says "I grew up in Ukraine", but her main self-identification is her Jewish roots. That's an example of someone who lives outside Ukraine, but isn't "Ukrainian" because she chooses not to be. The religion isn't the issue, it's what she calls herself and she doesn't say "I'm Ukrainian", she only says "I grew up in Ukraine". That's the difference. --Taivo (talk) 02:10, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
I know, I get that theory. So as you mean to say, since Jews are Semitic and Ukrainians are Slavic they can't assimilate? Okay. I'm a Filipino (Austronesian). If I go to Malaysia, my children are going to become Malays (also Austronesians) if they speak Bahasa Malaysia as a native language if they profess to be Malays? PacificWarrior101 (talk) 21:52, 29 April 2012 (UTC)PacificWarrior101
You DON'T get it. A Jew can be a Ukrainian as well as a Christian can. The difference with Kunis is that she doesn't claim to be Ukrainian. This isn't about "all Jews", this is specifically about Kunis alone. SHE doesn't claim to be Ukrainian. That's the key. Don't turn this into something it isn't or generalize this to all Jews. We have specifically looked at what Kunis says about herself. If she said, "I am Ukrainian", then we'd list her here with other famous Ukrainians. But she doesn't want to be Ukrainian. And Jews are not "Semites". That is simply ridiculous ethnic profiling. Most Russian Jews are descended from the medieval Khazars, converts to Judaism, so their DNA isn't primarily "Semitic" anyway. But you cannot equate religion with ethnicity or nationality. We don't for a second consider religion in this list. --Taivo (talk) 21:56, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
I thought Russian Jews were Ashkenazim who migrated eastward (into the Pale)? Khazars kinda disappeared (and according to the khazar article, the notion that modern jews descended from the turkic khazars is contested)--Львівське (говорити) 01:11, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
While the Khazar culture may have disappeared, that doesn't mean that Khazar DNA disappeared. But the point is that you cannot simply assume that all Jews are "genetically pure" Semites. Conversion and intermarriage have mixed that DNA quite a bit over the last 2000 years. That's the point. PacificWarrior was trying to claim some sort of Semitic genetic purity to Jews in the Russian Empire and that was simply not the case. Religion simply does not carry DNA along (and neither does language for that matter). --Taivo (talk) 02:20, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
I just want to emphasize here the inherent problem with the mutually named ethnonym and denonym of 'Ukrainian' here. This article concerns the ethnic portion - the Ukrainian people. Self identification plays a big role, but it isn't the be all end all. Even of someone like Kunis called themselves "Ukrainian" they could just as well be referring to citizenship, or their place of birth (case in point, my father was born in Germany and likes to call himself German, for fun or whatever reason, but he's not German by any means). --Львівське (говорити) 16:03, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
wow...because basically someone wants to be Ukrainian. Okay, I'm going to move to Germany and claim that I'm German! I'm not Filipino, so I guess my ehtnicity magically dissappears don't it? PacificWarrior101 (talk) 16:12, 30 April 2012 (UTC)PacificWarrior101
No, because, unlike Jovovich, at least one of your parents wasn't raised in Ukraine, you were not born in Ukraine, and you don't speak Ukrainian (or Russian, for that matter). You have some stupid and ignorant notion that there is some genetic measurement for being "Ukrainian". Such ideas show a complete ignorance of Ukrainian history and nationality. --Taivo (talk) 18:52, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Even if his Filipino parents were raised in Ukraine, they wouldn't be Ukrainians. Sure, they would be Ukrainian citizens, they may even speak Ukrainian, but I doubt they'd be checking off "Ukrainian" in the nationality field of a census. --Львівське (говорити) 15:58, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
But, Lvivske, you know as well as I do that trying to use some DNA measurement to define who is "Ukrainian" and who isn't is simply impossible. It is a slippery slope from "ethnic identity" to "ethnic purity" to "ethnic cleansing" to "final solution". --Taivo (talk) 16:54, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
I can't believe we're still arguing. The question is very simple, if someone has assimilated to the local culture and there are no obvious indications (appearance, accent, mannerisms,...) they are not of the local culture, then they are of the local culture and if they self-identify as such, that is sufficient. For example, many Jews identify themselves as Ukrainian, Russian, Lithuanian, etc.
On the one hand, if I moved to central Africa and became fluent in Bantu, at > 6 ft tall and untanned parts of my body as white as the driven snow, I doubt anyone would mistake me for a Pygmy. I'd still be "Latvian" no matter what my personal conversion is with regard to adopting the local Pygmy culture. On the other hand, if Milla Jovovich walks, talks, looks, and acts like a Ukrainian and culturally considers herself Ukrainian, then we're done. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 17:51, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Gaitana and Gretzky

Lvivske wants to remove Gaitana because "she's a nobody". He wants to add Wayne Gretzky. I've opened this section for discussion on these two. If Gretzky is Ukrainian, then he should be here. What are his credentials for being Ukrainian? --Taivo (talk) 18:46, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

  • Ukrainian Wikipedia links to the Gretzky interview [3] where he told about his grandparents: grandfather Belarusian and grandmother Polish who spoke at home in Ukrainian. Bogomolov.PL (talk) 20:39, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
According to this in the English Wikipedia Gretzky doesn't fit any of the categories that we have previously looked at for determining if someone in the diaspora was "Ukrainian": 1) he wasn't born in Ukraine, 2) neither of his parents are Ukrainian, 3) he doesn't speak Ukrainian, and 4) he doesn't claim to be Ukrainian. As far as I can tell, only his paternal grandmother was Ukrainian. That's not enough Ukrainian, especially since he doesn't claim to be Ukrainian. --Taivo (talk) 21:57, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
His father is Ukrainian. (Or 'Belarusian/Ukrainian who speaks Ukrainian')--Львівське (говорити) 21:59, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
Personally, I think Gaitina is a bad choice, and Gretzky is a better but not ideal choice. Even Gretzky's father is a better choice (he has biopics done on him, books, etc. he's actually famous unlike Gaitana). I'd personally like to see Daria Werbowy on there rather than a few options as well. I think there are probably a lot more options too, several of whom were voted for above on the talk page but not included for whatever reason.--Львівське (говорити) 22:02, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
I'm sure Ukrainians are a large nation with a lot of indisputable Ukrainians but Gretzky (who is a Pole in plwiki, a Belarusian in bewiki and really a Canadian, I see) has too week Ukrainian descendancy, I guess. I'm not sure of his Ukrainian roots as even Львівське told "His father is Ukrainian. (Or 'Belarusian/Ukrainian who speaks Ukrainian')" so he is not sure too (may be father may be grandfather or grandmother). Just now we know mr.Gretzky has the relatives in Belarus, but we have no information about his Ukrainian roots. Bogomolov.PL (talk) 22:42, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
No....Walter Gretzky is a Ukrainian speaker. Both of his parents spoke Ukrainian. His mother was Ukrainian, and born in Ukraine. His father was born in Belarus. This is indisputable and widely known. (there are no "maybes" here). --Львівське (говорити) 00:29, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
But Wayne Gretzky himself doesn't claim to be Ukrainian that I can tell. At different times he's claimed to be Polish, Belarusian, Canadian, etc. If he isn't going to claim to be Ukrainian, neither of his parents were born in Ukraine, his mother isn't Ukrainian, and he, himself, doesn't speak Ukrainian, then he's simply too far removed from Ukraine to be considered here. --Taivo (talk) 05:21, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
And, yes, we have positively discussed others above here, but haven't added them yet. Jack Palance, for example. --Taivo (talk) 05:22, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
Taivo, why are you holding the page hostage? It seems like WP:OWN at this point to revert everyone on the premise of consensus when Gaitana herself wasn't even added with consensus. You can't have it both ways. [4], [5], [6], [7]--Львівське (говорити) 22:26, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Not holding the page "hostage". But no consensus was ever reached on deleting Gaitana. Simple as that. If we're going to work by consensus, then we must work by consensus. Period. The people removing Gaitana all happen to be strangers who haven't taken a moment to discuss the deletion here. I suspect that her dark-skinned photo has more to do with it than with any reason why she should not be considered Ukrainian. And Gaitana's photo was added before we really started discussions here. --Taivo (talk) 22:32, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Gaitana was added April 18, and there was no consensus to add her in the first place. There's no reason you should be reverting everyone. If we look at those you've reverted so far as 'against', then there (based on how active this discussion has been) should be enough consensus to remove her. I don't know what exactly you're waiting for. --Львівське (говорити) 00:17, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
Editors who don't discuss here, make a change without comment, then disappear, do not constitute a consensus. State why you want her removed. This isn't a complicated process. Just get some agreement right here on this Talk Page. Fly by night editors don't count. You've edited here long enough, you know exactly how WP:CONSENSUS works. --Taivo (talk) 02:47, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I know how consensus works, but there was no consensus to put in in in the first place - but plenty of objection. You owning the page under this guise of 'consensus' like this is just mind boggling at this point. --Львівське (говорити) 05:55, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
So, Lvivske, if there was all this "objection", then it won't take you more than 24 hours to get a nice little consensus for removal. Instead of bitching about me asking for a consensus, why don't you use your time to get one? So far you're the only person commenting here against Gaitana and you are complaining about the process and haven't presented a single reason why you think she should be omitted (and offered no one to replace her either). --Taivo (talk) 06:46, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
This entire page has been about consensus. Look at all the 'votes' we have going on. Holding a page hostage and asking for "consensus" when you know very well what people here are erring to is just asinine. Edit warring with users because they didn't use the talk page first to get your approval far from constructive editing. --Львівське (говорити) 15:03, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
Yes, building consensus, Lvivske, but anon IPs simply imposing their desires on the page without discussion is not building consensus. Build a consensus, Lvivske, don't bitch because we don't want anon IPs running amok. --Taivo (talk) 15:47, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
Gaitana is a temporally interesting at the international scale (EuroVision 2012) - but Sergey Bubka has better importance, I see. Bogomolov.PL (talk) 12:33, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
I agree that Bubka is worlds more important and well known. I doubt Gaitana is even popular in Ukraine. --Львівське (говорити) 14:59, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
The question isn't about whether X or Y is popular in Ukraine, but about who represents the notion of "Ukrainian" to our readers. Is she a citizen? Is she an expat? Are her parents Ukrainian? Was she born in Ukraine? Does she self-identify as Ukrainian? These are relevant questions, not popularity. I notice that Bubka meets all these criteria, but, like Gaitana, is he really known to a wider audience, namely, our English-speaking readers? Of course, most of the people pictured are virtually unknown outside Ukraine. --Taivo (talk) 15:47, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
FWIW, my brother's girlfriend, Irish-Canadian, 18 years old - brought up Bubka in a conversation recently about the Olympics / track. Bubka may have done what he did a long time ago, but he did it on the international stage and won a lot of hardware. Gaitana on the other hand is unknown outside of Ukraine, or in the English speaking world, and has no accolades to speak of other than being a contestant. Ruslana at least won. --Львівське (говорити) 18:16, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
OK. So you're replacing Gaitana with Bubka? --Taivo (talk) 18:21, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
I'm really sick and tired of these anon IPs just running amok on the article page without bothering to read a single word here on the Talk Page. If the consensus was to replace Gaitana with Bubka, then that is what should happen, not just letting an anon IP delete Gaitana. --Taivo (talk) 02:02, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
Will one of you guys who want to exchange Bubka for Gaitana actually do it? I'm sick of anon IPs running amok without even bothering to look at the Talk Page. --Taivo (talk) 05:33, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
Thank you :) --Taivo (talk) 13:15, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

What this page is and is not

Rather than screaming about "Russification" and "American bias", why don't those of you who want to make political statements go somewhere else? This page is for rational, careful, considerate discussion about what criteria we will use for determining who should and should not be shown here. First of all, this is not the "international version" of Wikipedia. This is the English language version. Since the majority of English speaking users of Wikipedia tend to come from the United States and the United Kingdom, that tends to be an important consideration for who should and should not be here--are these people individuals that Americans and/or Brits will or might recognize. That is an important consideration. If Ukrainians want only residents of Ukraine, then they should post that set of photos in the Ukrainian Wikipedia. Second, this is not some list of "ethnic purity" based on some politicized notion of who should and shouldn't be Ukrainian. There is no measurement of "ethnic purity" in Eastern Europe anyway. Indeed, half the population of Ukraine either has Tatar or Mongol blood in them anyway and if you know how to separate Russian blood from Ukrainian blood then you have done something that no geneticist will ever be able to do. So we take individuals on this page one at a time, slowly and carefully, with references, to determine whether they are appropriate or whether someone else might be more appropriate. We want this page to be useful for American and British readers primarily and only secondarily for Ukrainian readers. It's not a vanity list for Ukrainian pride week. --Taivo (talk) 06:16, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Criteria for famous Ukrainians

We need to have no more than 25-30 persons in the infobox at a time, otherwise the names and portraits get too small. However I believe we may rotate famous Ukrainians in the infobox from time to time, so if we compile a larger list of perhaps 50-60 persons, that would be OK.

So, the size of the list of famous Ukrainians should not be the primary issue. However, we need to establish the criteria for the persons to be added into the infobox. I propose the following:

  • Self-identification. Ukrainian (19-21st centuries), Soviet Ukrainian (20th century), Malorussian (up to the early 20th century).
    • In the time of the Russian Empire I believe that many famous persons actually identified themselves as Russians but were proud of their Malorussian "little homeland" and ancestry. So I believe a person born in the Malorussian territories during the Imperial era should be considered Malorussian (i.e. OK for inclusion into the famous Ukrainians list - of course if a person is also notable), unless both of such person's parents came to Malorussia from other regions of Russia or from elsewhere, or were known to have non-Malorussian ethnicity.
    • Ruthenian self-identification (late middle ages to early modern era) also passes for persons who were born on the modern Ukrainian territory. Rusyn self-identification is a hard case, especially for modern Rusyns who apparently consider themselves a different ethnic group from Ukrainians. So, unless there is majority support from sources that a particular Rusyn person is also Ukrainian, than we should better not include such persons.
  • Notability. The number of WP:Interwikies is a moderately good way to establish international notability of a person. The more interwikies are in the article, the better. Persons with less than 15 interwikies should better not be included, and those with less than 10 interwikies most certainly should not be included.
  • No significant controversy. Persons with highly controversial or negative reputations should not be included (e.g. Bandera, Shukhevych, Chikatilo). Ukrainians could be fairly and nicely represented without such people. Cases like Ivan Mazepa or Symon Petliura are borderline in my opinion - they are fairly controversial, but sufficiently distant history not to raise too many emotions and edit wars. I'd recommend to remove Petliura, though, since he is 20th century. GreyHood Talk 17:49, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Those look like good criteria, but I would not exclude people who claim to be Malorussians, but whose parents were not. A person who is proud to be "Malorussian/Ukrainian", and was born there, should be allowed to be that. Ethnic identity is not the same as genetic purity. --Taivo (talk) 17:57, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Agreed, but a person should not only be proud to have been born in Malorussia/Ukraine, but should be proud to be Malorussian/Ukrainian. It is an intricate difference - I mean the person should identify him(her)self not only with the place, but with the people too. GreyHood Talk 18:04, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Current Ukrainian nationalist seem not to care about Petliura and I wonder why will edit war about him (since I included him into the picture I have heard no complaints about him; PS he has the most Notability of all people from the period 1914-1925).... Russian/Israeli nationalist wo have a lot of free time? — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 18:18, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

I do not agree with the No significant controversy criteria. Wikipedia is not a tool of promotion of the Ukrainian people. Sure that we shall have not 2 highly controversial persons at the same time in the infobox: OK! We should not give the impression that there are statistically more Ukrainian murderers then German ones... But 1 murderer in the infobox will not harm beyond repair the reputation of Ukraine… I believe that bad sides of a country should be openly discussed since ignoring the bad sides of the past will lead to stinky open wounds that could erupt in nasty ways… — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 18:35, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
I see 3 controversial persons in the infobox now: Mazepa, Makhno, Petliura. Seems rather many. I'd prefer to remove Petliura, but leave Mazepa as an old story, and Makhno as more notable and seemingly less controversial. As for WP:NOTADVERTISING - we are not advertisize Ukrainians - we simply try to show some Ukrainian faces and link to the better known Ukrainian persons for the convenience of the readers. And we better do that avoiding controversy and edit wars. GreyHood Talk 18:59, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Since when are Petliura, Mazepa and Makhno controversial? They are not even known outside Eastern Europe.... The readers of this article where we are aiming for are from the English speaking world with no knowledge of Ukraine... We are not editing this article for the Eastern European Diaspora... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 19:07, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Per example: Hitler is a controversial figure, not Mazepa.... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 19:09, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
I guess it's only in Russia (where historians always have to say he was a traitor) that Mazepa is still a controversial person 300 years after his death. Petliura is a well-known symbol of the short independence struggle after the revolution. Makhno might be a well-known person among anarchist, but less notable than the others mentioned. Närking (talk) 19:11, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
The difference between "I'm proud to have been born in Ukraine/Malorussia" and "I'm proud to be a Ukrainian/Malorussian" is trivial and not really relevant for our purposes here. --Taivo (talk) 19:16, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
I agree with Taivo on this (I mean his sentence right above this one). — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 19:23, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Many people born in Ukraine and proud to be born in Ukraine consider themselves Russians or Crimean Tatars. So the difference is not trivial. GreyHood Talk 19:41, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
But you are treading on WP:OR and improper WP:SYN here. If a person says, "I'm Ukrainian" in a reliable source, then it is not our place to contradict that with some original research about the genetic ancestry of their parents. If they say "I'm Ukrainian", then we must take them at their word without second guessing them. It is improper original research or POV motivated improper synthesis to say they are not. Wikipedia is not the place for ethnicity or genetics testing that contradicts the sourced comments of the person in question. --Taivo (talk) 20:11, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
If a person says, "I was born in Ukraine, but I'm Russian/Rusyn/Tatar," then those aren't the cases that I'm talking about. People such as Warhol have self-identified then as something besides Ukrainian. But without a definite statement from a reliable source that the person claims a different ethnicity, then saying "I'm from Ukraine" is equivalent for Wikipedia purposes to saying "I'm Ukrainian". Any attempts on our part to judge the issue or segregate citizens of Ukraine into different categories is original research or improper synthesis. Kyrylo Fesenko, for example, speaks Russian, but was born in Dnipropetrovsk. He has never said, however, "I'm Russian", so he is Ukrainian. --Taivo (talk) 20:15, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Don't you think that it could be also considered original research to make an assumption that if a person says "I am from Ukraine" than he is Ukrainian ethnically, not only nationally or by birthplace? Such an assumption would come true only in 3/4 of cases which corresponds to the percentage of people who identify themselves as Ukrainians in Ukraine. GreyHood Talk 20:29, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Nope. The statement "I am from X" and "I am an Xian" are identical unless the person says they are not. Any other formulation is simply original research. Look up "Ukrainian" in the dictionary and the first definition will always be "A person from Ukraine". If the standard English definition of "Xian" is "a person from X", then that is what we go with in Wikipedia--common English usage. Any other ad hoc definition of "Xian" here is original research and not a simple interpretation of English meaning. --Taivo (talk) 06:36, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
You mix things, geolocation/nationality and ethnicity. When a Crimean Tatar person says "I'm from Ukraine" or even "I am Ukrainian" he means place of birth/residence and nationality, not ethnicity. GreyHood Talk 19:44, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
Seems that the attitude towards Mazepa is polarised in the Ukrainian society as well: "About 30 percent of the population views Mazepa as "a man who fought for the independence of Ukraine," while 28 percent view him "as a turncoat who joined the enemy's ranks," according to an April survey by independent Ukrainian pollster the Research and Branding Group". [8] --glossologist (talk) 19:25, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
About 28% of the Ukrainian population watch Russian TV where 300 year old history is still politicized and where Mazepa is always called traitor. So the result in that poll is no surprise. Närking (talk) 19:34, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Petliura was accused in anti-semitism (perhaps not quite correct, but he was killed by a Jew activist for that, and the activist even was acquitted). Makhno was anarchist and both Makhno and Petliura were connected to the atrocities of the Russian Civil War. As for Mazepa - explained above, he is controversial among Ukrainians too. GreyHood Talk 19:50, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Once again= We are not editing this article for the Eastern European Diaspora nor for Ukrainians nor for Russians. It is trivial for us, as editors of English Wikipedia, what the people in Ukraine think about anybody or anything.... the same goes for Russians and for any Diaspora... Makhno and Petliura and Mazepa are not controversial in the English speaking world (well they never heard of them so how could they...). — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 14:17, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
I've removed some persons from the infobox per 10 interwikies criterion, and Petliura per no controversy. I propose not to make infobox wider than 5 persons in a row - otherwise the text in the first section is very crammed. But obviously, much more persons would pass under the proposed criteria, so, for anyone interested, I suggest making a wider list, storing it on this talk page (perhaps in some template at the top) and rotating persons in the infobox from time to time so that everyone would be happy. GreyHood Talk 20:54, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
@Greyhood, please discuss specific people individually to be added and deleted, then let's get consensus, one by one, of the same. Since you appear to advocate that there is palpable and real controversy in regard to who appears in the infobox, by your own advocacy it's not appropriate for you to also be the editor making wholesale changes—generating contentiousness here is surely not your intent. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 21:07, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
@Vecrumba, your accusations of other people in generating contentiousness are unhelpful, as always. Re-read the dicussion above. Criteria proposed by me, at least for the most part, seemed OK for the people here. They can be modified, setting different interwiki levels. Most of the people deleted by me were deleted under this technical criterion, and for the technical purpose of reducing cramming in the article. As for the no controversy, I've removed exactly one person for that reason, because Yulia Romero herself agreed that we should not have more than two such controversial persons and because we already have another more notable relatively controversial person from the same period. And I exactly try to avoid generating contentiousness by removing points of contentiousness - such an approach could be applied here because this article is about Ukrainians in general, and almost any specific Ukrainian (except perhaps for Khmelnitsky, Gogol and Shevchenko) is not necessary to mention in the article at all. Finally, I repeat, that I propose to make a wider list and rotate persons, so that more people could be featured, and so the contentiousness about which people are the most famous could be reduced. GreyHood Talk 21:39, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

I was refering too Andrei Chikatilo; how many times do I have to say that Makhno and Petliura and Mazepa are not controversial in the English speaking world. If we had Anatoly Onoprienko and Chikatilo at the same time in the collage that would be bad. That would give the idea that a lot Ukrainians are killers. All countries have people like Makhno and Petliura and Mazepa. Otto von Bismarck, Karl Marx and Friedrich Nietzsche are all in the collage of famous Germans. One could argue those 3 are responsible for more killing then Makhno and Petliura and Mazepa... Greyhood and glossologist need to understand that Englids Wikipedia is for the English speaking world and not for Eastern Europe and its Diaspora... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 15:00, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

You (plural) are making this WAY too hard. You're arguing over people who no one has ever heard of outside Ukraine. The word famous should mean something to people outside Ukraine, not to afficionados of Ukrainian history who seem to be delighting in finding the most obscure people. Unless Jovovich occurs on your list as a famous Ukrainian, then your criteria are wrong. She's probably the most famous Ukrainian in the world right now. Second would probably be Yuliya T. The world knows very well who she is because of the trial. You are overthinking this issue. Get very simple so that you list Ukrainians that normal people will recognize. Do a Google search for famous ukrainians and you will get a nice selection of the people you should actually be showing--people that common people will know and recognize and say, "Hey, I didn't know they were Ukrainian!" That's who should be on this list. Look there--Karina Smirnoff from "Dancing with the Stars". Everyone knows who she is. Why isn't she "famous"? If she isn't "famous" by your criteria, then your criteria are wrong. "Famous" means "well-known". Karina certainly fits that category. Look, there's all kinds of well-known (i.e., "famous") people there--Jack Palance, Yuliya Timoshenko, Karina Smirnoff, Dustin Hoffman, etc. So before you go running off to find obscure activists from the Orange Revolution, go through those "famous Ukrainians" photos and select Ukrainians who are actually famous first. What a concept!!! Showing actual famous Ukrainians!! Remember, this list isn't important Ukrainians in history, it is famous Ukrainians. Those are very distinct lists. --Taivo (talk) 06:50, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
@ Taivo, thank you for that. The "I didn't know they were Ukrainian" and followers of Ukraine audiences are completely different, you are completely correct. My admonishment to Greyhood is that editors who might be seen by others as partisan should comment as voluminously as they like but should leave changes to others, meaning, their suggestions have gained consensus. I don't see any need to "rotate" individuals, there's no editorial imperative to introduce churn. The only reason to add/update is if some new Ukrainian bursts upon the popular culture scene. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 13:47, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
P.S. I thought Palance was Lithuanian, actually. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 13:48, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
It was me who had introduced the current format of the table of personalia the infobox, and I was asked by Julia Romero to join this discussion. And I think it is obvious that any editor with constructive background and further constructive proposals is welcome to make reasonable changes to the article. GreyHood Talk 19:44, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
Btw, it is not pre-determined that we should prefer the famous Ukrainians approach over the important Ukrainians in history. I tend to think that a mixed approach is more reasonable: famous Ukrainians in historical perspective, i.e. not only famous people of the modern time, but those of the previous ages too. GreyHood Talk 19:44, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

I put back in the collage Symon Petliura because that "Petliura removed per no controversy" was part of a consensus that is now dead; a.k.a. I did that edit per WP:CCC. Sure WWII was important for Ukraine but so was the Ukrainian People's Republic. Replaced Olga Kurylenko with Gaitana who seems to have a higher "Hey, I didn't know they were Ukrainian!"-factor then Kurylenko (Gaitana will represent Ukraine in the upcoming Eurovision Song Contest 2012, that contest is big in the European part of the English speaking world she she will create some buzz there (not sure about US/Canada) and Kurylenko's career seems not to go so well, most people in the English speaking world have forgotten here I think... If not replaced by Gaitana she (=Kurylenko) should be replaced by Yulia Tymoshenko, Karina Smirnoff or Jovovich). But I thought it would be interesting to show the world that not all Ukrainians have a pink skin per the "Hey, I didn't know they were Ukrainian!"-factor (a very good concept dear Taivo!) — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 15:21, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Replaced "who the hell is that" Mykhailo Hrushevskyi with more interesting and big on "Hey, I didn't know they were Ukrainian!"-factor Roxelana. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 16:21, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
Roxelana is an excellent choice! Hrushevskyi, however, is depicted on Ukrainian banknotes and, as a head of Central Rada and a major figure in the Soviet Ukraine for years, he is arguably much more more higher impact person in the Ukrainian history than Petliura. Ukrainian People's Republic was massively less important and brief development than Soviet Ukraine or World War II. GreyHood Talk 19:44, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
Kurylenko is more renown than Gaitana and a bit more typical Ukrainian. Both pass per the proposed criteria, though. GreyHood Talk 19:56, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
Kurylenko is far more well known, and Gaitana is an unknown pop singer who is not even truly Ukrainian. I move that we find someone else, more notable than anything. Yulia, I've noticed a trend of you digging up really obscure people, what's up with that?--Львівське (говорити) 03:15, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

"not even truly Ukrainian" is not a valid argument anymore as you can read on the rest of this talkpage and on a similar one... Gaitana is in there since she represents Ukraine in the Eurovision Song Contest 2012; if she does not manage a career out of that I have no problem with her being removed from the collage some time after the contest... Since Kurylenko is not that well known also I hope she will be replaced with a Ukrainian more famous then Kurylenko... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 03:41, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

So she's some random, unknown singer who entered a contest? That's hardly notable enough for something like this. Plus, she's Congolese and lived/lives there...she loses points on ethnic and native grounds IMO (not that it matters, she's too obscure anyway)--Львівське (говорити) 06:30, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

The One-drop rule is not official Wikipedia policy (I hope…)… Gaitana has a Ukrainian mother and lives in Ukraine and thus she is Ukrainian not Congolese. People who live in Congo (any of the 2) are Congolese. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 18:45, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

  • Who Ukrainians are? "East Slavic ethnic group native to Ukraine" (this article led definition). We can use this definition or we can change it both in led and in collage. Otherwise we have add Leon Trotsky and Golda Meir - figures of undeniable historical significance (as Gaitana has a fleeting fame). Bogomolov.PL (talk) 04:59, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
Yes, this article is about ethnic Ukrainians, moreso the ones native to Ukraine. While diaspora Ukes make the cut, there are articles for those respective groups as it is, so they should only be included if they are both extremely notable, and also self-identify. IMO.--Львівське (говорити) 06:30, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Let's replace Farmiga

Vera Farmiga seems to have a higher "Hey, I didn't know who that is!"-factor then a "Hey, I didn't know they were Ukrainian!"-factor... Let's replace her with Milla Jovovich, Mila Kunis are another person from Ukrainian decent that is actually known in the English speaking world. Tymoshenko is OK too in my book... But it seems that most people here would prefer to see Jovovich there.... So let's do that! PS Since Gisele Bündchen is in the collage of famous Germans I have no objection anymore with some diaspora in the collage of famous Ukrainians. But not to much of them please.... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 15:42, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

I saw the movie "Source Code" and Farmiga still wasn't ringing any bells, so, IMO, Jovovich is a much better choice. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 16:35, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
No, don't replace Farmiga, she is well known in the U.S. and people here don't know she's Ukrainian. Replace some of those other historical figures that no one recognizes. Half the people in the first four rows are unknowns and no one would miss them. Don't just look at the last row for people that the American public would know and recognize. Here are the people, off the top of my head, that Americans will be expecting to see on that list because of media exposure: Farmiga, Karina Smirnoff, Mila Jovovich, Yuliya Timoshenko, and Jack Palance (yes, Ukrainian, Володимир Палагнюк). Here is a website that you can use as a guide to who Americans might be interested in seeing and knowing, "Hey, I didn't know they're Ukrainian!". There are some contemporary sports figures who may or may not be interesting to add, but sports fame tends to be more fleeting than acting fame. But don't just restrict our changes to the last row of photos. At least half of the Ukrainians in the first four rows can easily be trimmed and no one will miss them. Don't delete Farmiga to add Jovovich, replace someone in the first four rows who is unknown outside Ukraine. If you need suggestions for "Who the hell cares?" or "Who the hell is that?", I'll make them. We can start with the first two guys on the second row and the middle guy on the fourth row. Never heard of them. Then who is Ukrainka? Never heard of her/him. Is that the person who's picture is on one of the hryvnia bills? If so, then he/she can stay. Look to delete those individuals who have no international value, especially in the English-speaking world. --Taivo (talk) 16:43, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
Fine with that too. On Palance, the famous "coal crackers" of Pennsylvania were Lithuanians; and Palance appears on many lists of famous Lithuanians, so I think there's more work to be done on that--which I'll take to the proper article :-). 17:00, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
Palance is still big and well known in the USA??? I have my doubts about that.... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 17:20, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Let us not delete Roxelana please. She is very interesting for people outside Ukraine. I am not in favour of stuffing the collage with people that are currently famous but that will not be remembered after they are dead.... replacing 2 or 3 people in the first four rows with current celebs is OK but stuffing the collage with Ukrainian Americans just too proof, yeah what actually... Seems a bit sad to me... English speakers should also know these Ukrainians have been out there since ages and not since Ukrainians where able to escape the Soviet Union.... And they should see in the collage that right now people are living in Ukraine, not just in the Diaspora.... (a.k.a. let us not stuff the collage with Diaspora Ukrainians). Ukrainka is the woman on the Hryvnya bills. Stephen Timoshenko is the father of modern engineering mechanics he has to stay to show the English speakers that Ukrainians have accomplished something and have changed the world (being in a movie is a smaller accomplishment then being the father of modern engineering mechanics). Petliura could show English speakers that Ukrainians have tried to get a own state before 1991. Bortniansky and Kotlyarevsky? I do not care about them; they can be replaced by Tymoshenko (Yuliya Timoshenko is Diaspora spelling…. She is not known by that spelling at the BBC/CNN etc.) and Jovovich. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 17:11, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Makhlo, Pavlichenko. But I'm not advocating replacing the whole list with modern pop culture figures. What I'm saying is that we have to have a good mix of pop culture characters in here along with the biggest icons of Ukrainian history (Franko, Shevchenko, the guy on the horse between St Michael's and St Sophia's, etc.) And Jack Palance doesn't mention anything about Lithuanian, both his parents were Ukrainian immigrants--he's all Ukrainian. As far as I can tell, Palance never claimed to be Lithuanian, so that's the end of it--his parents were Ukrainian immigrants (at least according to Wikipedia, and we know that Wikipedia never gives us bad information). If someone was born outside Ukraine to two Ukrainians, I'd say they count since this article is at least partially ethnic. But if someone is born outside to only one Ukrainian parent, that's probably a disqualifier to being "Ukrainian" to me ("mudbloods", lol). Yes, Palance is still well-known in the US because of his decades on film, especially winning the Oscar for "City Slickers". He'll be known by anyone in their 30s or older. --Taivo (talk) 17:27, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry about my last comment about Tymoshenko… I am just trying to hammer it in we should not approach this from a Diaspora point of view…. You are allowed to write Timoshenko when writing to your mates about her . Repetition is a strong educational tool! Bortniansky and Kotlyarevsky could be replaced by Tymo(shenko) and Jovo(vich); I am not to crazy about this Pavel Popovich (seems to have done the same but then less then Sergei Korolev) let's replace that dude with Pala(nce). Am I they only one who thinks Milla Kunis is right now a more famous modern pop culture figure then Jovo(vich)?
— Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 17:38, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Milla Kunis is Ukrainian Jewish, while Jovovich is Serbian-Russian. Their addition would be highly doubtful. Tymoshenko is OK from ethnical point of view and visually looks very Ukrainian, but given her present plight... GreyHood Talk 19:44, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
Bortniansky is perhaps the most famous Ukrainian classical composer, and Kotlyarevsky is a founder of the literary Ukrainian. Replacing them with controversial modern politicians and actresses with arguable ethnicity is not the best choice. GreyHood Talk 19:56, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
(ec w/below) Regarding Kunis, I would argue immaterial. With the expulsion of Jews from Spain at the tail end of the 15th century, many wound up in Eastern Europe, and, strictly speaking, we'd probably have to disallow as much as a third of all of today's "Ukrainians" just on that basis. As there is no pure anyone of anything, I suggest that "Ukrainian-born" is also a sufficient hurdle for figures in popular culture. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 20:25, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

I am not getting the reason why ethnic criteria are so important here... What are those people in the collage at European American doing there then? Or Marie Curie in the collage at French people. Greyhood is still approaching this to much from a Diaspora point of view.... You could argue that Kunis and Jovovich have not lived too long in Ukraine to be considered Ukrainians... To me Ukrainian Jews are 100% Ukrainians (hence the name Ukrainian Jew). If Bortniansky and Kotlyarevsky are so famous then why we never heard of them? — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 20:31, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. Arguing for ethnic purity regarding anyone of Eastern European origin is, quite frankly, fruitless. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 20:47, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
Obviously the proposed criteria of no one modern ("Petliura = 20th century" being Greyhood's prior reason to delete him) is defunct—just clarifying for the record. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 20:58, 18 April 2012 (UTC)


Who the hell is Farmiga? Could we have possibly found a more obscure person?--Львівське (говорити) 06:50, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Farmiga is well-known in American television and film. --Taivo (talk) 11:13, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
No she isn't, she's on American television but isn't well known. Please explain your reversal and calling Wayne freakin' Gretzky (one of the most famous athletes in history) and Daria Werbowy (top 6 grossing model in the world) "unknowns" compared to Farmiga (unknown actress) and Gaitina (unknown singer who entered some contest in europe)--Львівське (говорити) 17:56, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Lvivske, if you haven't noticed we're trying to work by consensus and take proposals step by step here. If you want to argue about Gaitana and Gretzky, then please start a section and get some consensus. Werbowy is unknown as far as I'm concerned, but please try to get a consensus. The last thing we want here are edit wars. Both Farmiga and Jovovich were added after discussions here and a consensus has already been reached below to add Jack Palance, but it just hasn't been done yet. I'm sure you'll get consensus for Gretzky, but please work the process instead of simply making changes without some discussion. --Taivo (talk) 20:08, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Farmiga doesnt seem to be particularly notable. I certainly have never heard of her. Her credentials are certainly higher than Gaitina or whoever. Werbowy is one of the top models in the world, and is far more internationally known than any of these contemporary figures we're debating here. (even if you dont know her by name, just walk into any department store, you'll see her face)--Львівське (говорити) 01:52, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
And Werbowy doesn't seem particularly notable either. I've never heard of her. So we should get other input. There are certainly much less internationally known Ukrainians on that list that can be replaced anyway. The first two guys on the second row for example are completely unknown outside Ukraine in the English-speaking world. --Taivo (talk) 02:16, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Can we at least remove Gaitina? She's a nobody.--Львівське (говорити) 15:26, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

It is a problem with all these people of mixed origin, where father / mother is Ukrainian and the other part is someone else... I dont understand why one has to deal with this problem when we have enough of famous Ukrainians, PLENTY, literally THOUSANDS of them, who complete all the criteria of being Ukrainian, who deserve to be listed here... Roman Zacharij (talk) 01:07, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

If you want a famous actress, why not Olga Kurylenko? She was born in Ukraine, speaks perfect Ukrainian and more importantly says she's Ukrainian. I would even say she's more famous than Jovovich or Kunis and who are maybe better known in North America, whereas Kurylenko is well known throughout the world. She's definitely better known than Vera Farmiga. As to Daria Werbowy not being well known, I strongly disagree. Just to give some persepective, Daria had 47 Vogue covers,( Gisele Budchen, certainly the supermodel had ~90, Cindy Crawford 50 covers); was 6th on the Forhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ukrainians&action=edit&section=13bes list of top earning models of all time (http://www.forbes.com/2011/05/05/top-earning-models_slide_12.html) Maybe it's a gender thing - Daria is definitely well known among females. Mykyta (talk) 03:02, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

And Olga Kyrylenko is about to become quite famous - a movie with Tom Cruise and another one directed by Terence MalickMykyta (talk) 06:02, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

This sounds pretty Ukrainian to me. If you want to replace someone, why not replace some of the guys on the second row who are unknown outside Ukraine? --Taivo (talk) 06:18, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Because I assumed one would want a balanced cross section of individuals from different areas of expertise and from different ages, I proposed a replacement of one modern day actor with another. Go ahead and keep Ms. Farmiga, it really doesn't matter. 99.233.135.66 (talk) 03:47, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Petliura and "no contriversy"

I'm not sure to what consensus or defunct consensus Yulia Romero referred to when re-instating Petliura. But an obvious thing that a person who lost his war cause is not a perfect example of acclaim in some area, and a person who was killed for anti-Jewish atrocities by a Jewish activist (the activist was even acquitted) is rather controversial historically.

Checking the articles Austrians or Germans you won't see Hitler there, and it looks like other ethnicity/nationality articles tend to avoid controversy and not display persons with significant negative reputations and lack of major and obvious positive legacies. To someone the absence of such persons may look like promotion, but on the positive side it reduces potential for edit-warring. I do not see why the article about Ukrainians should be different in this relation. GreyHood Talk 20:18, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

In fact, the presence of such controversial persons also may look like promotion of the ideas related to them. Yet another reason to follow the general practice and establish "no controversy" policy for the Ukrainians article too. GreyHood Talk 20:22, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
I guess it's not only me who are wondering what consensus made you to take away Petliura to start with. I guess the consensus was your personal view as in so many other cases. And to compare Petliura with Hitler surely doesn't make a stronger point for you. Närking (talk) 20:27, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
Pogroms were made a capital crime under Petliura. I don't recall Hitler outlawing the murder of Jews. It's (IMO) ludicrous to conclude that the inclusion of Petliura will be mistaken as advocacy for pogroms killing Jews. (As I recall, Bolshevik Russia was the origin of the pogrom allegations, but that's a topic for a different article discussion.) VєсrumЬа ►TALK

Read Symon_Petliura#Role_in_pogroms. Petliura is no monster like Hitler but rather a man who tried to create an Ukrainian state without antisemitism (an idea well worth promoting in current Ukraine....). This "general practice and establish "no controversy" policy" exist only in your head Greyhood. Just look at the Wikipedia:Five pillars (the 5th one). You writing about it over and over on this talkpage does not make it the truth... it simply does not exist... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 20:46, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

PS Joseph Stalin is still in the collage at Georgian people; his Doctors' plot smells more of antisemitism then anything Petliura ever did. And Stalin being in that collage proofs once again no "general practice and establish "no controversy" policy" does exist. And I never got the idea the editors at Georgian people are promoting to me the idea to starve people to death if the are not following my plans or to hide in my Dacha for days when Nazi's invade my country.... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 21:03, 18 April 2012 (UTC)


Petliura is not controversial at all and pretty universally liked. I don't see the argument here, except by some fringe complaints.--Львівське (говорити) 03:12, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ukrainians/Archive_3&oldid=1151050372"