Ukraine

Ukraine (, ''Ukraina'' ) is a republic in eastern Europe which borders Russia to the east, Belarus to the north, Poland, Slovakia and Hungary to the west, Romania and Moldova to the southwest and the Black Sea to the south. The territory of present-day Ukraine was a key centre of East Slavic culture in the Middle Ages before being divided between a variety of powers, notably Russia, Poland, Lithuania and the Ottoman Empire. A brief period of independence following the Russian Revolution was ended by Ukraine's absorption into the Soviet Union, and the republic's present borders were only established in 1954. It became independent once more following the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991. {| border=1 align=right cellpadding=4 cellspacing=0 width=300 style="margin: 0 0 1em 1em; background: #f9f9f9; border: 1px #aaaaaa solid; border-collapse: collapse; font-size: 95%;" |+Україна
Ukrayina |- | colspan="2" | {| style="background:none; text-align:center; width:100%;" |- | | |- | (Flag of Ukraine) | (Coat of arms of Ukraine) |} |- | align="center" colspan=2 | ''National motto: none'' |- style="text-align:center;" | colspan="2" | |- | Official language || Ukrainian language |- | Capital || Kiev () |- | President of Ukraine || Viktor Yushchenko |- | Prime Minister of Ukraine || Yuliya Tymoshenko |- | Area
Total
% water || List of countries by area
1 E11 m2
negligible |- | Population
Total (2004)
Population density || List of countries by population
47,732,079
80/km� |- | Gross domestic product (2004)
- Total (PPP)
- Total (Nominal)
- GDP/capita (PPP)
- GDP/capita (Nominal) ||
$339.7 billion (List of countries by GDP (PPP))
$82.7 billion (List of countries by GDP (nominal))
$7,182 (List of countries by GDP (PPP) per capita)
$1,748 (List of countries by GDP (Nominal) per capita) |- | Collapse of the Soviet Union
Date || From Soviet Union
August 24 1991 |- | Currency || Hryvnia |- | Time zone
- in European Summer Time | Eastern European Time (Coordinated Universal Time+2)
Eastern European Summer Time (Coordinated Universal Time+3) |- | National anthem || ''Shche ne vmerla Ukraina'' |- | Top-level domain || .ua |- | List_of_country_calling_codes || 380 |} ==Name== The country is often referred to as '''''the'' Ukraine''' in English language. This usage is now deprecated by many media organizations, partly for stylistic reasons (compare "the Lebanon" and "the Sudan") and partly because of its implication that Ukraine is merely a region rather than an independent state. There was, however, no change in Ukrainian or Russian usage with Ukraine's independence, as there is no definite article (''the'') in either language. Various Slavic languages etymologies have been suggested for the name. Most translate it as "borderland" or "frontier" (compare Krajna, Krajina - in Polish, or Окраина (Okraina, "Outskirts") in Russian) and also "country" (compare Krayina in Ukrainian and Kraina in Belarusian). Other more legendary ethymologies trace the name to a verb meaning, "to cut" (krayaty), indicating the land the Rus' people (or Ruthenians or Ukrainians) carved out for themselves; some take it to mean "homeland" or "one's own land" ("Kray"). == History == In antiquity, parts (Southern and Eastern) of the current territory of Ukraine was populated by Iranian peoples nomads called Scythians. The Kingdom of Scythia existed in Ukraine between 700 and 200 BC. At the beginning of the second millennium BC, the speakers of the Proto-Iranian language moved from Ukraine to the southeast but many also remained. In the 3rd century AD, the Goths arrived to Ukraine, which they called Oium and formed the Chernyakhov culture before moving on and defeating the Roman empire. Later the area of today's Ukraine encompassed the central portion (Rus' propria), and formed the southern part of the first Eastern Slavic peoples state, Kievan Rus'. Its capital was Kiev, the capital of modern Ukraine. Kievan Rus' was founded by Varangians, Scandinavians, from present-day Sweden. The Varangians later became assimilated into the local population of Rus' and gave the Rus' its first powerful dynasty, the Rurik Dynasty. In the 7th century AD the Khazars (a Turkic semi-nomad from Central Asia who adopted Judaism) founded the independent Khazaria in the southeastern part of today's Europe, near the Caspian Sea and the Caucasus. In addition to western Kazakhstan, the Khazar kingdom also included territory in what is now eastern Ukraine, Azerbaijan, southern Russia, and Crimea. During the 10th century and 11th century the territory of Ukraine became the center of important state in Europe— 'Kievan Rus' laying the foundation for Ukrainian national identity through subsequent centuries. The term "Rus'" referred to many of the East Slavic principalities in the Ukrainian regions (''Rus' Chervona'' (Red Rus')/Ruthenia, for example). Kiev and Kievian Rus' were the seat of the Grand Prince of the Rurik Dynasty. The ruler of Kiev was also in effect the ruler of all the Rus' principalities. Kievan Rus', the root of the term "Rus'ki" (today 'Russians'), declined during the Mongol invasion of Russia. The term "Rus'" was originally applied to the inhabitants of all Rus' principalities, today comprising Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine. After the fall of Kiev, and until the 18th century, the term "Rus" or "Ruthenian" was used to designate inhabitants of Belarus and Ukraine; Russians were then known as "Muscovites", and Russia (the country), as "Muscovy". "Ukraine", originally a geographic term, dates to the 11th century. At that time, Ukraine was synonymous with Rus' proper (Rus' Propria). "Ruthenian" originally meant "Rus'", then Ukraine and Belarus, but later became limited to Ukraine alone, and then solely to West Ukrainians (Galicians). Originally it was a term applied to the Rus' by other Europeans (Poles, Germans, and Turks, especially). Kievan Rus' became weakened by internal quarrels and was destroyed by Mongol and Tatars invasions. On Ukrainian territory (Rus' in the narrow sense), the state of Kievan Rus' was succeeded by the principalities of Halych and Volhynia, which were merged into the state of Halych-Volynia. This was later subjugated by Lithuania and Poland, and after the 1376 marriage of Lithuania's Ladislaus II of Poland to Poland's Jadwiga of Poland, was ruled by the Poles (see the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth). Although locally defeated, the Rurik Dynasty continued, first in Novgorod, and then in Moscow. During the mid-17th century, a Cossack state, the Zaporozhian Host, was established by Ukrainians and others fleeing Polish serfdom. Located in central Ukraine, it was an autonomous military state, initially independent. Eastern Ukraine was eventually integrated into Russia as the Cossack Hetmanate, as a consequence of the controversial Treaty of Pereyaslav. After the partitions of Poland by Prussia, Austria and Russia at the end of the 18th century, Western Ukraine (Galicia (Central Europe)) was taken over by Austria, while most of Ukraine was progressively assimilated into the Russian Empire. Ukrainians played an important role in continuous wars between East European monarchies and the Ottoman Empire. Following the Russian Revolution in 1917, Ukraine was briefly independent in two states, then united, in 1920. By 1922 Ukraine was split between Poland and the Soviet Union. Also in 1922, most of Central and Eastern Ukraine became a constituent republic of the USSR as the Ukrainian SSR. To satisfy the state's need for increased food supplies, the Soviet industrialization program called for the collectization of agriculture, which had a profound effect on Ukraine, the nation's breadbasket (''see'' Collectivisation in the USSR). In the late 1920s and early 1930s the state compounded the peasants' lands and animals into collective farms and state farms. Although the program was designed to affect all peasants, the plan met particularly heavy resistance from the wealthiest peasants, the kulaks, and a desperate struggle of the peasantry against the authorities ensued. Peasants slaughtered their cows and pigs rather than turn them over to the collective farms, especially in Ukraine, with the result that livestock resources remained below the 1929 level for years afterward. The state in turn forcibly collectivized reluctant peasants and deported kulaks and active rebels to Siberia. Within the collective farms, the authorities in many instances exacted such high levels of procurements that starvation was widespread. In some places, famine was allowed to run its course; and millions of peasants in Ukraine starved to death in a famine, called the ''Holodomor'' in Ukrainian. During World War II, some elements of the Ukrainian nationalist underground fought both Nazi Germany and Soviet forces, while others collaborated with the Nazis. In 1941 the German invaders and their Axis allies crushed the Red Army. In the encirclement battle of Kiev, the city was acclaimed by the Soviets as a "Hero City", for the fierce resistance of the Red Army and of the local population. More than 660,000 Soviet troops were taken captive. Initially, the Germans were received as "liberators" by many Ukrainians. However, German rule in the occupied territories eventually aided the Soviet cause. Nazi administrators of conquered Soviet territories made little attempt to exploit the population's dissatisfaction with Soviet political and economic policies. Instead, the Nazis preserved the collective-farm system, systematically carried out genocidal policies against Jews, and deported others (mainly Ukrainians) to work in Germany. Under these circumstances, the great majority of the Soviet people fought and worked on their country's behalf, thus ensuring the regime's survival. Total civilian losses during the war and German occupation in Ukraine are estimated between five and seven million, including over half a million Jews shot and killed by the Einsatzgruppen. Of the estimated 11 million Soviet troops who fell in battle against the Nazis, about a fourth (2.7 million) were ethnic Ukrainians. Ukraine is distinguished as one of the first nations to fight the Axis powers in Carpatho-Ukraine, and one that saw some of the greatest bloodshed during the war. After the Second World War, the borders of then-Soviet Ukraine were extended to the West (as stipulated in the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, see also Curzon line), uniting most Ukrainians under one political state. In 1954, Crimea was transferred from the RSFSR to Ukraine (Crimea has no continuous land bridge to the Russian Federation.) This decision of Nikita Khrushchev, intended to commemorate the 300th anniversary of the controversial Treaty of Pereyaslav, seen in Soviet historiography as the 'union of two fraternal peoples', led to tensions between Russia and Ukraine after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Independence was achieved in 1991 with the collapse of the Soviet Union, and Ukraine was a founding member of the Commonwealth of Independent States. Despite the Soviet hegemony during most of the 20th century, Ukraine has been a member of the United Nations since the latter's inception in 1945. == Government and Politics == Ukraine is a democracy under a semi-presidential system with separate legislative, executive, and judicial branches. The President of Ukraine (elected by popular vote) nominates the Prime Minister of Ukraine, who must be confirmed by the 450-seat parliament, the Verkhovna Rada. The President (on advice and consent of the Prime Minister) appoints members of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, as well as heads of all central agencies and regional and district administrations. Laws, acts of the parliament and the Cabinet, presidential edicts, and acts of the Crimean parliament (Autonomous Republic of Crimea) may be nullified by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, when they are found to violate the Constitution of Ukraine. Other normative acts are subject to judicial review. The Supreme Court of Ukraine is the main body in the system of courts of general jurisdiction. Local self-government is officially guaranteed. Local councils and city mayors are popularly elected and exercise control over local budgets. In practice, the scope of local self-government is limited. Ukraine has a large number of political parties, many of which have tiny memberships and are unknown to general public. Small parties often join in multi-party coalitions (electoral blocks) for the purpose of participating in parliamentary elections. See also: * Ukrainian presidential election, 2004 * Foreign relations of Ukraine == Subdivisions == Ukraine is subdivided into twenty-four oblasts (provinces) and one autonomous republic (Crimea). Additionally, two cities have a special legal status. {| border=0 |- valign=top | * Cherkasy Oblast * Chernihiv Oblast * Chernivtsi Oblast * Autonomous Republic of Crimea * Dnipropetrovsk Oblast * Donetsk Oblast * Ivano-Frankivsk Oblast * Kharkiv Oblast * Kherson Oblast * Khmelnytskyi Oblast * Kirovohrad Oblast * City of Kiev * Kiev Oblast * Luhansk Oblast | * Lviv Oblast * Mykolaiv Oblast * Odessa Oblast * Poltava Oblast * Rivne Oblast * City of Sevastopol * Sumy Oblast * Ternopil Oblast * Vinnytsya Oblast * Volyn Oblast * Zakarpattia Oblast * Zaporizhia Oblast * Zhytomyr Oblast |} See also regions of Ukraine. == Geography == The Ukrainian landscape consists mostly of fertile plains, or steppes, and plateaus, crossed by rivers such as the Dnieper, Seversky Donets, Dniester and the Southern Bug as they flow south into the Black Sea and the smaller Sea of Azov. To the southwest the Danube Delta of the Danube forms the border with Romania. The country's only mountains are the Carpathian Mountains in the west, of which the highest is the Hora Hoverla at 2,061 m, and those in the Crimean peninsula, in the extreme south along the coast. Ukraine has a mostly temperate climate continental climate, though a more mediterranean climate is found on the southern Crimean coast. precipitation (meteorology) is disproportionately distributed; it is highest in the west and north and lesser in the east and southeast. Winters vary from cool along the Black Sea to cold farther inland. Summers are warm across the greater part of the country, but generally hot in the south. == Economy == Formerly an important agriculture and industrial region of the Soviet Union, Ukraine now depends on Russia for most energy supplies, especially natural gas, although lately it has been trying to diversify its sources. The lack of significant structural reform has made the Ukrainian economy vulnerable to external shocks. After 1991 the government liberalised most prices and erected a legal framework for privatisation, but widespread resistance to reform within the government soon stalled reform efforts and led to some backtracking. Output by 1999 had fallen to less than 40% of the 1991 level. Loose monetary policies pushed inflation to hyperinflationary levels in late 1993. The current government has pledged to reduce the number of government agencies, streamline the regulatory process, create a legal environment to encourage entrepreneurs, and enact a comprehensive tax overhaul. Reforms in the more politically sensitive areas of structural reform and land privatisation are still lagging. Outside institutions—particularly the IMF—have encouraged Ukraine to quicken the pace and scope of reforms and have threatened to withdraw financial support. The Gross Domestic Product in 2000 showed strong export-based growth of 6%—the first growth since independence—and industrial production grew 12.9%. The economy continued to expand in 2001, as real GDP rose 9% and industrial output grew by over 14%. Growth was undergirded by strong domestic demand and growing consumer and investor confidence. Rapid economic growth in 2002 - 2004 is largely attributed to a surge in steel exports to China. == Demographics == Ethnic Ukrainians make up 77.8% of the population, ethnic Russians 17.3%, Rusyns (in Transcarpathia) some 0.9%. The industrial regions in the east and south-east are the most heavily populated, and about 70% of the population lives in urban areas. Other minorities include significant groups of Romanians (with Moldovans, 0.8%), Belarusians (0.6%), Crimean Tatars (0.5%), Bulgarians (0.4%), Magyars, Poles (0.4%) and Jews (0.3%). Ukrainian language (the only official language) and Russian language are the principal languages, spoken by ~39% and 46% accordingly (but considered to be a native language by 67.5% and 29.6% of population, according to census-2001). Standard literary Ukrainian is mainly spoken in the western quarter of the country, including its cities such as Lviv. In central Ukraine, Russian is usually the main language of cities (including Kiev), while Surzhyk (a certain kind of dialect or mixed language with mainly Russian vocabulary and Ukrainian grammar and phonetics) is widespread in the rural areas (15% to 20%, according to some surveys). In the eastern quarter Russian influence is even stronger. In the Crimean peninsula Ukrainian is virtually unused, despite numerous attempts to introduce it as the only language of advertising, media, and administration. The share of students receiving their education in Russian has significantly declined from 41% in 1995 to 24% in 2004, in favour of their Ukrainian counterparts. Still, many urban Ukrainian schools are de-facto Russian-speaking, especially in the East and South. Russian continues to be the language of international communication for many Ukrainians and is understood throughout the country. ==Religion== The dominant religion in Ukraine is Eastern Orthodoxy, which is currently split between three Church bodies. The distant second is the Eastern Rite Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, which practices similar Liturgical rite to Eastern Orthodoxy, but recognises the primacy of the Roman Pope as head of the Church. There are also smaller Roman Catholic, Protestant, Judaism and Muslim communities. == Culture == * List of Ukrainians * Music of Ukraine == Miscellaneous topics == * Communications in Ukraine * List of newspapers in Ukraine * Transportation in Ukraine * Military of Ukraine * Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) * Tourism in Ukraine * List of cities in Ukraine * Chernobyl accident * Ukraine at the 2004 Summer Olympics == External links == * [http://www.president.gov.ua/en/ Official presidential site of Ukraine] * [http://www.kmu.gov.ua/control/en Government Portal of Ukraine] - Official governmental portal * [http://www.rada.gov.ua Verkhovna Rada]—Official parliamentary site (in Ukrainian) * [http://www.archives.gov.ua/Eng/ Archives of Ukraine] * [http://www.ukrtelecom.ua/en/offers/web_cam/ Web cam shots for selected cities across Ukraine] * [http://www.infoukes.com Infoukes]—General info on Ukraine's History and Politics * [http://myukraine.info My Ukraine]—General info on Ukraine's culture and geography. * [http://www.kyivpost.com Kyiv Post]—Kyiv News in English * [http://www.ukraina.at Ukraina.at]—Ukraine Fanpage from Mr. Bartosch (in German) * [http://pages.prodigy.net/l.hodges/ukraine.htm Ukrainian Language, Culture and Travel Page] Ukraine ang:Ucr�gna bs:Ukrajina cv:Украина fa:اوکراین hi:युक्रेन ka:უკრაინა la:Ucraina lv:Ukraina li:Oekra�ne ms:Ukraine zh-min-nan:Ukrayina mo:Украина nds:Ukraine sq:Ukraina th:ประเทศยูเครน yi:אוקרײַנע

Ukraine

''An event mentioned in this article is an Template:August 24 selected anniversaries.'' ----- == "Artificial famines" == ''However, these "artificial famines" appear to have been themselves, artificially engineered by western historians as slander. '' This is ridiculous. I have read translations of documents from Ukraine and Russia about the Ukrainian genocide, and in my travels in the former Soviet Union have spoken to people who lost relatives in it. I don't think the famines were invented by Western historians. --User:Ed Poor As a local journalist, I strongly support Ed's remark. Besides, those famines were anyway artificial since the whole system of Soviet "collectivization" was practically designed to leave peasants with minimal food supplies. --User:AlexPU 16:43, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC) See: http://www.infoukes.com/history/famine/ :Starvation is definitely was not the primary target of the Soviet collectivisation policy. No doubt, however, it had some very specific priorities and side effects... User:Drbug[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Drbug&action=edit§ion=new ] User:Drbug 17:44, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC) ::::Yeah, this is it: a pre-designed immanent side effect resulting in genocide User:AlexPU 10:58, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC) :::::Side effect is a bit different than intention. Artificial famine is no doubt the non-NPOV wording implicating that starvation was a primary target of the policy, not a side effect. It's why "artificial famine" is not appropriate term for Wikipedia. User:Drbug[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Drbug&action=edit§ion=new ] User:Drbug 13:17, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC) Starvation was not the goal of collectivization. Starvation was part of the process to colectivization, it was the punishment of the "greedy kulaks" - peasants who were a little richer than other peasants. These famines were artifial because they were created with intent to starve.User:209.197.154.195 ----- Dr Bug, Vladimir, aka "Volodymyr." You need to check the link provided above, The famine was artificial: it was created by policies. Mass starvation occured while the borders of Ukraine were sealed and while grain was exported and while the Soviet government induced journalists, including the New York Times' Walter Duranty, to lie about the situation. But the truth leaked out through other journalists, such as Malcolm Muggeridge, of the Manchester Guardian (who became a non-believer in communism as a result of it!) Later, eyewitness survivors gave testimony. And printed newspapers admitted that the goal of the inadequate availability of grain for local use was to break the backbone of the Ukrainian nation! Let's not rewrite Stalin's biography and portray him as "accident-prone!" User:Genyo 20:22, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC) :Thank you for your rebuttal, Genyo. There was a resolution passed by Canada's Senate (http://www.ucc.ca/media_releases/2003-06-19_1/) which, among other things, states that it is "to recognize the Ukrainian Famine/Genocide of 1932-33 and to condemn any attempt to deny or distort this historical truth as being anything less than genocide". The US Senate has a similar resolution on the table (http://www.ukrweekly.com/resolution202.shtml), but it's currently being held up by Senator Richard Lugar in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. I would like to note that of the 19 members of this committee, 10 of them have co-sponsored the resolution. What's the hold up, Mr. Lugar? -- User:Tryzub 01:42, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC) ::While a famine did occur, it cannot be pinned on the Soviet government. The kulaks provoked it by hoarding grain, destroying property, killing cattle, attacking people who wanted to join the collectives, and refusing to work the land that they occupied. The claim that Stalin caused a famine is indeed a lie that was cooked up by Western "historians". User:Shorne 06:27, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC) :::I'm sure this Wiki is not the place for personal disagreement so I will say that I can agree to disagree with those who feel the Famine in Ukraina was not induced by Stalin. However, I will submit to everyone that while I am living in America now, my entire family, and many of our friends, were in Ukraine at the time of the Famine. I speak from our collective experience and not from the view of a western "historian" or aged Soviet who thinks that it's too late to blame the current Russia for something that happened decades ago. Whatever your background, if you or someone you know wasn't there, then anything you have to add to this subject is simply conjecture and hearsay. Although I cannot say what was going on in Stalin's head at the time, I can tell you this, "In 1988 the Gorbachev government finally admitted that the 1932 famine had been part artificial, the direct result of Stalin's deliberate use of starvation as a means of coercion and social control." User:Tryzub 08:20, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC) Its not black and white shrone. First, whatever the provocation, the soviet govn't initiated the famines so it can be "pinned" on them. Next, my grandparents lived in Ukraine during the famines, everyone in their village, rich or poor (unless they worked for the soviet govn't) starved. Next, you make it sound like the famines were a reasonable response to the actions of the kulaks, starving and killing them for resisting a system that was forced on them and for disagreeing to give away what they worked for. This is insulting. Lastly, many of the people who were starved were not kulaks. From what I see on your page you seem to be a liberal, so am I, and I dislike aspects of capitalism as well, but again the world isn't black and white, while in theory communism may be better, in practice its another story.User:209.197.154.195 == ''The'' Ukraine == Merriam-Webster says Ukraine = The Ukraine [http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?ukraine]. The article currently ardently denies this. What is this contradiction? --User:Menchi 22:49, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC) : When Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union it was just called ''The Ukraine'' which was short for ''The Ukranian Soviet Socialist Republic''. When it gained independence it was called ''Ukraine''. Not The France or The Germany; but France or Germany, likewise ''Ukraine''. This is the usage of the Embassy of Ukraine states [http://www.ukremb.com/about/aboutukr.html]. The usage in the CIA Factbook is also ''Ukraine'' without the article [http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/up.html#Intro]. User:Alex756 01:09, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC) : American Heritage Dictionary says Ukraine. Princeton Wordnet says Ukraine or Ukrayina. [http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=Ukraine]. CIA World Factbook says Ukraine, and The Ukrainian Republic in one reference to the Ukrainian SSR. [http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/up.html] ''—User:Mzajac User talk:Mzajac 2005-02-8 17:50 Z'' :: Ok, added that to the intro. --User:Menchi 01:31, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC) :::Do you think that is clear, ''"Ukraine, formerly the Ukraine"''? Maybe we should be more explicit about dropping the "The". Mentioning that people called it "The Ukraine" (with the capital The). What do you think? User:Alex756 02:32, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC) :::: Good idea. I've made it clear that "The" goes with "Ukraine" as an old name. --User:Menchi 03:29, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC) ::::: This info seems fairly tangential to be included so prominently at the top of the article. It should be relegated to a note at the right place in the history page. --User:Shallot 17:51, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC) ::::: Any relationship to "The Bronx", which is also a concrete political entity? :) User:Rickyrab 01:33, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC) :: The article ''the'' refers to the noun ''Republic''. "The Ukraine" is not short for Ukrainian SSR. ''—User:Mzajac User talk:Mzajac 2005-02-8 16:00 Z'' :::You are probably right, it is not short for the UkSSR. It is, however, undeniable, that only "the Ukraine" was considered to be a correct variant during Soviet times. Thus, it is only logical to continue utilizing this variant when referring to Soviet-related topics.—User:Ezhiki 16:14, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC) :::: Well, we don't refer to 19th-century Islam as ''Mohammadanism''. ''Negro'' may have been a neutral term in the U.S. in the past, but it's avoided today unless carefully (or carelessly) adopting a period affectation. :::: ''"The'' Ukraine" was a geographic region in the times of Kievan Rus' and early Cossack times. The usage in English was perpetuated under the Russian Empire and Soviet Union, along with a colonial attitude which was reticent to acknowledge any kind of Ukrainian nationhood. It was never an official name. I don't know what was authoritatively "correct" or not, because neither of my old dictionaries have entries for countries. Although the usage was by far the most common, it was not universal, at least as far back as the 1970s, in my experience. :::: Today some of us see the usage as either innocently ignorant or mildly pejorative in reference to the native land of an ethnically, linguistically, and culturally distinct people, even when discussing the Soviet period. ''—User:Mzajac User talk:Mzajac 2005-02-8 17:05 Z'' :::::I tend to disagree. The words "Negro" and "the Ukraine" refer to completely different situations. Just because a country is called differently now does not mean it cannot be referred by its historical name in an appropriate context. C�te d'Ivoire, for example, is referred to as ''Ivory Coast'' when speaking of a certain time period (one can only hope that, by analogy, the Ukrainian government will not go as far as to mandate that the name "Ukraine" cannot ever be translated from Ukrainian). Heck, even "Negro" is still used every once in a while when discussing times of slavery, without giving the word a negative meaning. Why make an exception for Ukraine?—User:Ezhiki 18:20, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC) :::::: I see your point, but maybe the reason that it doesn't win me over is that it's just too close. ''Ukraine'' and ''the Ukraine'' are not two different names or translations; the latter is the same name with a slightly belittling signifier applied. We still have to regularly explain to people that the modern country is not called ''the Ukraine'', so it doesn't make sense to confuse the issue in descriptions of recent history. When ''Negro'' is used it is obviously self-conscious; it strongly brings to mind the very different sensibilities of the times of slavery (yes, it was an extreme example). When ''the Ukraine'' is used, it sounds just normal to many people. :::::: And you can't disagree that some of us find it offensive, if only mildly so. ''—User:Mzajac User talk:Mzajac 2005-02-8 19:22 Z'' :::::::I indeed agree that some find it offensive (although even understanding the reasoning behind it I still do not get what the big deal is—the argument sounds silly at best. "The", to me, gives a name a distinction, not assigns it an offensive meaning—e.g., "The Hague" certainly does not sound offensive). I still believe that when Soviet periods of time are discussed, "the Ukraine" is a more preferable term, but I am just not passionate enough about this whole topic to push my viewpoint or to try to persuade you. I'm leaving this discussion being sure that the subject will be raised at a later time by someone else. Plus, I don't believe this whole issue is worth the time already wasted on it. Anyway, thanks for your comments and willingness to discuss.—User:Ezhiki 16:12, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC) : "The Ukraine" is both a literal translation, and an extremely honorable name. The literal translation of "the Ukraine" is "the Mark". In modern English literature, "the Mark" designates a sovereign nation of the highest honor: In J.R.R. Tolkien's Middle-Earth, the Rohan was a sovereign kingdom that ''always'' kept its oaths. Like the modern Ukraine, the Mark was a large land of prairies, bordered by marshes, forests, and mountains. Also like the modern Ukraine, it had great rivers. Unlike the modern Ukraine, it was landlocked and thinly settled. :: ''The ukraine'' might considered an Anglicization of ''ukrayina'', loosely the marches, or "the mark", of Kievan Rus: a geographic sub-region that existed until the 1200s or so—although that translation isn't perfect since it wasn't a remote frontier, but the region directly surrounding the city-state. However, the modern state Ukraine is not defined by its subordinate relationship to any other entity—as the fictional Mark is a borderland established by the grace of Gondor—nor is it governed by a margrave, marquis, or king. It is certainly not a vassal of the Russian Empire, Soviet Union, or Russian Federation, as that usage implies. :: Ukraine is now universally considered a nation-state, with its own ethnicity and language. ''Ukraine'', ''Ukrainians'', and the ''Ukrainian'' language are not literal translations of "the Mark", "Markians", nor the "Markian" language. There is no definite article "the" in the Ukrainian language, but even if there was, we wouldn't translate the proper name ''Ukrayina'' and add one (even ''la France'' is never translated "the France). :: Thanks for trying to find a meritorious example in fiction, but it's not an accurate analogy, and the usage "The Ukraine" is simply incorrect. ''—User:Mzajac User talk:Mzajac 2005-03-13 21:03 Z'' ==Cossacks== Why no mention of Cossacks in the article? Not even in ''demographics''? User:R�bezahl 16:51, 15 Jan 2004 (UTC) I see the following statement in the article: Many Ukrainians played important roles in the Russian civil war. Much of the Cossack Army/Clan(Voysko) sided with the Red Army during the conflict. I know of no evidence for this, and my impression and further consultation indicates the opposite is true. Can anyone support this statement with specifics or references, so that we can move to balance and/or correction? User:Genyo 20:06, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC) Seeing no objection,I'll remove the incorrect sentence. User:Genyo 03:25, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC) == Ukrainian dilemma during WW II == The Ukrainians lived through a Soviet terror prior to Hitler's invasion, which included genocidal intent, and these events are described in standard histories as "terror" and using the term "terrible" is quite proportionate to the real situation and an accurate reflection of the wide varieties of view that population experienced. If you think this is unbalanced, add some accurate information for balance. Don't delete valuable accurate information in these articles. User:Genyo 16:59, 13 May 2004 (UTC) == Transliteration of Ukrainian place names == Should we adopt the official system of transliteration adopted by the Ukrainian Legal Terminology Commission in 1996 ([http://www.plast.org.au/translit.php])? This would entail slight changes to the current spellings, such as Zaporizhzhya -> Zaporizhzhia. I don't think the transliteration system that the articles now use is so entrenched that the changes would cause any major problems. If no one objects, I will start changing the spellings to follow the official system, as soon as I have some free time. User:Iceager 16 May 2004 : I agree that we should use a common transliteration. I would extend this to all Ukrainian text, not just place names (e.g. names of people). With my limited knowledge of the various Ukrainian transliteration standards, the one you suggest seems to be most appropriate. --User:JamesTeterenko 21:28, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC) The most important would be changing existing names from their Russian transliteration (or even translation). I believe such names are both offensive and inacurate. So let's make these changes folks. --User:AlexPU 16:56, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC) : It is the English Wikipedia, not Ukrainian one, neither Russian one. We should use the most common names in English, ignoring etymology of those names. It's the Wikipedia policy. Also please refer to Wikipedia:Naming policy poll. User:Drbug[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Drbug&action=edit§ion=new ] User:Drbug 17:51, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC) ==History section== The article is not consistent to other articles on similar topics in History section (Ruthenian, etc.), and contains biased view User:Drbug 11:24, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC) :How is it inconsistent? How is it biased? The point of the tag is to say it's biased. The point of the talk page is to explain how, not to repeat the same unsubstantiated claim. --User:JiangUser talk:Jiang 23:00, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC) The history section needs some serious gutting. This is not only contrary to the template but also something of a flamebait. --User:Shallot 10:47, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC) : And it goes on and on and on... *sigh* --User:Joy 23:05, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC) I'm not aware of a Grand Duke "moving the seat" of Rus' from Kyiv to Russia. This sounds like Russian Imperialism. As the nation of Muscovy was formed from the Suzdal Vladimir on the Klyamza region to the north, their rulers eventually claimed to be ruling Rus', but that was later ambition. User:Genyo 17:23, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC) Hello, 1) ...'the root of the term "Rus'ki" (today 'Russians'), declined during the Mongol invasion' Actually, it was not declined. Even at the end of the 17th century Bohdan Khmel'nytskyj called himself the 'rus'kyj knjaz' and the 'King of Rus' (Letting alone that in the Lithuanian principality the official language was 'rus'ka mova'). And even after 1721, when Peter I, the Tsar of Moskovia, had renamed his state to 'Russia', there remained such maps as below, on which one can clearly see what was called 'Russie' and what 'Moskovie': [http://www.geocities.com/ua_ukraine/uaukrayina019.gif] 2) ...'Until well into the 19th century, there has been no perception of a "national" (as opposed to regional) difference between these tribes' It's probably the same if one would say: there were no Germans and Englishmen till 19th century, there was no difference between these German tribes. What is the 'perception of national'? One of the main criteria of national identity is language, and Ukrainian language differed from Moskovian ten centures ago, some researchers even consider them not belonging to the same East-Slavic language group... User:Olexij ==Culture of Ukraine== I've just wikified the Culture of Ukraine page, but it actually contains very little on Ukrainian culture (food, writers, music etc.). If anyone more knowledgeable than me has time, I'd suggest a quick look. -- User:EuroTom 02:06, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC) I just added quite a bit about some Chirstmas traditions, please have a look at it, for grammar, acceptablitity, adding links, etc. I will add easter traditions, as well as some other stuff at a later date if you would like. --Nathan Jun 3, 2005 : Also see the article on Ukrainian cuisine. ''—User:Mzajac User talk:Mzajac 2005-06-3 14:13 Z'' == Attention moderators: Incorrect coat of arms picture == You people (especially moderators) note that the image presented here is not an official coat of arms, but a most popular project for it. The actual "small coat of arms" (as stated in constituion) is a trident at the center of the picture that you see. I have a proper picture file but don`t know yet how to upload it to Wikipedia. The "big" coat of arms is still not adopted. --User:AlexPU 18:06, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC) :Please find "Uploa file" button (if you use the standard layout, it should be the next to the last button in the left bar). If you experience problems, please ask me at my talk page, I'm happy to help! User:Drbug[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Drbug&action=edit§ion=new ] User:Drbug 17:55, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC) == Kiev/Kyiv == Regardless of what we use in other pages, shouldn't the official listing in the Ukraine country page include the official Ukrainian transliteration in the first place and the more common loanword in English after it? I.e. the edit war should be settled by integrating edits, not by picking one version over the other... --User:Joy 22:18, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC) :As per Wikipedia:Naming_conventions#Use_English_words the native form should only be used in articles if it is more commonly used in English than the English form. Google search gives over 4 million hits for ''Kiev'', and only 530,000 for ''Kyiv''. The native form, of course, should be mentioned, but it can in no way take precedence over the established form most commonly used in English.—User:Ezhiki 00:14, Nov 7, 2004 (UTC) :: Actually that same naming convention explicates that there is precedent for using the more native loanword. Since both are transliterations, I don't see much reason not to have "Kyiv" take precedence on the page about Ukraine where it mentions the country's capital. The early mentions of Kiev and Kievan Rus in the history section can stay "Kiev", but the recent stuff like the infobox should include "Kyiv". --User:Joy 09:57, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC) The Wikipedia:Naming policy poll dealt specifically with the heading names of articles, and doesn't discourage the use of other versions in appropriate contexts. I'm prejudiced; I prefer ''Kyiv'', which is the most common one used in international relations. That said, consistency in WP is important, and I admit that in most contexts the name used should match the heading of the article. When most major commercial encyclopedias give "Kyiv" prominence, then Wikipedia should at least follow their lead. ''—User:Mzajac 19:31, 2004 Nov 7 (UTC)'' :While I agree to ''some'' extent with both Joy and Michael, I think it would be the best to discuss this issue at the policy talk page, or maybe even devise an exception (to use ''Kyiv'' as the main name when it comes to the capital of Ukraine in the modern context). I will probably not participate in the discussion myself (beyond maybe casting a vote), since it's not an issue that's important to me (I was just enforcing the existing policy), but since there are things that are unclear, I think the discussion is in order.—User:Ezhiki 16:05, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC) Let's not overstate the terminology policy here. While the accepted English form, Kiev, does apply to NAMING an article, the use of more integral and proper native forms is directed in the first line and NOT FORBIDDEN in the remaining article. The suggestion of the official listing of a city in the country page IN THE NATIVE FORM is an allowed way of being progressive and respectful, and in my opinion, highly desirable. In general, topics should be discussed on their own terms, not chained to foreign agendas. User:Genyo 13:08, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC) :To me, the policy neither states nor implies this. Moreover, using one name for the article and using (as opposed to ''mentioning'') a different one in the article would create a consistency discrepancy, and this is something that should be avoided like a plague (otherwise it might eventually lead to something like [http://www.techcentralstation.com/111504A.html this]). :In any case, my opinion is that the policy in its present form is far too vague to competently cover a lot of naming-related situations that periodically arise here and there. That was my rationale for suggesting moving the discussion to the policy's talk page, using Kiev/Kyiv issue as an example.—User:Ezhiki 16:27, Nov 24, 2004 (UTC) ::official Ukrainian-English transliteration table http://www.rada.kiev.ua/translit.htm ::Kiev?, Kyiv?! Which is right? http://www.uazone.net/Kiev_Kyiv.html (unsigned by anon user:83.131.3.5} :Since when does Ukrainian Rada have authority over the English language? They can invent their own version of English, if they so please, but the rest of the world will still use Kiev because this is the variant that's traditionally been in use. When the US Senate or UK House passes legislation mandating use of Kyiv over Kiev, you'll have a point. As for now, there is no official English transliteration, only traditional (which is Kiev). It's unbelievable that such a mundane issue stirs so much controversy... Tell me, would you start saying and writing "Уошингтон" instead of "Вашингтон" if the the US Government passed legislation stating that the name of the US capital must be pronounced and written the same way it is in English all over the world?—User:Ezhiki 15:36, May 26, 2005 (UTC) :: They don't have or claim authority over the English language. The transliteration from Ukrainian ''Kyiv'' is the official English-language form used by the Ukrainian government. :: But ''Kyiv'' is not only a Ukrainian transliteration, it is also an alternate English-language spelling for the city's name. It has been used in some English-language publications, mostly for a Ukrainian diaspora readership, even before 1991. It has since become more widely adopted, and is the preferred form of some English-language publishers, (e.g., Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, United Nations mapping, Winnipeg Free Press). ''—User:Mzajac User talk:Mzajac 2005-05-26 17:26 Z'' :::The way the anon put it, "Kyiv" is the only official version to be used, rendering all other options incorrect. That's all I was trying to point out. :::While it is indeed true that "Kyiv" spelling is getting more common, even Google search, no matter how inaccurate it might be, shows that "Kiev" spelling is roughly six times more common than "Kyiv". I believe that was the main reasoning why the article still stays at "Kiev". Until the usage evens out, it is quite pointless to try moving the article to "Kyiv", or sneakily insert this spelling as "official" (without mentioning that it is "official" in a very limited number of places).—User:Ezhiki 18:33, May 26, 2005 (UTC) :::: Fair enough. ''—User:Mzajac User talk:Mzajac 2005-05-26 18:50 Z'' ===Another round=== Why not just put Kyiv(formerly Kiev) and then throughout the article put "Kyiv(Kiev)"? In my opinion that is much more acceptable than using the unnofficial version of the cities name. I find it somewhat unprofessional to use an improper name, no matter how widely used it is. --Nathan Jun 3, 2005. [http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/1217/p18s04-hfes.html Why we're still chicken on 'Kyiv'] User:Rollon 04:53, Jun 7, 2005 (UTC) :Talk:Kiev#Please_check_the_past_discussions_of_the_issue_before_raising_it!-User:Irpen 05:10, Jun 7, 2005 (UTC) ::: I dare to respond within Michael's text below. We very well managed to keep our disagreements friendly and I am sure it will stay the same way. -User:Irpen :: While it's nice to see at least one journalist actually addressing the subject, the [http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/1217/p18s04-hfes.html "chicken on Kyiv" article is actually pretty lame]. The writer starts to make a point about transliteration vs. spelling and abandons it, and then refers to the International Phonetic Alphabet without understanding it, and talks about Ukrainian pronunciation without understanding it. She writes: ::: ''A new system for Romanizing Ukrainian was introduced in 1996, and that's where we get Kyiv.'' :: Not quite. The English spelling ''Kyiv'' has been used in English-language publications since long before the Ukrainian National transliteration system was introduced. :::: True, but which English L. publications is what matters. It was not major media publications, neither major books on UA-history or at least not the majority of them. Out of three main popular books about Ukrainian History in print today (all listed at History_of_Ukraine#References) I checked two (Wilson and Reid) and they use Kiev. Papers published and read mainly by Ukrainian diaspora are no doubt EL publications, but I can set up a Ukrainian web-newspaper and start calling Вашингтон (Washington) Уошингтон there. That would of course be much more obscure than a number of papers that used Kyiv before 90-s, but this would still be a Ukrainian language publication that calls the city Уошингтон. This would not have warranted even mentioning Уошингтон in UA-L Wikipedia (should it have existed at that time). This is an exaggeration, of course. The situation with major publications changed since that time but not significantly so far. With CBC (Canada) being a notable exception, major EL media and papers use Kiev. One can do a google-news search (not a general google search) for Kyiv and find hits but Google-news covers some rather obscure sources and includes many less-read papers with no consistent editorial style policy. Therefore, it is important to do a ''Major Media'' search. Right now a LexisNexis Academic 2-yr search of Major Papers (50 EL papers selected worlwide, all importnat enough to have a style manual and editors responsible for style consistency) gives Kiev an advantage over Kyiv as 842 to 22 for the search of the Headlines and Lead Paragraphs only. Full text major papers search over 24 months finds 206 mentions of Kyiv and too many mentions of Kiev to be able to list them (even too many if reduced from 24 to 6 months). Those who use Kyiv are several Canadian and Australian papers. These are important references but for a reader in Canada it may seem that Kyiv is more used than it actually is. -User:Irpen ::: ''What the "y" in Kyiv does approximate pretty well is the letter of the International Phonetic Alphabet used to represent its counterpart in Ukrainian'' :: Nope. The IPA letter representing the sound of Ukrainian I (Cyrillic) is either , depending on your interpretation. ::: ''But what neither letter ["i" nor "y"] naturally represents to English speakers is the actual Ukrainian sound, a so-called middle vowel that simply doesn't exist in English.'' :: Uh-uh. The sound of the y in Kyiv is just like the i in "kit", common as sparrows. :: In other words, she distracts us with a number of inaccurate observations, refrains from drawing them to any logical conclusion, and essentially says "we choose to stay on the bandwagon". :: But anyway, the ''name'' of the city hasn't changed; just the official language of Ukraine—so Київ and Киев both remain the name of the city, in different languages. The transliteration from Russian ''Kiev'' is still the most commonly used English spelling, so it remains the title of the article according to Wikipedia convention; the Ukrainian ''Kyiv'' is still just an alternative spelling. Of course there's no convention that keeps you from using ''Kyiv'' in the body of an article, where it is appropriate. ''—User:Mzajac User talk:Mzajac 2005-06-7 06:02 Z'' :::: I agree here. There is no reason not to use Kyiv in the body of the article should an appropriate context exist. We have to decide, as I proposed earlier, on what context is appropriate and whether it exists at all. Right now, I don't see an appropriate context to use Kyiv in the body of any article as a ''main name'' (I see mentioning it in parentheses at least once entirely appropriate). The reason being is that Kyiv has no advantage in ''English Language'' sources in any context. Even its being derived from Russian name rather than being used in English for centuries (is that so?) for other reasons is still a matter of debate. If major publications even books on UA-history itself still use Kiev, I don't see any context. But that's just my opinion and there is some room for discussion on this. A good research on the Spelling of the Capital of Ukraine, its origin, evolution, etc. would make a great WP article, may help resolve the issue, and its talk page would be a good single place for such discussions. Regards to all, -User:Irpen 00:49, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC) == Revised figure == : ''"Of the estimated 11 7.5 million Soviet troops who fell in battle against the Nazis, about a ~~fourth~~ third (2.7 million) were ethnic Ukrainians."'' I'm not disputing User:SecretAgentMan00's figures, it's just odd that this change was marked "minor grammar edits", and this is a potentially sensitive subject. I'm sure it was just the browser's auto-fill putting that there, so forgive me for asking. Is the revised figure a generally accepted one? ''—User:Mzajac 08:46, 2004 Nov 14 (UTC)'' == Information == A good place to harvest some information, if someone has the time: [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/country_profiles/1102303.stm BBC Country Profile for Ukraine] —User:Thames 14:59, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC) ATTENTION PEOPLE! The worst place to harvest info is Ukraine's governmental portal (http://www.kmu.gov.ua) Especially good for experiencing bad English, bureaucratic language and confusing with structure of governmental bodies. If you need to extract info from there - use links and alternative sources - not the text first, check everything. Don't you cite this Websource - I'll be ashamed even more than I'm having seen it. Local User:AlexPU == "Excessive state control" == Re "Ukrainian politics are still troubled by ''excessive'' state control...This stalls efforts at economic ''reform'', stifles privatization, and ''endangers civil liberties''." According to....? User:A-giau 08:05, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC) ::Acccording to me, thousands of other Ukrainian journalists, and various international experts. Is that enough?User:AlexPU == Russian name == Why put the Russian name of the country here? Russian is not an official language of Ukraine. *Over half of Ukrainians speak Russian, and a substantial portion of the country speaks it as their only language, especially in the east. User:Livajo|User_talk:Livajo">User:Livajo|User:Livajo|User talk:Livajo 19:10, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC) *:Still, it is not an official language, so why putting it so prominently? It does look like Russian has equal rights with Ukrainian, which it does not. Can't the fact that over half of population speaks Russian be mentioned elsewhere in the article? (Just for the reference—the original question was ''not'' asked by me, but I happen to agree)—User:Ezhiki 17:28, Dec 7, 2004 (UTC) *:I don't see a Spanish language name in the article about the United States of America (even though that country doesn't have any official language) ---- * *Really, why not to put hear a Polish name of Ukraine, or Hungarian one? There are 100+ nationalities in Ukraine, and all their languages have the same rights as Russian according to present time Ukrainian laws. May be we also should place here a Mongolian name (Mongolians seized Kyiv once upon a time)? Or Greek (there were ancient Greek settlements here)? Another good idea: let's put 'Росія in Ukrainian' in the article 'Russia'. Why not? --User:Olexij 22:17, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC) == Removed para == The totally confusing paragraph removed. :The region has also been known as Rus or Ruthenia, and in Russian historiography as Little or Lesser Russia (Малороссия, ''Malorossiya''). This gave rise to the formal title of Russia's Tsar, the "Tsar of all the Russias"—the others being Russia proper and White Russia (now Belarus). First, the region of ''whole'' Ukraine was never known as Rus or Ruthenia. hence these names are better discussed in the "History" section. Second, "This gave rise" in wrong conjunction, third, "the others" part is unclear, fourth, "of all the Russias" is an inexact translation of the title, for whatever reason. In Russian it is literally "Of the whole Rus". Fifth, it is not "Tsar" of all. &c.., but "Emperor" of all..&c. User:Mikkalai 20:59, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC) == In/On == the following piece removed. ''However, since Ukrainian independence, some of the Russian language speakers have begun using a different preposition (в as opposed to на) to emphasize Ukraine's status as a country and not merely a neighboring territory.'' First, it is relevant only for Russian language usage, hence only marginal relation to English wikipedia. All languages change all the time, and IMO there is no reason to discuss every language in every other language encyclopedia. Second, the sentence as it stands is stated in a totally unclear way for an English speaker. Third, even when you "get it", the "emphasize" part is not totally correct. E.g., there is the usage, e.g., "na Rusi" (English: "On Rus"). The preposition "na" (Eng:"on") is not exclusively used in the cases of territory or direction, as opposed to "in". A seeming confirmation of this theory would be: "na smolenshchine", but "v Smolenskoj oblasti". But this is not a strict rule, often a matter of tradition. "Na Ukraine", but "v Zaporozhye" (in the sense "in Zaporizzhya area"). "V zapolyarye", "v pribaltike", no "na dalnem vostoke", "Na Volge" i "v Povolzhye" are almost synonyms. Anyway, this is a topic of Russian language, not English one. User:Mikkalai 19:56, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC) ==Modern Ukraine== The text says: Ukraine became independent from the Soviet Union on August 24, 1991. But wasn't Ukraine already recognised as an independent country by the International Community? After all wasn't Ukraine or the Ukrainian SSR already a member of the UN since its formation in 1945? User:Meursault2004 15:59, 1 May 2005 (UTC) :I think the reason why Ukraine and other republics were a member of the UN is to get more votes or something. Also notice "became independent ''from'' the SU", but either way the country under USSR was far from independent, not even autonomous, or anything like that. --User:Berkut 08:55, 30 May 2005 (UTC) ==Coat of Arms== Cross posted from user:talk page: :I am just curious why the main article about Ukraine contains a wrong image of the coat of arms: the one with a lion and a cossack. The only official (small) coat of arms is currently the trident. I'll try to find an image of the trident.User:Sashazlv 03:37, 30 May 2005 (UTC) :Found. Use. User:Sashazlv 03:49, 30 May 2005 (UTC) ::If this CoA is not official, we should change it. Could you or anyone just confirm for sure that the CoA in the main UA article is not correct? (I am not at all and expert in these things). User:Irpen 07:39, May 30, 2005 (UTC) From the Constitution [http://www.rada.kiev.ua/const/conengl.htm]: * The state symbols of Ukraine are the State Flag of Ukraine, the State Coat of Arms of Ukraine and the State Anthem of Ukraine. * The State Flag of Ukraine is a banner of two equally-sized horizontal bands of blue and yellow. * The Great State Coat of Arms of Ukraine ''shall be established'' with the consideration of the Small State Coat of Arms of Ukraine and the Coat of Arms of the Zaporozhian Host, by the law adopted by no less than two-thirds of the constitutional compositio n of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. * The main element of the Great State Coat of Arms of Ukraine is the Emblem of the Royal State of Volodymyr the Great (the Small State Coat of Arms of Ukraine). I think the small COA is the trident, here's something else I found [http://www.hampshireflag.co.uk/world-flags/allflags/ua-arms.html]: ''The current state emblem (officially known as the "small" or "minor" coat of arms) is a gold Trident of St. Volodymyr the Great on a blue shield (much like the one shown on your rendition of the Border Guard Flag). As correctly stated in your excerpt from the Ukrainian Constitution, the small coat of arms is to become the central element in the great coat of arms. However, this decision has become stalled in parliament, mainly due to opposition from the Communists, who would like to see an emblem at least partially recalling the Soviet period.'' I don't think the "Great" COA has been adopted yet... --User:Berkut 09:12, 30 May 2005 (UTC) :Sounds convinsing. Than we should put the small CoA into main Ukraine artcle. Let's just wait a little bit for responses. I don't expect objections, so we can replace the image there soon. Thanks, guys. User:Irpen 16:08, May 30, 2005 (UTC) Great CoA has not yet been adopted and even considered by the Verkhovna Rada (unlike the text of the anthem). A bill was proposed by Kuchma (26.09.2002) and another one by Lukyanenko (08.07.2003). None of them is scheduled for consideration during this session [http://zakon.rada.gov.ua/cgi-bin/laws/main.cgi?nreg=2390%2D15]. User:Sashazlv 20:31, 30 May 2005 (UTC) ==National Motto== I tried to verify whether "Воля, злагода, добро" is the national motto of Ukraine and whether Ukraine does have the national motto. I searched the Rada's legislative database, as well as the sites of KMU and the president. Nothing. Google gives a bunch of links, but they are just cross-references to Ukraine or List of state mottos in Wikipedia. The phrase sounds/looks great, but it does not appear in official documents, on official seals, etc. It seems to be someone's good intention to fill in the "gap", but this does not make it a true fact. My hypothesis is that the phrase was used as a kind of a motto, maybe, at a regional level. Maybe, it was widely in the diaspora. If you know the original source, please, post it here. I would suggest changing the National motto to none. At least, this would reflect the reality that no official motto (according to an act of the parliament or president) currently exists. User:Sashazlv 07:36, 31 May 2005 (UTC) :I heard this motto only colloquially and never officially. I support the suggestion above. User:Irpen 15:53, May 31, 2005 (UTC)

Ukraine

European countries Eastern Europe Slavic countries ka:კატეგორია:უკრაინა la:Categoria:Ucraina

Ukraine

A SHORT BIOGRAPHY OF THE BARD OF UKRAINE TARAS HRYHOROVICH SHEVCHENKO Taras Hryhorovich Shevchenko, the great Ukrainian poet, artist and thinker, was born on March 9, 1814, in the village of Moryntsi in central Ukraine, then part of the Russian Empire. His parents, H. Shevchenko and K. Shevchenko, were serfs on the land of V. Engelhardt. His grandfather I. Shevchenko, who was a witness of the Haidamak movement, had a significant influence on Taras. Taras's father was literate, and he sent his son to be educated as an apprentice to a deacon. In 1823, Taras's mother died, and his father married for a second time. In 1825, his father also died. For some time little Taras, now an orphan, served as a houseboy and was in training as a servant. A talent for drawing showed itself in the boy quite early. When he was 14 years old, he became a domestic servant to P. Engelhardt. In the spring of 1829, Taras travelled with P. Engelhardt to Vilnius. There he studied painting under an experienced craftsman. The Polish rebellion for national liberation from Russia began in November, 1830, and Engelhardt left for the Russian capital, St. Petersburg. Shevchenko stayed with the lord's servants in Vilnius and was witness to the revolutionary events. Shevchenko went to St. Petersburg at the beginning of 1831. In 1832, the lord "contracted" him to the master painter V. Shyryayev, with whom the lad experienced a hard school of professional training. Noted writers and artists bought Shevchenko out of serfdom. The 2,500 rubles required were raised through a lottery in which the prize was a portrait of the poet, Zhukovsky, painted by Karl Bryullov. The release from serfdom was signed on April 22, 1838. A committee of the Association for the Encouragement of Artists had examined drawings by Shevchenko and approved them. In 1838, Shevchenko was accepted into the Academy of Arts as an external student, practicing in the workshop of K. Bryullov. In January, 1839, Shevchenko was accepted as a resident student at the Association for the Encouragement of Artists, and at the annual examinations at the Academy of Arts, Shevchenko was given the Silver Medal for a landscape. In 1840 he was again given the Silver Medal, this time for his first oil painting, The Beggar Boy Giving Bread to a Dog. In the library of Yevhen Hrebinka, he became familiar with anthologies of Ukrainian folklore and the works of I. Kotlyarevsky, H. Kvitka-Osnovyanenko, and the romantic poets, as well as many Russian, East European and world writers. Shevchenko began to write poetry even before he was freed from serfdom. In 1840, the world first saw Kobzar, Shevchenko's first collection of poetry. Later Ivan Franko wrote that this book, "immediately revealed, as it were, a new world of poetry. It burst forth like a spring of clear, cold water, and sparkled with a clarity, breadth and elegance of artistic expression not previously known in Ukrainian writing." In 1841, the epic poem Haidamaky appeared as a separate volume. In September of that same year, Shevchenko got his third Silver Medal -- for his picture The Gypsy Fortune Teller. A significant work is the painting Kateryna, based on his poem. Shevchenko also tried his hand at writing plays. In 1842, a fragment of the tragedy Nykyta Hayday appeared, and in 1843 he completed the drama Nazar Stodolya. In this period, the full genius of Shevchenko was apparent, and the main characteristic of his poetry - a deep national sense - was evident. All his life, the poet was devoted to his nation. "Body and soul I am the son and brother of our unfortunate nation," he wrote. Opposition to the social and national oppression of the Ukrainian people grew in Shevchenko. Tsarist censorship deleted many lines from his works, and created problems for the printing of the writer's poetry. None of the critics of the Kobzar, however, was able to deny the great talent of Shevchenko. In 1843, the poet left St. Petersburg, and at the end of May he was in Ukraine. In Kiev, he met M. Maksymovich, P. Kulish and others, and did many paintings. That summer, the poet visited the sites of the former Zaporozhian Cossack Sich, and in September he went to Kyrylivka where, after a fourteen-year separation, he saw his brothers and sisters. In Ukraine Shevchenko did many pencil studies for a projected book of engravings to be called Picturesque Ukraine. At the end of February Shevchenko returned to St. Petersburg. In Ukraine, the poet has seen the heavy social and national yoke borne by the working people and the inhuman conditions of life of the peasants. This evoked new themes in Shevchenko's poetry. It was useless to think of publishing political poetry in conditions of Russian tsarist censorship. The works of the Polish poet Adam Mickiewicz had a great influence on Shevchenko, especially in the writing of political satire. One of the highlights of the political poetry of Shevchenko is the satirical poem Son (The Dream). On March 22, 1845, the Council of the Academy of Arts decided to grant Shevchenko the title of artist. On that same day, he approached the leadership of the Academy with a request for a "pass" for a trip to Ukraine. In Kiev, the poet met with M. Maksymovich, and was commissioned to paint historical sites. Shevchenko visited Kyrylivka, and in the fall of 1845, on an appointment by the Archeological Commission, he left to paint the historical and archeological sites of Poltava. In Myrhorod, the poet wrote the mystery play The Great Vault. Toward the end of October, Shevchenko went to Pereyaslav, where he lived to the beginning of 1846. In the spring of 1846, the poet lived for some time in Kiev, where he met the members of the Kyrylo-Methodius Society. The views of the poet had a great influence on the program of this secret society and on the philosophical outlook of many of his contemporaries. In 1847, arrests began of the members of the Kyrylo-Methodius Society and Shevchenko was arrested on April 5, on a ferry crossing the Dnipro River near Kiev. The next day, the poet was sent to St. Petersburg. He arrived there on April 17, 1847, and was imprisoned. Here he wrote the cycle of poems In the Dungeon. Of all the members of the association who came under investigation, Shevchenko was punished most severely: he was exiled as a private with the Military Detachment at Orenburg. Russian Tsar Nicholas I, in confirming the sentence, wrote, "Under the strictest surveillance, with a ban on writing and painting." On June 8, 1847, Shevchenko was established at Orenburg, and later he was sent to the fort at Orsk. From the very first days, Shevchenko violated the tsar's order. He transcribed the prison cycle into a small secret book he kept in his boot, and he wrote new poems into the book. In 1848, Shevchenko was included as an artist in the Aral Survey Expedition. In 1850, Shevchenko was arrested for violating the tsar's order. Warned by his friends, the poet was able to give them his notebooks and to destroy some letters. The poet was taken to Orsk, where he was questioned. Then he was sent to a remote fort in Novopetrovsk. Once again, strict discipline was imposed, and the poet was subjected to more rigorous surveillance. It was not until 1857 that Shevchenko finally returned from exile, thanks to the efforts of friends. While awaiting permission to return, Shevchenko began a diary, an important documentation of his views. On August 2, 1857, having received permission to travel to St. Petersburg, Shevchenko left the fort at Novopetrovsk. In Nizhniy Novgorod, he learned that he was forbidden to go to Moscow or St. Petersburg, on pain of being returned to Orenburg. A kind doctor attested to Shevchenko's illness, and the poet spent the entire winter in Nizhniy Novgorod. The winter of 1857-58 was very productive for Shevchenko. During that time he painted many portraits and other paintings. He also edited and transcribed into the Bilsha knyzhka (The Larger Book) his poems from the period of exile, and wrote new poetic works. After receiving permission to live in the capital, he went to St. Petersburg. After his exile, Shevchenko devoted his greatest attention as an artist to engraving, and in this field he became a true innovator. In May, 1859, Shevchenko got permission to go to Ukraine. He intended to buy a plot of land not far from the village of Pekariv, to build a house there, and to settle in Ukraine. In July he was arrested on a charge of blasphemy, but was released and ordered to go to St. Petersburg without fail. The poet arrived there on September 7, 1859. Nevertheless, to the end of his life, the poet hoped to settle in Ukraine. In spite of physical weakness as a result of his exile, Shevchenko's poetical strength was inexhaustible, and the last period of his work is the highest stage of his development. In a series of works, the poet embodied the dream of the people for a free and happy life. Shevchenko understood that the peasants would gain their freedom neither through the kindness of the tsar nor through reforms, but through struggle. He created a gallery of images - Champions of Sacred Freedom - of fighters against oppression and tyrarny. On September 2, 1860, the Council of the Academy of Arts granted Shevchenko the title, Academician of Engraving. The poet began to feel increasingly ill, and complained in letters about the state of his health. Taras Shevchenko died in St. Petersburg at 5:30 a.m. on March 10, 1861. At the Academy of Arts, over the coffin of Shevchenko, speeches were delivered in Ukrainian, Russian and Polish. The poet was first buried at the Smolensk Cemetery in St. Petersburg. Shevchenko's friends immediately undertook to fulfil the poet's Zapovit (Testament), and bury him in Ukraine. The coffin with the body of Shevchenko was taken by train to Moscow, and then by horse-drawn wagon to Ukraine. Shevchenko's remains entered Kiev on the evening of May 6, and the next day they were transferred to the steamship Kremenchuh. On May 8 the steamship reached Kaniv, and Taras was buried on Chernecha Hill (now Taras Hill) by the Dnipro River. A tall mound was erected over his grave, and it has become a sacred site for the Ukrainian people. == My Testament == When I am dead, then bury me
In my beloved Ukraine,
My tomb upon a grave mound high
Amid the spreading plain,
So that the fields, the boundless steppes,
The Dnieper's plunging shore
My eyes could see, my ears could hear
The mighty river roar.
When from Ukraine the Dnieper bears
Into the deep blue sea
The blood of foes... then will I leave
These hills and fertile fields --
I'll leave them all and fly away
To the abode of God,
And then I'll pray... But till that day
I nothing know of God.
Oh bury me, then rise ye up
And break your heavy chains
And water with the tyrants' blood
The freedom you have gained.
And in the great new family,
The family of the free,
With softly spoken, kindly word
Remember also me.''' ''Pereyaslav, December 25, 1845. Translated by John Weir.''

See other meanings of words starting from letter:

U