Talk:Cyril and Methodius/Archive 7

Warning!Their origin is unknown
Please, stop to add "Greek", "Bulgarian" or "Slavic" origin in the beginning of article. Quote from the book "The Byzantine world' by D. Georgiev, 2004, Prosveta, page N114: There are 3 hypotheses about the origin of Cyril and Methodius: 1)Greek - it is being established as the hypothesis that the two brothers have greek origin. 2)Bulgarian - it is being established as the pieces of work for the apocryphal literature and the more late documents where it is claimed that they are Bulgarians. 3)Mixed - they have a Bulgarian mother and a Greek father. None of the three hypotheses is confirmed. We have no evidences about their origin. The serious historians do not use this question in their works. Every theories which considered brothers as Greek, Bulgarian or Macedonian origin are biased and in the majority of cases can be with fantastic character or effect of political propaganda. Similar theories can not be viewed as historically correct opinions.--Stolichanin (talk) 19:05, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Depends on how you look on the matter. The brothers had two parents, but the sources confirm the nationality of only one of them: their father was of Byzantine Greek origin, who served in high positions in the Byzantine Empire and the local theme of Macedonia. However, I am not sure how the unknown nationality of their mother, (some sources say she was Bulgarian, other sources claim she was Serbian but there is no real concensus on her origins) automatically makes the nationality of the brothers themselves be in question. In There are many theories, but we can't ignore the fact that there is a consensus among the academic people that Cyril and Methodius where Byzantine Greeks in every aspect of their life: 1) They were born as Byzantine Greek citizens, 2) they were given Byzantine Greek birthnames, 3) Their mother tongue was the Byzantine Greek language, 4) were born in the historically Greek city of Thessaloniki, although this has little relevance, but it relates to their birthplace and 5) were members of the Greek Orthodox Church. That said, the sources mentioning of their mother being of Slavic origin, combined with theories whether their family already had Greek roots, or just were hellenized (or not), prior to their birthdate, haven't reached a concensus in the academaic community and remain unclear for the most part. --SilentResident (talk) 09:02, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Stolichanin, I have noticed the removal of over 8 sources from the page that have been added by other Wikipedia users. The removal of so many sources, and doing edits without citing any sources from your part, as well as the lack of a good and verified explanation on regards to their removal, forced me to revert your edits. Until sources and explanations are provided for these changes of yours, at least here in the Talk page, is better to not remove sourced information by other people just based on your personal POVs. If can you please explain in a detailed manner (and with sources if possible) your changes, that could be great. I do not dispute your information, but I couldn't recommend just removing so many sources like that and without citing any new sources backing these changes. Thank you. --SilentResident (talk) 15:39, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * The authors do not indicate any evidence of their origin. The term "Greeks" does not exist in the Middle Ages. "Byzantine" and "Greek" are two different things. The Byzantine can be Armenian, Syrian, Georgian, etc. The national idea was born in 18th - 19th century.--Stolichanin (talk) 17:54, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Their origins are completely uncertain and disputed. They may have been simply of mixed origin, all the theories are not an evidence. I agree that in the Middle Ages any Greek identity vanished because the Greeks of the Byzantine Empire were completely assimilated and viewed themselves as Romans, although kept speaking Greek. It is unknown as to whether Cyril and Methodius have ever affiliated to Greek or Slavic identity, so both are only theories and should be explained apart from the leading sentence. Their origins are unknown to me, only that Byzantium is their birthplace and that they are polyglots is certain. I do not defend any point or position, I am unaware of their origins and therefore doubt the statement at the lead, nobody can guess and all the theories should be mentioned to achieve an essential balance.

Sources theorizing their Slavic origin:

... Two Christian brothers of Slavic descent, Cyril and Methodius, set out in about 862 as missionaries from the Byzantine ...
 * 1. Mortimer Chambers, Barbara Hanawalt, Theodore Rabb, Isser Woloch, Raymond Grew. The Western Experience with Powerweb. Eighth Edition. McGraw-Hill Higher Education 2002. University of Michigan. p. 214. ISBN 9780072565447

... Being of Slavic descent, both of them spoke the old Slavic language fluently ...
 * 2. Balkan Studies, Volume 22. Hidryma Meletōn Chersonēsou tou Haimou (Thessalonikē, Greece). The Institute, 1981. Original from	the University of Michigan. p. 381

... In the ninth century two brothers Cyril and Methodius, Macedonian educators of Slavic origin from Solun, brought literacy and Christianity to the Slavs...
 * 3. Loring M. Danforth. The Macedonian Conflict: Ethnic Nationalism in a Transnational World. Princeton University Press, 1995. p. 49 ISBN 9780691043562.

... 63-68 (Cyril and Methodius were Slavs) ... There remains that argument for Cyril's and Methodius' Slavic origin which has to do with the Slavic translation of the Gospels and ...
 * 4. Ihor Ševčenko. Byzantium and the Slavs: In Letters and Culture'. Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute, 1991. p. 481. ISBN 9780916458126

... Two missionaries of Slavic origin, Cyril (baptized Constantine) and Methodius, adapted the Greek alphabet and translated both the Bible and the liturgy into the Slavic tongue...
 * 5. Roland Herbert Bainton. Christianity: An American Heritage Book Series. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2000. p. 156. ISBN 9780618056873

..Byzantine emperor Michael, on the request of the Moravian prince Ratislav, decided to send Slav priests as educators, he chose the Salonika brothers Cyril and Methodius...
 * 6. John Shea. Macedonia and Greece: The Struggle to Define a New Balkan Nation. McFarland, 1997. p. 56 . ISBN 9780786437672

... They may have been of wholly Slavic descent or of mixed Greco-Slav origin...
 * 7. UNESCO Features: A Fortnightly Press Service. UNESCO. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 1984. University of Michigan

... century in Salonika, then one of the largest towns in the Byzantine Empire. The brothers were of Slav origin ...
 * 8. The Pakistan Review, Volume 19. Ferozsons Limited, 1971. University of California. p. 41

... Cyril and Methodius not only lived among Slavs. ... of Slavonic, which the not only spoke and understood, but in which they also wrote — translated and composed — and for which they invented an alphabet, is proof of their Slav origin ...
 * 9. Balkania, Volume 7. Balkania Publishing Company, 1973. Indiana University. p. 10

... brothers of Slavic origin, Cyril and Methodius, who, after being ordained at Constantinople, preached the Gospel to the Slavs...
 * 10. Bryce Dale Lyon, Herbert Harvey Rowen, Theodore S. Hamerow. A history of the Western World, Volume 1. Rand McNally College Pub. Co., 1974. Northwestern University. p. 239

...Two missionaries of Slavic origin, Cyril (baptized Constantine) and Methodius, adapted the Greek alphabet and translated both the Bible and the liturgy into the Slavic tongue...
 * 11. Roland Herbert Bainton. The history of Christianity. Nelson, 1964. p. 169

... There is disagreement as to whether Cyril and his brother Methodius were Greek or Slavic, but they knew the Slavic dialect spoken in Macedonia...
 * 12. Carl Waldman, Catherine Mason. Encyclopedia of European Peoples: Facts on File library of world history. Infobase Publishing, 2006. p. 752. ISBN 9781438129181

... Cyril and Methodius derived from a rich family of Salonica, perhaps of Slavic origin, but Grecized in those times. Methodius (815-885) ...
 * 13. Frank Andrews. Ancient Slavs'. Worzalla Publishing Company, 1976. University of Wisconsin - Madison. p. 163.

.. Born at Thessalonica, and so probably of Slavic descent, at least acquainted with the language of the Slavs, ...
 * 14. Johann Heinrich Kurtz, John Macpherson. Church History. Hodder and Stoughton, 1891. University of California. p. 431

.. This man and his brother Cyril became the and Cyril apostles of the Slavic people. These two brothers seemed to have been raised up for such a mission. They were probably of Slavic descent ...
 * 15. William Leslie King. Investment and Achievement: A Study in Christian Progress. Jennings and Graham, 1913. Columbia University.

Sources theorizing at least partial Slavic or mixed origin(should also be mentioned as an option in the description): .. Cyril was born of Greek nobility connected with the senat of Thessalonica, although his mother may have been of Slavic descent ...
 * 1. Philip Lief Group. Saintly Support: A Prayer For Every Problem. Andrews McMeel Publishing, 2003. p. 37. ISBN 9780740733369

... The father of Cyril and Methodius, Lev, was a Macedonian Slav in the Byzantine service, occupying the post of assistant to the ...
 * 2. John Shea. Macedonia and Greece: The Struggle to Define a New Balkan Nation. McFarland, 1997. p. 56 . ISBN 9780786437672

... They may have been of wholly Slavic descent or of mixed Greco-Slav origin...
 * 3. UNESCO Features: A Fortnightly Press Service. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization., 1984. University of Michigan

... (The legend also suggests that their mother may have been of Slavic origin)...
 * 4. Proceedings of the PMR Conference, Volumes 16-20. Augustinian Historical Institute, Villanova University, 1992. p.

... of Cyril-Constantine. His mother's name was Mary and some maintain that she was of Slavic origin. ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Judist (talk • contribs) 05:33, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
 * 5. Tamara Archleb Gály. The Encyclopaedia of Slovakia and the Slovaks: A Concise Encyclopaedia Encyclopaedia Beliana. p. 436. ISBN 9788022409254

Ethnic origin obsession
This whole discussion completely misses the point. The "Byzantine Greek" in the lede has nothing to do with "ethnic origin" or any such thing, it merely refers to their culture and political affiliation. They were educated and wrote in Greek, and were subjects of the Byzantine Empire. That their mother may have been a Slav is mentioned clearly in the "Early life" section. This sort of edit is extremely crude POV-pushing, in terms of wording, placement, etc... Athenean (talk) 07:00, 27 November 2015 (UTC)


 * I agree. But this is part of wider POV campaign across several ARBMAC-related articles. It is very disruptive and has to stop. Also there has been canvassing by the same editor for support.  Dr.   K.  06:27, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

The annoying POV allegation obsession

 * Removing 15 sources because you do not like the way it is and call it POV is scandaleous. Is that justification that everything is simply POV preferred over my detailed research above? I may have added more research than has ever been made at this article, but you can just call it POV and revert it, no problem, why not? Falsely alleged "POV" and "disruptive" and has been reverted because that's not what you like. Calling anything POV have become the justification at any article, this is not an explanation detailed, and normal. That's far from disruptive edits, even worse. The allegations for canvassing are a personal attack. And please next time use explanation other than "POV" or "disruptive edits"! Other than "POV" once again, this doesn't mean anything! Somebody please check and confirm that the recent additions are not an extreme POV or disruptive.Judist (talk) 06:51, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
 * WP:IDHT, anyone? Instead of whining, try to read what I've written above. Athenean (talk) 07:00, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't need to read your frivolous tiny statement numerous times, while I made a huge research above which you ignored and removed without any justification! Judist (talk) 07:03, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Still there is no fair explanation for the removal of the whole research containing twelve reliable sources. Please check them and revert yourself.Judist (talk) 17:57, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
 * There is no one medieval chronicle, which considered themselves as "Greeks" or "Byzantine Greeks". It's late 19th century interpretation, which is too controversial. Byzantine Greek is some very strange concept as whole - during the 9th century "Greeks" means "Non-Christians" (check in Byzantine historiography). The Byzantine people are Romans (Romaion) according to the Byzantine chronists or often they think themselves like a "Christians". There are two chronicles from 12th century, where they are identified as Bulgarians. Their contemporaries talk about their Slavic origin on mother's line.
 * Yet there is a version that they have a some kind of Greeks and that many sources says. But many other reliable sources considered them as Slavs or people of Slavic origin.
 * The reliable sources above, presenting by Judist prove their Slavic origin and this POV must be represented in the article like the version about the Greek origin, I think. --Stolichanin (talk) 17:26, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 November 2015
Please, add Slovak language version (section Notes)


 * Ciril in Metod


 * Cyril a Metod


 * Кирило і Мефодій (Kyrylo i Mefodij)

Verification: https://sk.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyril_a_Metod Andreios (talk) 11:45, 26 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Yes check.svg Done --Cerebellum (talk) 15:30, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 January 2016
One of the last sentences in section "Methodius' final years" says:

"Cyrillic gradually replaced Glagolitic as the alphabet of the Old Church Slavonic language, which became the official language of the Bulgarian Empire and later spread to the Eastern Slav lands of Kievan Rus'."

That is a nonsens! That idea is influenced by political use of the Pan-Slavism by the imperial Russia in the last centuries.


 * Actually the Bulgarian language became known as "Old Church Slavonic" because of the widespread influence in ninth century and afterwards.

It was an act of power and authority done by Bulgarian tsar(emperor), developed by diplomacy, in co-operation with the east emperor and with the bishop from Constantinople. The Moravian mission was pilot project done at the borders between East and West. In the same time Christianity was officialised in Bulgaria adopting it from the east, so it was kind of a deal. The goal was to protect the state and the nation from total cultural dominance by the east or the west after this full christianisation.

Same thing is done centuries later by the north nations in the time of the Reformation. Political leaders stand by the idea and the Bible translated to the language become like a unifying code.

78.130.209.131 (talk) 20:25, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Bazj (talk) 20:16, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Extremely poorly sourced contentious claims
I reverted this addition on the grounds that it is extremely poorly sourced. The claim that their names are something other than Cyril and Methodius is quite extraordinary and runs contrary to the known literature. Only sources of extremely high quality would be acceptable here. So first of all "The Lives of St. Tsurho and St. Strahota', Bohemia, 1495, Vatican Library" is not how we do citations. Second, a source from 1495 is essentially no source at all. Contemporary, secondary sourced only. And "Obzor" magazine from 1979 is also dubious. Athenean (talk) 05:26, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Awkward phrasing in early life section
Currently the article reads "The two brothers were born in Thessalonica, in present-day Greece – Cyril lived from 827–828 and Methodius 815–820."

This makes it sound like Cyril only lived to be one year old and Methodius only lived to be five. I would suggest a re-write to something like 'Cyril was born c. 826 and Methodius c. 815'. This would (most importantly) make it clearer that it's their years of birth being referred to rather than duration of their lives, and as a side benefit make the dates consistent with those in the opening paragraph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.32.130.175 (talk) 12:50, 11 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Was gonna say the exact same. Bizarre that no one took the effort to correct, yet the article is locked for edit. Ah well... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.245.125.92 (talk) 22:27, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Origin of Saints Cyril and Methodius
The article previously stated that the the two saints were born in Salonica, which was a Byzantine city, and therefore presented them as Byzantine which is the most accepted view. However, the article has since been edited to state that there is dispute about their ethnic origin, an old and moot controversy in Byzantine studies. Salonica never became part of a Slavic state, and there is no contemporary source, Greek, Latin or Slavonic, stating that the saints were of Slavic origin. The sources that claim that Cyril and Methodius were Slavs are Slavic chronicles and vitae of dubious objectivity that date many centuries after their birth. These sources have been given unnecessary credence because the saints are so venerated in Slavic countries and Bulgaria's and Serbia's relations with Byzantine and post-Byzantine Greeks have been at times so hostile that the saints HAD to become Slavs. Serious contemporary Slav historians usually do not insist on this nationalistic myth because the evidence behind it is dubious (see for example http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Saints_Cyril_and_Methodius#Slavic_origin_hypothesis). But other sources that are not based on very good research continue to quote that the saints must have been Slavs. A good Wikipedia article should weigh the veracity of sources and not treat them all equally. I suppose it would be just as reasonable to insert in the article on Obama that his origin is disputed--he may have been born outside the US, or he may be Muslim; because some people believe so, it must be so. The article on Columbus fortunately still presents him as Italian. Many Spanish and Portuguese amateur historians whould claim otherwise, but fortunately the Wikipedia editors have not been foolish enough to give them much space. The fact that the same has not been done here is a sign of poor Wikipedia editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.166.138.164 (talk) 02:15, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

People born 300 years before they were actually born?
In the text it says " five Slavic disciples were ordained as priests (Saint Gorazd, Saint Clement of Ohrid and Saint Naum) and as deacons (Saint Angelar and Saint Sava) by the prominent bishops Formosus and Gauderic." and the "Saint Sava" entry here links to the article about Saint Sava, born in the second half of the 12th century (and dead in the 13th). Mind you, this is all happenning in the late 9th century of the common era.

Can someone please explain that?


 * Obviously it’s a mistake: the link referred to a different person. I have therefore deleted it.  I don’t think there is any point in having even a red link for the Sava who was a companion of SS Cyril and Methodius, as nothing else is known about him. Лудольф (talk) 19:52, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Commemoration
Is it just me, or are three of the four bullet points in this section extending into their paragraphs? 2601:1C0:7001:5EAF:8D73:A4CC:6850:967C (talk) 04:11, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Saints Cyril and Methodius. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070219170931/http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/saintm10.htm to http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/saintm10.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:18, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Why is there name of teachers from Macedonia on Greek, but not on Macedonian????
On Macedonian they are known as: Sveti Kiril i Metodij (Свети Кирил и Методиј).

Please fix it and put all interested languages - WHY ONLY GREEK???? (and some old church slavonic language not used by anybody today)

WE ARE LIVING TODAY, NOT IN THE PAST!!!!

WE are using the alphabet initiated by Sts. Cyril and Metodij, not "Greeks". It should be first on Macedonian, then (if even necessary) on "greek". (but it is not necessary, because it is not on French, Spanish.... --- not interested languages for this topic) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.28.219.133 (talk) 00:49, 21 July 2017 (UTC)


 * "WE ARE LIVING TODAY, NOT IN THE PAST!!!!"

Easy to say if you have no past.

They are in Greek cause they were byzantine, speaking greek.--193.239.221.248 (talk) 12:46, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 September 2018
In section "Methodius' final years," paragraph 4, line 3, please change "There they devised the Cyrillic script on the basis... to "There they (and, in particular, the Bulgarian scholar Saint Clement of Ohrid) devised the Cyrillic script on the basis..., because the invention of the Cyrillic script as used today is attributed to him and his work (see, for example, http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/in-pictures-ohrid-home-of-cyrillic-05-23-2018 where a primary source by Theophylact is discussed). You can change the sentence if you want, but I would like St. Clement's name to be mentioned in this sentence and his work recognized. Thank you! 192.76.8.91 (talk) 18:26, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done L293D (☎ • ✎) 19:16, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The adjective "Bulgarian" is not one we can use for this particular person, because he is surrounded by an intense nationality debate that will not move forward even with a genetic analysis of his remains in Rome. The debate as to whether he was ethnically Greek or Slavic, and if Slavic, what specifically. Even though the evidence from the Vita Constantini does seem to support one side in terms of plausibility, we would need high probability to be able to use any appellation. Not meaning to be rude, I will take the "Bulgarian" part our while leaving the rest. Thank you! Inatan (talk) 05:17, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Wrong Information.
Just to let you know - Cyril and Metodii are Bulgarians!!! Read a bit for the history of Balkans!!! Marrin1027 (talk) 12:43, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Let's separate both persons so each has his own article!
I needed information about St. Constantine / Cyril now, but it was super hard to find his article in Wikipedia. I had to google for some time until I was led to the right article on here. Hence, I feel the need to designate a separate article for each of the two 'brothers'. This is so uncustomary (to have two personalities joined in one article and merged into one corpus). — Preceding unsigned comment added by SilkySword (talk • contribs) 01:58, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 May 2019
Brothers were born in Macedonia and of Macedonian origin. 46.13.12.30 (talk) 11:43, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. – Þjarkur (talk) 12:01, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
 * That is not a change. The article already mentions that the duo were born in Thessaloniki, currently part of Macedonia (Greece). Of their ancestry, nothing certain is known, though they were residents of the Byzantine Empire. Dimadick (talk) 10:47, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:21, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Kiril i metodii.jpg

Semi-protected edit request on 3 November 2019
Under ===Early life=== field: The two brothers were born in Thessalonica, in present-day Greece

Please change from "in" to "present-day" (remove "in present day")

Source: According to Wikipedia but also many historical sources, Modern Greek republic is the continuation of The Byzantine empire. So "in present-day" would confuse the wikipedia users. Dimitrios1984 (talk) 12:47, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Pictogram voting wait.svg Already done Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 15:10, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Country labels under Gallery
How can I add the country label Macedonia to the Ohrid and Skopje monuments under Gallery? It seems that all the other photos have a country listing, except Donetsk due to Ukraine/Russia claims. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Macedonia1913 (talk • contribs) 01:26, 24 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Done, thanks. -- Local hero talk 15:59, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:38, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Church Cyril Methodius Salonica 1.jpg

Semi-protected edit request on 26 November 2020
92.53.21.203 (talk) 18:35, 26 November 2020 (UTC) In macedonia nit bulgaria
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. --TheImaCow (talk) 19:21, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Quote from the Life of Methodius
This is the quote from Vita Methodii, the oldest existing source on Cyril and Methodius (from 12. century manuscript):

"Then Emperor Michael said to Constantine the Philosopher: [...] Take your brother, the Hegumen Methodius, and go. For you are both Thessalonians and all Thessalonians speak pure Slavic."

- Vita Methodii

I think it is more then proper to be in the article. But someone has been reverted my contribution as vandalism, so I must open the discusion here. Does anyone think there is a reason for this quote not to enter the article? --Mladifilozof (talk) 08:18, 1 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Vita Metodii is a WP:PRIMARY source and should not be used per WP:PSTS. The Emperor Michael, as Roman emperor, did not speak a word of Slavic. And the Slavs never took Thessalonica, therefore the claim that "all Thessalonians speak pure Slavic" is bunk. This is exactly the reason we should only rely on modern secondary sources and not primary sources from over 1000 years ago. Khirurg (talk) 17:52, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 13 April 2022

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Moved as uncontroversial. (non-admin closure) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 00:08, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Saints Cyril and Methodius → Cyril and Methodius – Per the clergy guideline WP:NCWC that discourages the use of 'Saint' unless it is the only viable option for disambiguation. ~ Iskandar323 (talk) 19:04, 13 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Support. Not necessary for recognizability in this case. Srnec (talk) 02:36, 14 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Addendum: Ngrams shows that "Cyril and Methodius" is far more prevalent as a phrase in the absence of the prefacing title of "Saints" than it is with it. Iskandar323 (talk) 10:07, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Support per nom --Constantine  ✍  12:47, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 May 2022
Hipodilski (talk) 10:13, 11 May 2022 (UTC) Hello there is one more picture of a monument of Saint Cyril and Methodius located in Dobrich, Bulgaria i would like to include in the page https://pronewsdobrich.bg/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/%D0%A5%D0%93-1-1-1024x660.jpg
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: We cannot use copyrighted images taken from other websites. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:52, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Methodius's death location
The text of this article states that "Methodius' body was buried in the main cathedral church of Great Moravia. Until today it remains an open question which city was capital of Great Moravia and therefore the place of Methodius' eternal rest remains unknown." The article on Great Moravia states that "Although the location of the Great Moravian capital, "Veligrad", has not been identified, Mikulčice with its palace and 12 churches is the most widely accepted candidate." All well and good so far; Methodius probably died in, and was certainly buried in, the capital of Great Moravia, "Veligrad" or "Velehrad," the location of which is today uncertain. However, the infobox gives a death location for Methodius of Velehrad- a village which is popularly associated with the saints, and which today has structures commemorating the saints, but which is unequivocally not identical with the Veligrad/Velehrad of Great Moravia- as the village's own website states (translated from Czech), "...St. Cyril and Methodius, whose work is traditionally associated with Velehrad (although today we know for sure that the original Velehrad is not the same as the current one)." The website explains that the association with Cyril and Methodius dates from the 19th century, and that the consecration of the basilica which today honors the saints was only expanded to include them in the 1930s.

Anyway: I'm "being bold" and simply unlinking Velehrad from the death location in the infobox. It's incorrect, and contradicts the text of the article. Presumably, its linking to the article on the modern-day village of Velehrad was an honest mistake, caused by understandable confusion between the historic capital and the later village of the same name, made even more understandable because others have evidently made the same mistaken identification before. It'd be good to add a sentence to the article explaining the later (mis)identification of the saints with Velehrad, but I don't speak Czech, and am not quite confident about using/citing sources in translation like this. Yspaddadenpenkawr (talk) 02:03, 23 October 2022 (UTC)