Talk:Kontusz

Image
Sorry, but the images previously used in the article presentet totally different items of clothing - żupan and bekiesza. I've removed them and instead put the right image of kontusz. You can contact me on Polish Wikipedia here: Selena von Eichendorf 16:54, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Ok, tnx - but do tell me what are they wearing then? Captions need to be corrected in several other articles, I am afraid. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 18:09, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

De-stubbed
This article appears to be of an appropriate length for the subject matter under discussion. It is also appropriately categorized and wikified.

By nature, stubbing and tagging articles devalues them, giving them an aura of unreliability and making them seem less credible. As part of my personal campaign to free up articles that have been stubbed and tagged without cause, this article has been disenstubbified.

If any editor disagrees, and would rather re-stub it than improve it by adding actual content, please discuss here. The Editrix 04:11, 8 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I disagree, for the reasons presented at Talk:Pas kontuszowy. I propose the same solution to destub it as there :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 16:46, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Szlachcic/Шляхтич
In captions of two images there was written word "szlachtic", which, as I understand, was some compromise between Polish szlachcic and Ukrainian шляхтич (shlyahtych, or in more "Polish-like Latin ortography" szlachtycz) - but it (szlachtic) is not Polish nor Ukrainian word. So I've corrected it, under image of Polish nobleman I wrote szlachcic and under Ukrainian - шляхтич. Just wanted to explain what have I done here ;) Silmethule (talk) 13:43, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * BTW, I never understood Piotrus' attempts to introduce the word "szlachcic" into English. I'm not a native speaker, but to me it sounds bizarre and I'd rather we used gentry or Polish-Lithuanian gentry .  // Halibutt 17:55, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Rename
Kontusz to Kontush.

This is wikipedia in English, not Polish. "Sz" does not spell like [ʃ] "sh" in English.--202.71.90.139 (talk) 03:37, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Read WP:NC. We don't event words. There is no "kontush". --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 05:56, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I find nothing in WP:NC that says: "Sz" spells in English like [ʃ] ("sh"). Maybe you can help me?--202.71.90.139 (talk) 05:31, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Let's start with NC. Kontush is used in about 80 English works indeed (I was in fact incorrect when I claimed such a spelling does not exist). But Kontusz is used in several hundreds. PS. Dear anon, please consider registering. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 17:36, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you, for your comment and refs. I dont need a regestaration and find its useless.
 * Please give me examples of words in English in which "Sz" spells like [ʃ] ("sh"). I simply dont know them. Maybe there are some.
 * If we have a look at your refs from books.google, we can see that they are partly in Polish and thus cannot be the argument in this dispute. Some of the refs, however, use a word "kontush" in which Polish "sz" is replaced by English "sh". So, I'm not alone who think that word "kontush" is better than "kontusz". English and Polish share similar alphabet, but not phonology of similar letters. If wikipedia is in English, then its better to write words here in accordance with English orthography and phonology rather than Polish.--202.71.90.139 (talk) 03:28, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * As I've explained above, English works prefer kontusz to kontush. If you disagree, you are welcome to start a WP:RM. As for finding registration useless, well, unregistered users are denied many tools, such as ability to move and rename articles (to prevent anonymous vandalism; please read Why create an account?).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 04:40, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * English works do not prefer kontusz to kontush. Your refs for "kontusz" include hundreds of non-English books, especially Polish. I wonder how Polish books can be an evidence in our dispute. We are taking about English academia, arent we? In English we don't spell "sz" like [ʃ]. It would rather sounds like [sʒ] or [sz]. [ʃ] is represented only by "sh". Thus, if we want to write Polish word "kontusz" in English according to the rules of English phonology and orthography, we should write "kontush". And if it is an wikipedia in English we should write "kontush" rather then "kontush". Right? --202.71.90.139 (talk) 05:52, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
 * My search comparison included the English word Poland, and as such should not include Polish books. You are welcome to show that this is not the case, and we can revise the keywords, but as it stands, I believe my search did indeed prove that the word "kontusz" was more often used then "kontush".--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:40, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Compare also with  or  with .  // Halibutt 17:59, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Category:Belarusian clothing
Any reference that this was worn by Belarusians? By 19th century, when Belarusian national conciousness emerged, this clothing was quickly losing its popularity, and it was worn primarily by conservative Polish-Lithuanian nobility (peasant garb was sukmana). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:41, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kontusz. 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/20060617022627/http://www.reconstructinghistory.com/patterns/kontuszp.html to http://www.reconstructinghistory.com/patterns/kontuszp.html

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) 15:56, 25 December 2017 (UTC)