Talk:Lusatia

Spelling of historical names
It's quite possible the K spelling of modern-day Cottbus in the census data mirrors early 20th century usage... it's therefore somewhat moot which spelling to use in the article, or are there any guidelines for such cases? - Lasse

dispute of neutrality and historical mistakes
Well, I'am from Upper Lusatia and have to say that there are many historical mistakes in this article. Besides it would be much better not to mix the history of Lower Lusatia and Upper Lusatia in one paragraph. It would be much better to have 3 articles: Lusatia, Lower Lusatia and Upper Lusatia or at least different paragraphs. My language skills are not good enough to do it. It would make sense if someone who speaks English and German translates the articles form the german wiki - the Upper Lusatia article there is already realy good. I don't care if the articles are very short, because thats not an very important region for english speaking countrys, but I don't like the many mistakes. Thomas 16.01.06

I do agree with the previous statement. There are many historical oversimplifications in this article and it seems that some statements are rather propagandistic. The article puts the emphasis only on the slavic part of the history in this region and almost denies that this area has also now more then thousand years of german history. I also think that the history of the Oberlausitz and the Niederlausitz should be described separatly, since it differs quite a bit.


 * I wouldn't call it propagandistic, but it indeed needs some more facts. "now more then thousand years of german history" is a bit too much since the split of the Frankish Empire isn't even 1200 years back. The article is on my watch list now and as soon as I have some time for it I'll edit it. --32X 06:12, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Sometimes called Sorbia!
Where and when is this region called by the English construction Sorbia? I have never heard or read the name nor any possible German equivalent. A google search turns very few and almost no neutral use of the word. I removed the word Sorbia from this entry and unless somebody has proof that the word is seriously used as a name for the region I would say we keep it out.
 * It is mentioned a few times in Google Books, but the term does not seem to be in common usage. Olessi 02:50, 25 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorbs is an ancient German name for the tribes of Serbs. Nowaday the word is not used (or even spelled) in latin script and is rarely seen outside of manuscripts and chronicles mainly because a certain man with a quarter of a mustache misused the word in some propaganda which pissed of the Sorbs. Now they call themselves "Serbs" or when wanting to be more specific "White Serbs". 99.236.221.124 (talk) 05:42, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
 * bullshit alert. --32X (talk) 22:02, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Troll alert 99.236.221.124 (talk) 03:04, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

This article needs an extensive rewriting
From the beginning with the Sorbian Flag and Domowina-Logo (which seems like a Coat of arms of Lusitia which it isn't) to the unimportant "Autonomy Movement" of some Germans in Görlitz (which sounds here like it would be an actual slavic Autonomy Movement, but in Görlitz itself lives nearly no Sorbs for centuries), the mix and oversimplification of history and the many little mistakes this article need lot of rewriting. Best would be to translate de:Lausitz, de:Oberlausitz and de:Niederlausitz into English --86.56.0.49 07:59, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Strongly agree. This article is flawed in many ways. First of all: the logo of the Domowina and the Sorbian flag. Both the flag and the logo implicate that the Sorbs are the dominating ethnic group, which isn't true at all. They are a minority, even in this small region. Oh, and at least the flag of Upper Lusatia ist blue and yellow (i don't know about Lower Lusatia).
 * The article should be splitted into Upper and Lower Lusatia since both regions share the same name (Lusatia), bot not the same history and are not the same. Most people also define themselves as Upper or Lower Lusatians, not simply as Lusatians. 84.181.94.113 19:22, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

I removed the flag and the logo because of the fact that they are not the official symbols of Lusatia. The flag is the flag of the Sorbs - and much of the area shown on the map is not inhabited by Sorbs. The Logo is the Domowina-Logo (you can find it now in the Domowina-article). The historical Logo of Upper Lusatia (totay there is no official Logo) is this: Knarf-bz 15:43, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

don't be shy about the english
Wikipedia is crawling with people who love to fix things, even if they don't add content. But someone who knows both German and the preferably some history of the region should make the first cut at these translations. Aren't there any bored undergraduates in Dresden?


 * Why in Dresden? What did you say about content? -- j.budissin 09:52, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Info: translation request for Upper and Lower Lusatia
Just to let you all know. There are translation requests for Upper and Lower Lusatia now. Splitting the region into Upper and Lower Lusatia and translating the german articles is probably the best way to solve this mess. Karasek (talk) 10:06, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree that separate articles are needed. I might get around to working on it eventually, but there are other projects in my queue first. If you feel intrepid, feel free to take a stab at the articles yourself. Olessi (talk) 22:39, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Religion
Are the Sorbs mainly catholic today?

The first books written in Sorbian language were translations of the bible as a result of the Lutheran Reformation. Belonging to a Protestant state ment to be Protestant ( in 16th century). So why should the Sorbs stay catholic?(62.134.88.165 (talk) 08:00, 8 April 2008 (UTC))


 * Most Sorbs around Bautzen and Panschwitz-Kuckau monastery are catholic, many of the others protestant. But there is no real statistics on that. -- j.budissin (talk) 15:50, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

The origin of the terms SORB, SORBIAN
Can somebody explain why English uses the terms SORB and SORBIAN? They call them selves SERB, SERBKA, SERBJA, the name for the language is SERBSKI, SERBŠČINA. There is no sense in that. A Friend of Lusatia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.244.195.13 (talk) 22:20, 4 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I guess, because the German word is Sorben, as you might know. I could also ask, why this is the case, but it definitely is. Historical reasons. Doesn't really matter, does it? -- j.budissin (talk) 23:40, 4 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I guess it should be cleared up in the article as it seems to be leading to some confusion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.117.157.157 (talk) 22:19, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Not descended from Sorbs?
"More than 60,000 of the Sorbian Slavic minority continue to live in the region. Historically their ancestors are the Milceni and the Lusitzer, and not the Sorbs, that settled in the region between Elbe and Saale." What does this mean? Are the Sorbs of Lusatia distinct from a people of the same name, who live or lived to the west of Lusatia? Or is this some sort of error in construction? 140.147.236.195 (talk) 16:29, 3 November 2008 (UTC)Stephen Kosciesza

No, no, you're right, there was a Slavonic people of the same name in the Elbe/Saale area. "Sorben" was hardly ever used to refer to the Slavonic population of Lusatia prior to 1945. (The German term "Wenden" would be used, or, in scholarly language, sometimes "Serben" - which in today's German refers exclusively to the people of Serbia - or "Lausitzer Serben".) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.117.157.157 (talk) 22:16, 3 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Right, but it descends from their own name, "Serbja". And also that name comes originally not from Lusatian people, but from Slavonic tribes in Thuringia. -- j.budissin (talk) 14:08, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Sinti & Roma or Sinti a subgroup of Roma?
I changed "alongside Sinti and Roma" to "alongside Sinti a subgroup of Roma" because the Sinti are a subgroup of Roma and the "and" implies they're two seperate groups when that isn't the case. So why did somebody change it back? 47.17.90.59 (talk) 21:54, 12 November 2023 (UTC)