Talk:Petro Konashevych-Sahaidachny

Untitled
I've reverted back to the stub version. Two anonymous edits had copied the bulk of this article from http://www.kinasevych.ca/?p=54. —Michael Z. 2006-01-28 06:05 Z 

Good to see that the article has been expanded. --Ghirla-трёп- 22:20, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, but there's still a lot more information that could be added (which I hope, would make it FA-status).. —dima/talk/ 04:01, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

B-class review
This article is currently at start/C class, but could be improved to B-class if it had more (inline) citations. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; talk to me 21:59, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

For Zas
Article must be based on modern scientific sources, not russian folklore and legends. Geohem (talk) 10:56, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

The editing by me text has all needed and respectful references contrarily to yours. Your remarks " Russian folklore and legends" has not any grounds. Soloviev is well-known historian. Belska script is real historical source - any historian in a lucky case of finding this kind of reference will be unspeakable happy. I do not see any real explanations for  erasing by you  text. Moreover, most of your text has not references at all and a inaccurate statements.. --zas2000 (talk) 11:50, 24 March 2013 (UTC) I am ready to give you detail explanations for any of my text and could  supply you comments to your text? to show you an inaccuracies and an absences of the references of your text. I am waiting you comments and dis--zas2000 (talk) 12:03, 24 March 2013 (UTC)cussion.
 * First of all read the : WP:NOR and WP:RELY. Leave the historical sources for professional historians. If you continue to break the rules, I will make a request to the administrator.Geohem (talk) 10:18, 25 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I am glad yuo answer me exclusively polite, but I am very upset not hearing from anything in cause of our-my editing?

To make it easier for you: How about unsuccessful siege of the Trotsk-Sergei monastery? ( Read about it in my references, please)
 * your text is "Near Serpukhov Sahaidachny forced the army of Dmitri Pozharski to flee". This is wrong. Vernadsky and Soloviev claims, that Pozharsky  did not take a part in this battle. He was sick. The command of the troops was under the other officer.  Give reference on your vision of this story, please.
 * Of course this is not true, the russian troops were under Gregory Volkonsky command, Pozharsky was in Moscow.
 * your text: "Luckily for the Muscovites the assault was unsuccessful". This phrase is out of  an encyclopedic style, too many emotions and looks like is a  politically motivated statement. Give reference off this statement?
 * It s not my text. Probably it's text from one of historical stories, like Solovyov.
 * Why you choose only successful part of the military company?.
 * There is no relationship between the siege of the Troitsk-Sergei monastery and Sahaidachny. At least for modern historians.Geohem (talk) 16:16, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Later I will give you more --zas2000 (talk) 14:50, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Additionally, you removed three times in row the big chunk of the valuable, referenced information  - I suggest you to fulfill your threats asking the administrator to discuss your-my behavior--zas2000 (talk) 14:59, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

taken from the very famous work of Дмитрий Иванович Яворницкий ИСТОРИЯ ЗАПОРОЖСКИХ КАЗАКОВ История запорожских казаков. Т.2., ГЛАВы 9-10. ''Выйдя с "воинством своим" из Киева, он прошел на Путивль, Волхов, Белев, Козельск, Мещовск, Серпейск, Лихвин, Перемышль, Калугу и "много по пути зла сделал, пролив кровь христианскую". ''
 * Because you dont like Belsk chronicles specially for you: this is the same information as in Belsk script  about the barbaric, rude Cossacks "treatment"   of the Orthodox brother's in Moscovy. The cited text is

...побив в них множество мужчин, женщин, детей "до ссущих младенцев"; а потом, ворвавшись в рязанскую область, предал огню много посадов, побил несколько священников  -Luckily for the Muscovites the assault was unsuccessful.
 * I do not understand why you basically ignore modern scientific work, and look at the different historical tales.Geohem (talk) 11:05, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Let's return now to your encyclopedic style. I think that after your editing of the text  you could  be considered as author :

Q: I think this is fiction similar to the next: Unlucky and disappointing Cossacks retreated from the Moscow walls and moved to the south to robbed something which is not so strong as Moscow castle. Are you agree? --zas2000 (talk) 00:19, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Some more about the same: Олександр РІГЕЛЬМАН ЛІТОПИСНА ОПОВІДЬ ПРО МАЛУ РОСІЮ ТА ЇЇ НАРОД І КОЗАКІВ УЗАГАЛІ КИЇВ — «ЛИБІДЬ» — 1994, КНИГА ВТОРАЯ, ГЛАВА 12 []''Конашевич, исполняя волю их, по повелению с войском козацким пришел в порубежные российские города: он, во-первых, взял Ливны, воеводу князя Никиту Черкасского пленил, а товарища его убил, город выжег и людей побил. Потом одержал город Елец и в нем посланников, посланных от царя в Крым, Стефана Хрущева да подьячего Семена Бредихина и с ними 50 человек татар крымских и на 30 000 государевой казны взял, а оттоль шед, разорил многие города и прогнал от Серпухова супротивных противу себя россиян. Перешед реку Оку, пришел с польскою и литовскою силою и Владислав, с которым Сагайдачный войско свое соединил, и домогались город одержать, но по усильному отпору от московских граждан взять оный не могли. Владислав по сем, хотя требовал от царя мира, но в договорах согласиться не могли. Королевич старался Троицкий монастырь одержать, но и там не успел, как только послал Сагайдачного к Серпухову и до Калуги, который только что Калугу, и то от переметчика, в осаде держал, а полякам замосковные уезды разорять велел;''--zas2000 (talk) 23:33, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Regelman was military engineer and born in 1720, its a primary source. Why you basically ignore modern scientific work, and look at the different historical tales?Geohem (talk) 08:54, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Your pre-selection  of the authors  is very astonishing for few reasons. - Most of the "modern" authors are infected by nationalism. Many of them at present time tol opposite to what the wrote 20 year ago. In best cases they are hiding the historical truth now. - Yavortnitsky 3-volumes work  is a  very respectful scientific research. Read, for example, the opinion of the one of the contemporary historian - Smolij, who the is Kiev-Mohila Academy professor.  - I should recall for you, that in time of our disscusion Sahaidachny and his Cossacks  was in the war with Muscovy. The war is a war. Before war the Polish Commonwealth had no more than 1000 registered Cossacks. The Sahaidchny troops had around 20000 men. Who were that 19000 men in his army? They were engaged from the "free" cossacks which lived on the south border of the Commonwealth,  in Zaporozhie. They were very special people. They earned for living by the robbing, stealing, killing, selling  people  in slavery (no difference which confession they were belonged). What do you think these people did in Muscovy? For what they invaded this country?. Do you think they told their Orthodox brothers nice stories about Christian brotherhood? They did what they should do during  the war. That is the information which you and another "modern" historian ignore refusing all reasonable references, besides the sources in which the Cossacks are shown as a fighter for Orthodox Christianity, unfortunately for the 'modern" historians they had others driving goals  Finally,  one more about you attitude to the references which should be used in the article - among the references of the page, devoted Sahaidachny are used and recommended for further reading these very "old" and " not modern" authors ( among them Yavornytsky as well)
 * Yavornytsky, Dmytro (1990).
 * Hetman Petro Konashevych-Sahaidachny. Dnipro. and Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary. 1906.;
 * John III Sobieski (1646). Sahaidachny, Petro Konashevych.;
 * Adrian Kashchenko (1917). A Short History of the Zaporozhian Host. Ukrainian press in Katerinoslav, Leipsig, Germany. pp. 91–92.

- Will you delete these sources and related information as well?

--zas2000 (talk) 16:06, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Your opinion is against the Wikipedia rules, which does not allow us to use our own appraisal. And if we want to edit in Wikipedia, we must rely on modern scientific publications. As you said, war is war. During every war civilians suffer, and it was not particularity Sahaidachny troops. I recommend you read the works of one of the best Sagaidachny biography  researcher - P.Sas.Geohem (talk) 08:04, 28 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Could you give me the answer for my:

Finally, one more about you attitude to the references which should be used in the article - among the references of the page, devoted Sahaidachny are used and recommended for further reading these very "old" and " not modern" authors ( among them Yavornytsky as well) --zas2000 (talk) 11:09, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Yavornytsky, Dmytro (1990).
 * Hetman Petro Konashevych-Sahaidachny. Dnipro. and Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary. 1906.;
 * John III Sobieski (1646). Sahaidachny, Petro Konashevych.;
 * Adrian Kashchenko (1917). A Short History of the Zaporozhian Host. Ukrainian press in Katerinoslav, Leipsig, Germany. pp. 91–92.
 * Obviously, these are not reliable sources. We can use them as any other Primary source and according WP:NOR with appropriate restrictions. Geohem (talk) 16:02, 28 March 2013 (UTC)


 * *Could you bemore certain to give reference on the wor of SAS.

ИСТОРИЯ ЗАПОРОЖСКИХ КАЗАКОВ История запорожских казаков. Т.2., ГЛАВы 9-10. '''Выйдя с "воинством своим" из Киева, он прошел на Путивль, Волхов, Белев, Козельск, Мещовск, Серпейск, Лихвин, Перемышль, Калугу и "много по пути зла сделал, пролив кровь христианскую". ''
 * Follow of your last reply and the  list of the recommended literature of the wiki page  we can use ( with certain restriction) : Дмитрий Иванович Яворницкий

...побив в них множество мужчин, женщин, детей "до ссущих младенцев"; а потом, ворвавшись в рязанскую область, предал огню много посадов, побил несколько священников ' --zas2000 (talk) 22:31, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * First of all you can read information from this articleGeohem (talk) 13:28, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Your reply is not relevant to my questions.    You are circling around the same point, w/o any grounds.  You have promised to draw  the admin to our discussion - it is good time to do this right now.

--zas2000 (talk) 16:47, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Your English is not good, so its difucult properly understand, that you are talking about. Request for administrator attention will be made, when you start to break the rules.Geohem (talk) 09:38, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Petro Konashevych-Sahaidachny. 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/20150101191703/http://www.ursr.org/vitchyzna/ to http://www.ursr.org/vitchyzna/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131103101433/http://www.asv.gov.ua/content.php?lang=en&page=1_0 to http://www.asv.gov.ua/content.php?lang=en&page=1_0

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) 06:22, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Kononovych
Kononovych isn't the father's surname but a patronymic name of Petro. And Kononovych = Konashevych, because Konon = Konash. Юе Артеміс (talk) 21:24, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Under his tenure a greater common identity developed the Cossacks, the Orthodox clergy and peasants of Ukraine, which would ultimately be inherited as a modern national consciousness
Currently the lead of the article states: "Under his tenure a greater common identity developed the Cossacks, the Orthodox clergy and peasants of Ukraine, which would ultimately be inherited as a modern national consciousness". Besides this being a very odd English sentence... it is also not backed up by a reference. And besides it being in the lead so apparently it is very important information it does not seem to be in the rest of the article... (Leads are a summary of the article, a summary can not have information that is not covered elsewhere in the article.) This type of information should be covered in the legacy section of the article... but that seemed to have been removed last month without a reason given.... (I restored this section a few minutes ago) So is Sahaidachny instrumental in creating today's Ukrainian "modern national consciousness"? I personally have the idea that he only became remembered after Ukrainian independence was achieved in 1991... —  Yulia Romero  •  Talk to me!  17:00, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I personally have the thought that Sahaidachny is the antithesis of Mykola Shchors... While the Soviet authorities tried to show Ukrainians that they should be like Shchors a friend of russia, Sahaidachny's lionisation seems to me to be an attempt to show Ukrainians that they have heroes who did not want to be united with russia (and were not so controversial as Ivan Mazepa). —  Yulia Romero  • Talk to me!  18:13, 11 December 2023 (UTC)