Talk:Porkhov

Untitled
This is not a Russian Wikipedia, that suggest the prevalence of contextual names accepted in the English language, not the Slavic versions of them, that is true to all the rest of languages. Iulius 07:25, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
 * This is not Lithuanian Wikipedia, either. The majority of Vitovt's subjects were Slavic; the official language of his empire was Slavic; he is known primarily from Slavic sources. Period. --Ghirla-трёп- 07:28, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I could cite this if you are interested:

"Article names for historical figures go by their most common name in English. See Naming conventions (people). The dukes are usually referred to in English scholarly works by their Lithuanian names, which is why "Vitovt" is at Vytautas the Great etc. Olessi 20:44, 30 December 2005 (UTC)"

There was no "official language" in GDL as you call it: that is a long settled issue. Vytautas, unlike some others, was of pure pagan Lithuanian origin: Kęstutis and Birutė had no known Orthodox ancestors; and was born in Lithuania proper, Senieji Trakai. The use of the name in ancient sources does not justify putting it the same way in modern contexts. The variation of the same person's name depending on the article subject is not a good idea as well. I don't understand the point of deleting the monarchs title "Grand Duke of Lithuania", which is acceptable under naming conventions. Use velikyi kniaz if you prefer, but the reader has a right to this crucial personal information. Iulius 07:39, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I did not find your remarks rational, because many may find you to be mythologysing Russians. Moreover, you did not reply to my statements. This article is too negligible to waste my time, so let it remain the only in English wiki to refer to Vytautas by his Ruthenised name only, so that nobody could identify him. Iulius 08:13, 25 May 2007 (UTC)