Talk:Ilya Muromets

Origin

Ilya, as well as the other Bogatyrs, is not a character only in Russian folklore, but also in folklore of other Slavic countries. Therefore, calling him exclusively Russian is incorrect. --M. Humeniuk (talk) 19:15, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Combing the Archive

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 August 2023 and 8 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Istanisavljevic (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Istanisavljevic (talk) 16:10, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

...with zero effect. - Altenmann >talk 16:33, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Birthplace

Ilya Muromets is connected to the "Ukrainian Polanian tribe"? He may have been born in Moroviysk in present-day Chernihiv region of Ukraine? Currently we have Western sources cited that do not say this and this looks like to be the generally accepted version. The version of "Ilya of Morovsk" does not look to be accepted anymore. The only mention I could find in a Western source is The Growth of Literature vol. 2 which was originally published in 1932. Although the statement about the birthplace was not even sourced in the first place. Mellk (talk) 11:55, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Mykula Selyaninovich is connected to Polanian tribe. Currently, there are two versions of his birthplace, original Kievan and Russian. Both are cited. There's no need to POV-Push russian version only. Shahray (talk) 12:28, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

See WP:FRINGE. Please find modern Western sources that support this version. The sources you used do not trump the reliable sources currently used, which you sidelined as 'Russian interpretations'. You also placed emphasis on an outdated version that was suggested by some imperial-era historians. Mellk (talk) 12:34, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Western sources aren't "must have", especially if the subject is not as popular in the west. My changes don't intervene with Russian interpretation. What exactly should I prove "mainstream"? In Kievan version, Morivsk is most likely location, while in russian it's Murom. Russian bylinas are Novgorodian interpretation of different stories with Kievan bogatyrs. What "emphasis on outdated versions"?

Also regarding "Rus' people", my changes could easily be put into Etymology, why is there a need for you to delete all my changes every single time? What exactly do you consider "editorializing? Shahray (talk) 12:50, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

What? He still belongs to the Kievan cycle of byliny. The byliny were mostly collected in the 19th-century in the northern regions, so it is known from certain provinces. Per WP:DUE, you need to prove that in mainstream sources they talk about "Ilko Murovets" rather than "Ilya Muromets". You cannot start the section about the character in byliny referring to the "hero Ilko Murovets" and referring to Ukrainian legends. Mellk (talk) 13:24, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

"Kievan versions" refers to original Rus' bylinas, while Kievan Cycle, or other cycles simply suggest where a story takes place. Other elements are opened to interpretation, that's why in russian bylinas these heroes come from modern russian cities which didn't even exist during the reign of Vladimir the Great.

Check the sources I added and you will this figure reffered to as Ілько Муровець in Ukrainian bylyny, which is romanized as Ilko Murovets. "Neutrality requires that mainspace articles and pages fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in those sources." this is exactly, what this article did before you tried to revert my changes. All viewpoints were properly represented, you're just creating an issue out of nowhere to seemingly note Russian-POV only. Shahray (talk) 13:57, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

What is "original Rus' bylinas"? Such oral epic poetry that did not really survive in the southern regions and are mostly known from isolated northern regions. They may have originated in the southern regions, but they were only collected in the 18th/19th century and as a result, they reflect centuries of change. You also need to prove that this is a "significant viewpoint" and not a fringe view.

Even Shevchuk says something similar in "Українські билини": "Bylyny are narrative songs that were recorded in Olonechshchyna, Arkhangelsk and other remote Russian areas... Somewhere in the same way, we also look at the epics recorded in Russia: they are the spiritual heritage of the Russian people, but they can also tell a lot about the epic creativity of the people of Kyiv, our immediate ancestors, in particular, about the times about which they preserve memories - the era of Volodymyr Great." Mellk (talk) 14:34, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

"Russian bylinas are a Novgorodian interpretation of epic stories. Novgorod, which in the 9th - 11th centuries was a part of Kievan Rus', took from the center not only epics, but also Kievan chronicles, construction, architecture. Not being subjected to devastating Mongol-Tatar attacks, the people of Novgorod preserved the remnants of the ancient Kievan epic. Having moved to the north of Russia, the epics became entrenched in the Russian epic. They are also known among the Cossack population of Kuban. In Ukraine, they were replaced by dumas — a reaction to a new wave of Tatar and Turkish invasion of Ukrainian lands."

CITATION

Hrytsa S. Y. Byliny of the Kievan Cycle // History of Ukrainian Music: In 7 vol. Vol. 1. Book. 1: From the earliest times to the 18th century. Folk music /National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Rylsky Institute of Art Studies, Folklore and Ethnology, editor:H. A. Skrypnyk(head) and others. — K., 2016. — pp. 181-189.(In Ukrainian)

"Byliny have been collected in Russia..." and so on.

That's all there is to say. Russian bylinas are just another interpretation of original Rus' bylinas, your POV is that the origin of the genre shouldn't be presented in the article, ridiculous. Shahray (talk) 14:56, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

There is no "original Rus' bylinas", they do not exist and we do not know exactly the origins. There was some preservation of such characters in Cossack songs but this is a different genre. Mellk (talk) 14:58, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

"Ukrainian bylyny mainly evolved into other folklore formats, and yet a significant number of Ukrainian bylynas about Ilko Murovets have reached our time." sourced. It is noted that they mainly evolved into other folklore formats, but some of them have survived, so, your point? As I said, you are just trying to create an issue, that different viewpoints weren't properly presented in the article. Shahray (talk) 15:04, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Even in the Encyclopaedia of Ukraine, it says: "An epic song of the Kyivan Rus’ era that has not survived in Ukraine but are still sung in northern Russia, where it is called starina... According to Ukrainian scholars, the bylyny ceased to be sung by the Ukrainian people in the 17th century, when turbulent events gave rise to a new epic song form—the Cossack duma". Mellk (talk) 15:32, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

There are recordings of some of them in Ukraine. But again, how my changes oppose that they're sung in russia? How my changes oppose any point of view? Shahray (talk) 15:35, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

The same source says: "In 2003 Valerii Shevchuk published a collection of Ukrainian-language prose and verse texts analogous to the bylyny... Some of Shevchuk’s verse texts are reproduced from collections of folk tales... Others, however, were transcribed by Shevchuk from Ukrainian-language recreations of bylyny composed and performed by banduryst Zinovii Shtokalko." The point is, byliny did not survive in Ukraine. It may be worth briefly mentioning other appearances but now how you edited the article, including the section specifically about byliny. Mellk (talk) 15:44, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

They're briefly mentioned. Shahray (talk) 15:51, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

What is? Mellk (talk) 16:16, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

In previous version everything was mentioned as it should be and all viewpoints were considered. If you have any issues, please clearly tell which segment you didn't like and edit ONLY this segment, and do not delete all other changes. Otherwise it seems you prolonge this conversation just for the sake of leaving only russian pov noted. Shahray (talk) 09:16, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Be willing to cooperate as well. Shahray (talk) 09:16, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I have restored the changes. Shahray (talk) 10:54, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

You did not get consensus for your changes. Stop edit warring. The section refers to byliny. If you wish to include other versions in that section, then please find sources that refer to Ilya Muromets in 'Ukrainian byliny' (and not something "analogous" to byliny). Mellk (talk) 02:54, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

No, it's you who should stop edit warring, and stop reverting sourced segments, unless you give a specific reason why they are wrong in discussion. That's when you will reach consensus and not simply POV push. "Please find sources" - already sourced. This segments specifically talk about bylinas, not "analogous to bylinas" Shahray (talk) 13:49, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Your own source says that there are no such Ukrainian byliny and yet you continue to restore all your changes. If you continue edit warring, I will instead request an indefinite block for you since you this would indicate that you do cannot grasp the concept of getting consensus for your changes. Mellk (talk) 07:01, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Instead of threats, I propose you to be kind and respectful and before deleting sourced statements, collectively define whether they are valid or not. There's no reason for now, as the head of the citation clearly states:"Ukrainian bylyny: Historical and literary edition of the East Slavic epic". You were already criticized for your unreasonable reverts by other editors, if you continue to do so, you might get reported, keep that in mind. Shahray (talk) 07:37, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

I have already told you about WP:ONUS. If you decide to just ignore policies and continue edit warring, going with the "no u" attitude, then this is not being "respectful". It does not matter if you believe that the revert was unjustified, you still do not have consensus. If that was the case, anybody could just restore their bold edits and simply say "revert not justified", but it does not work like this.

As I have already told you, Encyclopaedia of Ukraine says that this is "analogous to the bylyny". This does not mean we can say that this byliny and we should write most of the section about this. You did not address this. Mellk (talk) 07:51, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

This content definitely shouldn't be moved to other article, WP:ONUS does not apply here. If most of this bylinas didn't survived it doesn't yet mean they have not existed at all, and some of them did reach our time. Analogous to bylina simply refers to what Shevchuk published, and not Ukrainian bylinas as a whole. Before deleting sourced content, establish consensus about deletion in discussion and be respectful. Shahray (talk) 10:25, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

WP:ONUS does not apply here. Please take the advice that was given to you and refrain from disruptive editing. Mellk (talk) 03:07, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

So? You haven't yet explained why source which clearly states "Ukrainian bylyny" is wrong, or why shouldn't Kievan bylyny at least be included. Shahray (talk) 10:45, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

I already told you that your changes are WP:UNDUE. This characterization was already disputed by a source that you used (Encyclopedia of Ukraine). I cannot find any English-language source that refers to "Ilya Murovets" except the one that was published 100 years ago. The other sources support the current version. Therefore, that version is WP:DUE, since it represents the common viewpoint. Do you want me to repeat myself again?

When you make claims like WP:ONUS does not apply here and that I need consensus to remove the changes you made, rather than trying to address the concerns that were given to you, you are not making this a productive discussion. Mellk (talk) 03:41, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Again, English sources aren't "must have" if the topic isn't popular in the West. Again, Ilia Murovets is a Ukrainian name, so it's not supposed to be popular in English. Ukrainian viewpoint or at least their original Kievan homelands is pretty important to mention. Do to WP:NPOV, all major viewpoints must be mentioned. I addressed your concerns. Shahray (talk) 08:54, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

You also need to avoid inserting your own commentary and editorializing already-sourced statements when making edits. If a statement is already supported by a source, you cannot change the meaning in a way that is not supported by the source. Mellk (talk) 13:26, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Any additional claims I make I support with new sources (show me example where I don't). Some sentences need to be rephrased to emphasizes on them as a different point of view. Shahray (talk) 13:59, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Also, no, in Rus' people article my changes also refer to people, first Varangian people then Polianian people. Another false accuse. Shahray (talk) 14:03, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Also, "Illia Murovets" is not an alt name when there is only one result on Google for this name. Mellk (talk) 12:47, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Notes in the article:Ukrainian: Ілля Муромець, romanized: Illia Muromets. It seems to me you're just pushing Russian-POV. Shahray (talk) 12:52, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

What does this have to do with "Illia Murovets"? Mellk (talk) 13:27, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

"romanized: Illia Muromets" Shahray (talk) 14:00, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Ілля Муровець is common if you search in Ukrainian. Shahray (talk) 14:22, 29 September 2024 (UTC)