Category talk:Ukrainian historians

This category is within the scope of WikiProject Ukraine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ukraine on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.UkraineWikipedia:WikiProject UkraineTemplate:WikiProject UkraineUkraine articles

History

This category is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles

Scope

May I suggest that Mykola Kostomarov (Nikolay Kostomarov), and Volodymyr Antonovych, both of whom are described in articles in the Wikipedia, be added to this list of Ukrainian historians!

May I also suggest that Dmytro Doroshenko, also in the Wikipedia, be added to this list.

There is also an article on the emigre Ukrainian historian, Oleksander Ohloblyn, that should be linked to this page, I think. Mike Stoyik 03:09, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They're all in here now. To put an article in a category, just put a link like [[Category:Ukrainian historians]] at the very bottom of the article. To ensure that people are sorted by last name, use the form [[Category:Ukrainian historians |Kostomarov, Mykola]]. More info at Wikipedia:Category. Cheers. —Michael Z. 2006-01-18 07:01 Z

I don't like how this section is called. Historians who contributed to the scholarship of the History of Ukraine should all be here whatever their ethnic origins are. Orest Subtelny, Paul Robert Magosci, Andrew Wilson (historian) should all me in this cat and we should rename it such that its scope allows them. How about a new name Category:Historians of Ukraine?

But does it really decode as "historians of Ukrainian ethnicity", and not as "historians of Ukraine", "historians, belonging to history of Ukraine"? Certainly, I'm not a native English speaker, but I read English a lot and would not dismiss second interpretation. Easier to remember, too?.. Yury Tarasievich 21:43, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, sorry, make this "...does it really have to decode as...". And the ethnicity criterium for historian is sort of nonsencical. More important is what historian writes about, isn't it? Yury Tarasievich 21:56, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let's wait for what native speakers would say. --Irpen 22:18, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here's my two cents. "Historians of Ukraine" as well as "Ukrainian historians" both convey to me individuals knowledgeable in the field of "History of Ukraine" or "Ukrainian History" regardless of their ethnicity or origin. However, a possible combination of terms suggests that Historians of Ukraine is a more proper term - e.g. "American Historians of Ukraine" means individuals living/born in America who study Ukrainian History vs. "American-Ukrainian Historians" means Ukrain born individuals living in America. Thus, "Ukrainian historians" falls along the line with "Ukrainian musicians" etc. -asmadeus 13:31, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think current category is fine. I can see the possible interpretation as to the ethnicity or origin, but Andrew Wilson, Orest Subtelny, and others all qualify for Cat:Ukrainian historians, especially under Asmadeus' clarification (i.e. individuals knowledgeable in the field of "History of Ukraine" or "Ukrainian History" regardless of their ethnicity or origin). To avoid any confusion, a description of the category can mention specifically who falls into the category.--Riurik ^(discuss) 18:37, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ps cat:American historians makes the differentiation between citizens and others; however there, the distinction is necessary due to a huge number of individuals who qualify as American historians. The case is not the same for the category in question.--Riurik ^(discuss) 18:41, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]