Talk:Dulebes

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities 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.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks:

Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks:

Meta-tasks:
- Place the {{Ethnic groups}} template on the talk page of articles within the scope of this project.
- Resolve the disparity in importance rankings among different ethnic groups
Articles about ethnic groups that currently have issues needing resolution:
Start an article:
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Article requests

Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks.

Ukraine Low‑importance

	Ukraine portal This article 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

"Western"

UkrainianSavior1,

if you don't wish to link Western Ukraine on the whole, ok, but the other concern still holds, so until we don't agree in an appropriate rephrasing, it will be reset as it was.(KIENGIR (talk) 11:23, 7 December 2019 (UTC))[reply]

It doesn't make sense to link it because the Western Ukraine article mostly discusses West Ukraine in the political context, not historical. This is why linking it to just Ukraine, which has a greater focus on Ukraine's history, will make the connection hold more water.

The rephrasing also makes sense due to it being more efficient without taking away the meaning of the phrase. It saves space, and allows for more information to be added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by UkrainianSavior1 (talk • contribs) 05:52, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, but your recent change is even worse, because we cannot confuse the present situation with what was then, similarly with your previous changes, and the meaning of the sentence is not lost, on the contrary. I offered you several rephrasing that would satisfy the case, unless you don't pick one or you don't propose another acceptable here, it remains what was before.(KIENGIR (talk) 04:20, 10 December 2019 (UTC))[reply]