Talk:Khutor

In Siberia, they were known as zaimka (заимка).

This must be phrased more carefully. "khutor" and "zaimka" are not equivalent terms. Better not introduce confusion. mikka (t) 07:23, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Actually, the same problem is with myza. mikka (t) 07:23, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Also, "khutor" as applied to Baltic states is a Russification. mikka (t) 07:25, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

• Thanks for your corrections, Mikkalai. KNewman 16:57, August 4, 2005 (UTC)

Removed piece

After the October Revolution and during 1918-1920 the khutors facilities it has been considerably weakened, though in 1921-1926 in northwest areas RSFSR, in Belarus and in Ukraine were still created khutors.

Poor grammar and unclear meaning. Please write it in russian here. Also, in some of reasonable understanding of the etxt the statement is doubtful. Please explain and provide the source of the claim.

Also I removed links to Russian-language encyclopedia.

• Хутор, обособленное хозяйство in Brockhaus and Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary, in Russian.
• Хутор in Great Soviet Encyclopedia, in Russian.

This is English-language wikipedia. If there is some important info, please put info into the article. mikka (t) 18:15, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

I disagree that references in Russian (when English refs are lacking) can't be given. It is a standard practice, BTW. To have refs is a good thing. If you can find better refs in English add them, or even replace them. Refs give a broader view even if some of their info is used in the article, for example the view of the early 20th century. Refs also help avoid copyvios. By the stretch of the logic: "If there is some important info, please put info into the article" any refs can be eliminated from any article. It is not some widely researched topic, like "Russia" or the "USSR", where one can just go to any library and get a bunch of books. A topic is narrow, and you can't really find many specific references. Another useful thing in the context of onlile Encyclopedia, is that these are also online references. I wish they were in English and you are right in this. But quietly placed in the end of the article in a separate section, they don't disrupt the structure, they can't harm (even stylistically), but can help. Even if B&E were translated, I doubt an online version exists. I hope, I managed to convince you. --Irpen 20:56, August 11, 2005 (UTC)

Hamlet?

I always thought, the proper translation of the Ukrainian Khutir and Russian Khutor into English is Hamlet. I'm surprised to see the new word(s) imported -- there is really no need for them. I'd move, the article be removed -- perhaps, replaced with an "Eastern European" chapter under Hamlet to highlight any locale-specific details. пан Бостон-Київський (talk) 13:46, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

There is no one "proper" translation (although there are, of course, "improper" ones). "Hamlet" is just one of possible translations of "khut[o|i]r"; "village", "farmstead", "farm", etc. are just as common. "Khutor", a transliteration, is used as the most precise term, and precision is of paramount importance here, since we are discussing different types of rural localities and wouldn't want to confuse an already confusing subject by using overly vague terminology.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); October 19, 2015; 14:11 (UTC)

Dear User:Ezhiki,

Thank you for your editing.

As you know, according to WP:TITLECHANGES - "Wikipedia describes current usage".

I know you understand Russian so you can read: Значение слова "Хутор" в Большой Советской Энциклопедии.

A term "Khutor" had two meanings in English:

• Homestead
• Hamlet

After the Collectivization in the Soviet Union, all khutors (homesteads) were destroyed so nowadays the term Khutor means a hamlet only. Although it meant a homestead more commonly in the past.

Regards, --TimeWaitsForNobody (talk) 12:18, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi there! The problem here is that bilingual dictionaries are a source for translations, not definitions, as their purpose is to cover a broad range of uses. As I mentioned in my 2015 post above, there is a multitude of (equally acceptable) ways to translate Russian "хутор"/Ukrainian "хутiр"—some work better than others in any given context. And yes, oftentimes picking a translation and using it as a definition works just fine. Here, however, we have to tie the topic into a broader concept ("rural localities"), a subset of which "khutors" are. That, as you correctly noticed, is the "current usage" (but of course, the historical usage of "homestead" needs to be mentioned as well). I hope this clears the confusion. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); September 6, 2016; 14:20 (UTC)

I understand your logic but the definition: "rural locality" is not accurate. Regarding Ukraine, the most accurate definition is given by "Академічний тлумачний словник (1970—1980)" - "Невелике селище" - small settlement. So I believe the most accurate definition must be: "A khutor is a very small rural settlement in Ukraine and southern Russia. Till the Collectivization in the Soviet Union it more commonly meant a homestead." Another way is to find the English language Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. TimeWaitsForNobody (talk) 23:04, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

The definition (of a modern entity) is a "populated place", for which "inhabited locality" is a synonym, with "rural localities" and "urban localities" being perfectly valid subsets of that synonym. Any one of these can be seen used in English. Dictionaries, especially bilingual ones, only contain limited sets of variants and it's sheer folly to state that unless a variant is not found in a bilingual dictionary it is automatically "not accurate". And while it's true that a "small settlement" is also an acceptable synonym, it is one that does not work particularly well in Wikipedia's article dealing with human geography, since the term "settlement" is so ambiguous (it can mean a populated place in general, or a very specific type of an inhabited locality—the latter is especially true in the context of Russia and Ukraine,—or even a type of an administrative/municipal division). This very issue come up every couple of years, and once the term's ambiguity is demonstrated, the consensus is always to avoid using "settlement" except in the most generic contexts or when a mention is only in passing. This article here qualifies under neither condition. We need to make an effort that all our articles work well together, since readers often jump from one article to another, and ambiguity is one those things that impede understanding of a big picture.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); September 20, 2016; 18:11 (UTC)

The dictionaries that were mentioned by me are Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. Our articles must be based on them. That's a rule. So if you say: "sheer folly" about my remark, I don't think it's a good idea to keep on discussing. TimeWaitsForNobody (talk) 02:20, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Examples only:

• A hamlet is a small human settlement
• A village is a clustered human settlement or community

TimeWaitsForNobody (talk) 02:41, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

The dictionaries are not the only reliable sources and most certainly not the preferred ones. There is no argument that the term "settlement" in your examples is an acceptable synonym for "populated place", "inhabited locality", "community", and dozens of other equally acceptable, if less common, definitions. But articles have meanings to convey, and when one is using a term which is ambiguous in a given context over perfectly unambiguous synonyms, one is not doing readers a favor.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); September 30, 2016; 14:16 (UTC)