This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Principality of Moscow article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to Eastern Europe or the Balkans, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
More correct and consistent than "Grand Duchy of Moscow" and also supported by http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/393443/Grand-Principality-of-Moscow is "Grand Principality of Moscow". Imperium Romanum Sacrum ( talk) 11:20, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
Nice catch, SuperJew. Apologies for pinging you on the Sabbath but, hopefully, you will accept this as a good faith attempt to circumvent editing your talk page directly in order to address this issue now rather than risk forgetting to do so. I sincerely hope I haven't caused any offence.
In the context, the reference to the Godunov family should have a wikilink to a Godunov family page. As it's been tagged for disambiguation for a considerable amount of time, rather than one editor after another using precious time trying to find the (non-existent) page, I've created a 'wishlist' red link as I don't have the time to develop the relevant page right now.
If anyone wishes to revert my edit, feel free to do so. I just think it would be more useful to create even a stub than leave the link as it stands for years to come. Cheers! -- Iryna Harpy ( talk) 04:29, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
Is there a reason that the infobox doesn't say that the status of the Grand Duchy of Moscow is "Tributary of the Golden Horde"?-- Bogu Slav 00:40, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
The flag at right was created and uploaded by Лобачев Владимир; it lists no source and states it is possibly a variant. The flag was added to this page by Kammiejr in February 2015, but then removed by Altenmann with the explanation, "Please don't add flags of unknown origin." The flag was re-added to the page by Alexis Ivanov in January 2016. It was removed by Azgar on April 18th with the explanation, "fantasy variant." It has now been re-added by Sigehelmus.
So, is the flag valid? Is it a variant? Is there a source supporting the flag? Laszlo Panaflex ( talk) 03:02, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
If the banner was used by Ivan IV in 1552, then it definitely should not be used here. The article dates the end of the GDM as 1547, and Ivan IV is covered in the Tsardom of Russia article. Laszlo Panaflex ( talk) 16:42, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
The link cited here clearly says that "К царствованию Алексея Михайловича относится первое упоминание о государственных цветах и государственном флаге России. " (state banners as colors are first mentioned during the reign of Aleksey Mikhailovich (1629-1676), ie at times when Muscovy was already a tsardom rather than principality. The same res says that various Christianity-symbolic flags were used by various Russian armies before. But they were of widely various designs and they were not standard state banners. Staszek Lem ( talk) 16:39, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
In nay case, the issue must also be resolved in List of Russian flags. Staszek Lem ( talk) 16:45, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
The article has two citation by "The Grand Duchy of Moscow[2][3]":
[2]Plokhy, Serhii (2006-09-07).
The Origins of the Slavic Nations: Premodern Identities in Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus. Cambridge University Press.
ISBN
9781139458924.
[3]Isham, Heyward; Pipes, Richard (2016-09-16).
Remaking Russia: Voices from within. Routledge.
ISBN
9781315483078.
Citation [2] I did a search for "Grand Duchy" inside the book's text, and found six instances: pages 85, 87 and 114 have references to "Grand Duchy of Lithuania", page 299 "Grand Duchy of Ruthenia", pages 88 and 109 has "Grand Duchy" on its own - though in the case of page 88, the sentence is "Grand Duchy... as the Grand Principality of Muscovy was officially considered to be".
I did a search for "Grand Principality" and found five instances: page 88 "Grand Principality of Muscovy", pages 100, 101 and 109 "Grand Principality of Rus", and pages 111 "Grand Principality of Moscow".
Citation [3] I did a search for "Grand Duchy" inside the book's text, and found one instance "the grand Duchy of Muscovy". I also did a search for "Grand Principality", but the example I found was "the grand principality of Lithuania".
My conclusion is that citation [2] does not support the case that the entity was called the "Grand Duchy of Moscow", and citation [3] is weak evidence for it being called "the grand Duchy of Muscovy". I think both citations should be removed as not providing clear support for the text they are cited for.-- Toddy1 (talk) 09:10, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
Since the term Muscovite Rus' was deleted here, i want to say that i hope that this move wasn't done because of destructive ambitions and motives.
Very important suggestions for this article. First of all Moscovia was Rus' land. Grand Principality of Moscow is the right term and not Grand Duchy of Moscow. Britannica: https://www.britannica.com/place/Grand-Principality-of-Moscow Moskovskoye Velikoye Knazhestvo ( Великое Княжество Московское). Like Київське князівство were translated into "Principality of Kiev" https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Principality_of_Kiev&oldid=500060867, https://www.britannica.com/place/Suzdal, Suzdal, into Suzdal Principality (Suzdalskoye Knyazhestvo) https://www.britannica.com/place/Suzdal, Галицко-Волинскоє князство were translated into (?Kingdom?) of Galicia–Volhynia or Principality of Galicia–Volhynia Kingdom_of_Galicia–Volhynia
Also Muscovite Rus' is a common term, because it was in Rus' lands. Not only that Russia evolved out of it and Russian culture survived because of Muscovy, Muscovite Rus' and Grand Principality of Moscow should be in the introducing sentence because the term Russia evolved out of Rus'. https://www.britannica.com/place/Grand-Principality-of-Moscow.
Let's look at this article and it's formulation: The Kingdom or Principality of Galicia–Volhynia [1] (Old East Slavic: Галицко-Волинскоє князство, Ukrainian: Галицько-Волинське князівство, Latin: Regnum Galiciae et Lodomeriae), also known as the Kingdom (?why Kingdom?) of Ruthenia Kingdom_of_Galicia–Volhynia ( btw: Kingdom is a completely invented addition to the Galicia region, Волинскоє князство does not mean Kingdom ) The term Великое Княжество is translated here in this Moscow article into Grand Duchy of Moscow, Волинскоє князство is translated in the Galicia–Volhynia Wikipedia article into Kingdom and the same Old East Slavic term is translated into Principality of Kiev in the Kiev article. Something is very very wrong with all of this.
The term Kingdom of Ruthenia for Principality of Galicia–Volhynia was not used at all and it is mentioned anyway in the Wikipedia article. Muscovy Rus' for the "Grand Principality of Moscow" is much more common, accepted and more precise (not latinized) and should not be used? That does not make sense. It should be named here. Otherwise many other articles need to be revised soon. -- 188.108.243.50 ( talk) 14:16, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
The same words/terms like Великое Княжество should not have different translations in the different articles about Rus' lands, in one article it's Kingdom, others name it Principality and here it's for a couple of years Duchy.-- 188.108.243.50 ( talk) 15:41, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Kingdom of Ruthenia is called like that because of King Danylo (Daniel of Galicia), who was crowned by a papal archbishop in Dorohochyn 1253 as the first King of Ruthenia -- Roman Popyk ( talk) 15:03, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
....why the sourced version on 6th january 2020 was changed by Wikipedia editors:
Moscovian Rus,[2] Grand Duchy of Moscow,[3][4] Moscovia or Grand Principality of Moscow[5][6] (Russian: Великое Княжество Московское, Velikoye Knyazhestvo Moskovskoye, also known in English simply as Muscovy from the Latin: Moscoviae[7]) was a Rus' principality of the Late Middle Ages centered around Moscow, and the predecessor state of the Tsardom of Russia in the early modern period.
Hope and wait for very strong arguments. I understand that everyone makes mistakes.
-- 85.212.187.58 ( talk) 21:36, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
Waiting for arguments from both Wikipedia emplyooe - i suspect that the motives could be counterproductive. I hope its not the case. Like i said the flag is not correct and important historical names are missed. It cannot stay as it is now.-- 85.212.235.6 ( talk) 01:15, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
Vif12vf, [1], [2], [3]. 95.110.120.47 ( talk) 19:52, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Vif12vf, Vif12vf, can you read? [4], [5], [6]. 37.122.13.41 ( talk) 13:33, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved. Although only user !voted, his comment sums up the comments of the other two (and the nominator's implicit admission) well: there seems to be no dispute about what it is actually commonly called in English. If reliable sources discuss the superiority of some translations over others, that should be added to the article. ( closed by non-admin page mover) Srnec ( talk) 01:55, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
Grand Duchy of Moscow → Grand Principality of Moscow – Creditable source sources like Brittanica call it principality. Furthermore, the principality is the direct translation of княжество, the Russian word for duchy is герцогство; principality and duchy are not synonymous, this translation takes far too many liberties. I haven't heard any arguments about why it should be duchy. Go-Chlodio ( talk) 13:57, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
@ 88.71.249.51: You restored your edit saying that my reasoning did not make any sense. "Ruthenia Alba" is how it was known in Latin until the 17th century, not English, according to that particular source. Your example in your edit summary states that "Moscow is the english name for Москва/Moskwa", however "Ruthenia Alba" is not the English name for Grand Duchy of Moscow. This is also not a significant enough alternative name to include in the opening sentence and only creates confusion with White Ruthenia. If you wish to include this, I suggest to mention it in the Grand Duchy of Moscow#Name section instead. Mellk ( talk) 00:11, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Ruthenia alba is the historicsl latin name for Muscovian Russian lands, wether you like it or not. By the way, "White Ruthenia" is a new english term. "White" is not a latin word. For Russian topics, the Russian, latin or for example arab terms are very important, since it says lots about history. Especially when a english term like "White Ruthenia" is used, the historical latin name for Russian lands around Moscovia are even more significant -- 46.114.140.118 ( talk) 10:20, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Nope, there is a heart-led truth source, you have to look more into the Russian. I added the source. Ruthenia was used for Moscovia by other sources too in the far away past in different sources and in and around many corners in the world. It is about the Russian history moves in its own history - in history at all.-- 46.114.140.1 ( talk) 18:27, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
...first i must say that i have the impression that you have not ambitions about to serve facts. I added a good source and you just rejected it unfairly. You must try to order the evolutionary history, facts, even more important in comparison with other articles. It seems not logical from your side and i think you know it. -- 46.114.140.1 ( talk) 18:13, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
The fairy tale about Naugardas (Novgorod) being as Rus city was written in 1471-1478 in Muscovy after its annexation and genocide of Lithuanians there. Moreover Gardinas (Grodno in Lith. means Gardinas - a city that is enforced by city walls), NauGardukas (Novogrudek in Lith. means Little Naugardas), Naugardas (Novgorod in Lith. means New Gardinas) all are Lithuanian names to their cities and even a capital city of Lithuania was Naugardukas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.38.215.245 ( talk) 15:02, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
What was the date and event that established the Moscow principality/duchy?
Infobox gives 1263 as establishment, and the body text says in 1263 Daniel I was appointed to rule the newly created grand principality.
But the article is in Category:States and territories established in 1283, and I’ve seen that date mentioned elsewhere. What happened in 1283?
And when did it become a grand duchy? The article says “ Moscow dukes also designated themselves as the "Grand Dukes",” but the biographies of Daniel of Moscow (1263–1303) and successors Yury of Moscow (1303–25) and Ivan I of Moscow (1325–40/41) give their title as prince of Moscow. Only Simeon of Moscow (1340–53) is named grand prince. — Michael Z. 02:51, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
The current list of names in the lead do not represent the WP:COMMONNAME. Readers should be given some indication of what names are usually used.
Google Ngram gives us a rough indication of the relative frequency in reliable sources over four centuries, [7] over the last century, [8] and in this century (to 2019). [9] Removing the most common one from the chart helps gauge the relative prevalence of the more specific, academic, and obscure names. [10] (You can set smoothing to 0 to see that the relative proportions are similar even in individual years.)
Given this, I will adjust the lead with the two common names in the first sentence, and move all of the synonyms down into the #Names section. Comments or adjustments welcome. — Michael Z. 20:35, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
Brittanica tells us “the princes of Muscovy received the title of grand prince of Vladimir from their Tatar overlords (1328).” [11] Is that when grand principality of Moscow became a thing? Or was there a separate title of Grand Prince of Moscow conferred at some other time?
Is it correct to call it just the principality of Moscow in an earlier period? I see this is used a lot in sources, but not sure to what degree it is an abbreviation or just a generic use. Should Principality of Moscow be added as another name? — Michael Z. 21:35, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
Rus' principalities. Currently, Moscow is the only one with the words "Grand" and "Duchy" in it. Especially "Duchy" does not square well with WP:TITLECON, but "Grand", too, has issues with WP:UNDUE and perhaps even WP:NPOV, namely that it was allegedly the only grand principality and thus superior to all its rivals and "the only true legitimate heir" to the Grand Principality of Vladimir (Vladimir-Suzdal), and by extension to the Grand Principality of Kiev (better known as Kievan Rus'). That this is problematic needs no explaining. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw ( talk) 07:40, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
principality of Moscow. No "Duchy", no "Grand", and on her case not even a capital P "Principality". The only states called
grand principalityin her standard work are Kiev and Vladimir. Others that may call Moscow a grand principality will also call Tver, Nizhny Novgorod-Suzdal, Ryazan etc. a grand principality, such as ruwiki, ukwiki, and bewiki. Enwiki is uniquely inconsistent. Nederlandse Leeuw ( talk) 08:52, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
It is unclear when exactly the princes of Moscow started styling themselves "grand prince of Moscow" independently of their title of grand prince of Vladimir, but the addition of "grand" appears relatively late. Vasily II of Moscow referred to himself as "grand prince of Moscow and all Rus'" (velikii kniaz' i vseia Rusi) in a 1451/2 letter to the last Byzantine emperor, Constantine XI Palaiologos.If anyone knows earlier self-identifications of the Daniilovichi as "grand princes of Moscow" specifically, and not just "grand prince" due to Vladimir, that would be interesting. Before 1451, I haven't seen this. The title of "grand prince" is only used in reference to Vladimir, not to Moscow. The whole 14th century is the princes of Tver, Moscow, and Nizhny Novgorod-Suzdal trying to obtain the Golden Horde khan's jarlig for the title of grand prince of Vladimir. Nobody called themselves "grand prince of Tver/Moscow/Nizhny Novgorod-Suzdal", at least not yet. It was all about Vladimir. Nederlandse Leeuw ( talk) 15:08, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. This discussion saw a wide variety of policy arguments raised. In particular, the principal arguments were:
Looking over the discussion as a whole, I see a high level of appetite to adopt a title that includes "Principality" rather than "Duchy", but participants were divided on whether "Grand Principality" or simply "Principality" would be the most appropriate specific title. Numbers were close and good arguments were raised on both sides, but I see "Principality" as holding a narrow edge in strength of argument; when considering that factor, in conjunction with the widespread support for moving away from the current title, I see the discussion as resulting in a narrow consensus to move to Principality of Moscow as originally proposed. ( closed by non-admin page mover) ModernDayTrilobite ( talk • contribs) 16:11, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
Grand Duchy of Moscow →
Principality of Moscow – We should rename this article for the following reasons:
Principality of Moscowis most probably the WP:COMMONNAME. The fact that
Grand Duchy of Moscowhas seen a steep rise in popularity in recent years can probably be heavily attributed to WP:CIRCULAR: the fact that this Wikipedia page has had the title "Grand Duchy of Moscow" since the mid-2000s. Compare historical trends in Google Ngram. Without this Wikipedia article influencing the Internet for the past 20 years, it's unlikely that "(Grand) Duchy of Moscow" would have seen such a steep rise in recent years. Compare how
Grand Principality of Moscowis not nearly as popular (one reason why the Requested move 18 January 2021 was rejected) as
Principality of Moscow, while "Duchy of Moscow" appears entirely dependent on "Grand Duchy of Moscow".
Grand Prince of Moscow,
Grand Duke of Moscow, or
Duke of Moscow. Check Ngrams. Per Naturalness, people should be able to associate the title with the state:
The title is one that readers are likely to look or search for and that editors would naturally use to link to the article from other articles.
Principality of Moscowsuffices. This is another reason why the Requested move 18 January 2021 was rejected, because it included the unnecessary word "Grand". Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw ( talk) 17:40, 19 August 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. Lightoil ( talk) 03:59, 2 September 2023 (UTC)— Relisting. —usernamekiran (talk) 10:30, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
In diplomatic negotiations of the 1490s and early 1500s, the Lithuanian diplomats questioned the right of Ivan III to be called "Sovereign of All Rus' ".Instead, the Lithuanians called his state
Muscovy - the term that became dominant in European accounts of Muscovy and its people.If Wikipedia was written at the time, it surely would have been the common name. Joke Kidding aside, they did that of course because some of the Rus' principalities had been incorporated into the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, so if Ivan claimed to be the "Sovereign of All Rus' ", that was interfering in the internal affairs of Lithuania. They do appear to have been fine with "grand prince of Moscow" around 1500, but that is quite late into the state's existence from 1282 to 1547. For the longest time it was just "prince of Moscow". Nederlandse Leeuw ( talk) 20:13, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
Principality of Moscowwill have to remain my first choice, although "Muscovy" is well-supported by arguments no. #2 and #4. Nederlandse Leeuw ( talk) 21:50, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
Principality of Moscowwins it from
Principality of Muscovy. Nederlandse Leeuw ( talk) 14:50, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Grand Prince of Moscow,
Grand Duke of Moscow, or
Duke of Moscow. Check Ngrams. Nederlandse Leeuw ( talk) 14:56, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
"Grand Principality" fails all 4 of the WP:CRITERIA I mentionedcare to elaborate? How is it failing Naturalness for example if it's literally the name often used in the literature? Marcelus ( talk) 05:45, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Principality of Moscow article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to Eastern Europe or the Balkans, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
More correct and consistent than "Grand Duchy of Moscow" and also supported by http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/393443/Grand-Principality-of-Moscow is "Grand Principality of Moscow". Imperium Romanum Sacrum ( talk) 11:20, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
Nice catch, SuperJew. Apologies for pinging you on the Sabbath but, hopefully, you will accept this as a good faith attempt to circumvent editing your talk page directly in order to address this issue now rather than risk forgetting to do so. I sincerely hope I haven't caused any offence.
In the context, the reference to the Godunov family should have a wikilink to a Godunov family page. As it's been tagged for disambiguation for a considerable amount of time, rather than one editor after another using precious time trying to find the (non-existent) page, I've created a 'wishlist' red link as I don't have the time to develop the relevant page right now.
If anyone wishes to revert my edit, feel free to do so. I just think it would be more useful to create even a stub than leave the link as it stands for years to come. Cheers! -- Iryna Harpy ( talk) 04:29, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
Is there a reason that the infobox doesn't say that the status of the Grand Duchy of Moscow is "Tributary of the Golden Horde"?-- Bogu Slav 00:40, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
The flag at right was created and uploaded by Лобачев Владимир; it lists no source and states it is possibly a variant. The flag was added to this page by Kammiejr in February 2015, but then removed by Altenmann with the explanation, "Please don't add flags of unknown origin." The flag was re-added to the page by Alexis Ivanov in January 2016. It was removed by Azgar on April 18th with the explanation, "fantasy variant." It has now been re-added by Sigehelmus.
So, is the flag valid? Is it a variant? Is there a source supporting the flag? Laszlo Panaflex ( talk) 03:02, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
If the banner was used by Ivan IV in 1552, then it definitely should not be used here. The article dates the end of the GDM as 1547, and Ivan IV is covered in the Tsardom of Russia article. Laszlo Panaflex ( talk) 16:42, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
The link cited here clearly says that "К царствованию Алексея Михайловича относится первое упоминание о государственных цветах и государственном флаге России. " (state banners as colors are first mentioned during the reign of Aleksey Mikhailovich (1629-1676), ie at times when Muscovy was already a tsardom rather than principality. The same res says that various Christianity-symbolic flags were used by various Russian armies before. But they were of widely various designs and they were not standard state banners. Staszek Lem ( talk) 16:39, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
In nay case, the issue must also be resolved in List of Russian flags. Staszek Lem ( talk) 16:45, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
The article has two citation by "The Grand Duchy of Moscow[2][3]":
[2]Plokhy, Serhii (2006-09-07).
The Origins of the Slavic Nations: Premodern Identities in Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus. Cambridge University Press.
ISBN
9781139458924.
[3]Isham, Heyward; Pipes, Richard (2016-09-16).
Remaking Russia: Voices from within. Routledge.
ISBN
9781315483078.
Citation [2] I did a search for "Grand Duchy" inside the book's text, and found six instances: pages 85, 87 and 114 have references to "Grand Duchy of Lithuania", page 299 "Grand Duchy of Ruthenia", pages 88 and 109 has "Grand Duchy" on its own - though in the case of page 88, the sentence is "Grand Duchy... as the Grand Principality of Muscovy was officially considered to be".
I did a search for "Grand Principality" and found five instances: page 88 "Grand Principality of Muscovy", pages 100, 101 and 109 "Grand Principality of Rus", and pages 111 "Grand Principality of Moscow".
Citation [3] I did a search for "Grand Duchy" inside the book's text, and found one instance "the grand Duchy of Muscovy". I also did a search for "Grand Principality", but the example I found was "the grand principality of Lithuania".
My conclusion is that citation [2] does not support the case that the entity was called the "Grand Duchy of Moscow", and citation [3] is weak evidence for it being called "the grand Duchy of Muscovy". I think both citations should be removed as not providing clear support for the text they are cited for.-- Toddy1 (talk) 09:10, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
Since the term Muscovite Rus' was deleted here, i want to say that i hope that this move wasn't done because of destructive ambitions and motives.
Very important suggestions for this article. First of all Moscovia was Rus' land. Grand Principality of Moscow is the right term and not Grand Duchy of Moscow. Britannica: https://www.britannica.com/place/Grand-Principality-of-Moscow Moskovskoye Velikoye Knazhestvo ( Великое Княжество Московское). Like Київське князівство were translated into "Principality of Kiev" https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Principality_of_Kiev&oldid=500060867, https://www.britannica.com/place/Suzdal, Suzdal, into Suzdal Principality (Suzdalskoye Knyazhestvo) https://www.britannica.com/place/Suzdal, Галицко-Волинскоє князство were translated into (?Kingdom?) of Galicia–Volhynia or Principality of Galicia–Volhynia Kingdom_of_Galicia–Volhynia
Also Muscovite Rus' is a common term, because it was in Rus' lands. Not only that Russia evolved out of it and Russian culture survived because of Muscovy, Muscovite Rus' and Grand Principality of Moscow should be in the introducing sentence because the term Russia evolved out of Rus'. https://www.britannica.com/place/Grand-Principality-of-Moscow.
Let's look at this article and it's formulation: The Kingdom or Principality of Galicia–Volhynia [1] (Old East Slavic: Галицко-Волинскоє князство, Ukrainian: Галицько-Волинське князівство, Latin: Regnum Galiciae et Lodomeriae), also known as the Kingdom (?why Kingdom?) of Ruthenia Kingdom_of_Galicia–Volhynia ( btw: Kingdom is a completely invented addition to the Galicia region, Волинскоє князство does not mean Kingdom ) The term Великое Княжество is translated here in this Moscow article into Grand Duchy of Moscow, Волинскоє князство is translated in the Galicia–Volhynia Wikipedia article into Kingdom and the same Old East Slavic term is translated into Principality of Kiev in the Kiev article. Something is very very wrong with all of this.
The term Kingdom of Ruthenia for Principality of Galicia–Volhynia was not used at all and it is mentioned anyway in the Wikipedia article. Muscovy Rus' for the "Grand Principality of Moscow" is much more common, accepted and more precise (not latinized) and should not be used? That does not make sense. It should be named here. Otherwise many other articles need to be revised soon. -- 188.108.243.50 ( talk) 14:16, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
The same words/terms like Великое Княжество should not have different translations in the different articles about Rus' lands, in one article it's Kingdom, others name it Principality and here it's for a couple of years Duchy.-- 188.108.243.50 ( talk) 15:41, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Kingdom of Ruthenia is called like that because of King Danylo (Daniel of Galicia), who was crowned by a papal archbishop in Dorohochyn 1253 as the first King of Ruthenia -- Roman Popyk ( talk) 15:03, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
....why the sourced version on 6th january 2020 was changed by Wikipedia editors:
Moscovian Rus,[2] Grand Duchy of Moscow,[3][4] Moscovia or Grand Principality of Moscow[5][6] (Russian: Великое Княжество Московское, Velikoye Knyazhestvo Moskovskoye, also known in English simply as Muscovy from the Latin: Moscoviae[7]) was a Rus' principality of the Late Middle Ages centered around Moscow, and the predecessor state of the Tsardom of Russia in the early modern period.
Hope and wait for very strong arguments. I understand that everyone makes mistakes.
-- 85.212.187.58 ( talk) 21:36, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
Waiting for arguments from both Wikipedia emplyooe - i suspect that the motives could be counterproductive. I hope its not the case. Like i said the flag is not correct and important historical names are missed. It cannot stay as it is now.-- 85.212.235.6 ( talk) 01:15, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
Vif12vf, [1], [2], [3]. 95.110.120.47 ( talk) 19:52, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Vif12vf, Vif12vf, can you read? [4], [5], [6]. 37.122.13.41 ( talk) 13:33, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved. Although only user !voted, his comment sums up the comments of the other two (and the nominator's implicit admission) well: there seems to be no dispute about what it is actually commonly called in English. If reliable sources discuss the superiority of some translations over others, that should be added to the article. ( closed by non-admin page mover) Srnec ( talk) 01:55, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
Grand Duchy of Moscow → Grand Principality of Moscow – Creditable source sources like Brittanica call it principality. Furthermore, the principality is the direct translation of княжество, the Russian word for duchy is герцогство; principality and duchy are not synonymous, this translation takes far too many liberties. I haven't heard any arguments about why it should be duchy. Go-Chlodio ( talk) 13:57, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
@ 88.71.249.51: You restored your edit saying that my reasoning did not make any sense. "Ruthenia Alba" is how it was known in Latin until the 17th century, not English, according to that particular source. Your example in your edit summary states that "Moscow is the english name for Москва/Moskwa", however "Ruthenia Alba" is not the English name for Grand Duchy of Moscow. This is also not a significant enough alternative name to include in the opening sentence and only creates confusion with White Ruthenia. If you wish to include this, I suggest to mention it in the Grand Duchy of Moscow#Name section instead. Mellk ( talk) 00:11, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Ruthenia alba is the historicsl latin name for Muscovian Russian lands, wether you like it or not. By the way, "White Ruthenia" is a new english term. "White" is not a latin word. For Russian topics, the Russian, latin or for example arab terms are very important, since it says lots about history. Especially when a english term like "White Ruthenia" is used, the historical latin name for Russian lands around Moscovia are even more significant -- 46.114.140.118 ( talk) 10:20, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Nope, there is a heart-led truth source, you have to look more into the Russian. I added the source. Ruthenia was used for Moscovia by other sources too in the far away past in different sources and in and around many corners in the world. It is about the Russian history moves in its own history - in history at all.-- 46.114.140.1 ( talk) 18:27, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
...first i must say that i have the impression that you have not ambitions about to serve facts. I added a good source and you just rejected it unfairly. You must try to order the evolutionary history, facts, even more important in comparison with other articles. It seems not logical from your side and i think you know it. -- 46.114.140.1 ( talk) 18:13, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
The fairy tale about Naugardas (Novgorod) being as Rus city was written in 1471-1478 in Muscovy after its annexation and genocide of Lithuanians there. Moreover Gardinas (Grodno in Lith. means Gardinas - a city that is enforced by city walls), NauGardukas (Novogrudek in Lith. means Little Naugardas), Naugardas (Novgorod in Lith. means New Gardinas) all are Lithuanian names to their cities and even a capital city of Lithuania was Naugardukas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.38.215.245 ( talk) 15:02, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
What was the date and event that established the Moscow principality/duchy?
Infobox gives 1263 as establishment, and the body text says in 1263 Daniel I was appointed to rule the newly created grand principality.
But the article is in Category:States and territories established in 1283, and I’ve seen that date mentioned elsewhere. What happened in 1283?
And when did it become a grand duchy? The article says “ Moscow dukes also designated themselves as the "Grand Dukes",” but the biographies of Daniel of Moscow (1263–1303) and successors Yury of Moscow (1303–25) and Ivan I of Moscow (1325–40/41) give their title as prince of Moscow. Only Simeon of Moscow (1340–53) is named grand prince. — Michael Z. 02:51, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
The current list of names in the lead do not represent the WP:COMMONNAME. Readers should be given some indication of what names are usually used.
Google Ngram gives us a rough indication of the relative frequency in reliable sources over four centuries, [7] over the last century, [8] and in this century (to 2019). [9] Removing the most common one from the chart helps gauge the relative prevalence of the more specific, academic, and obscure names. [10] (You can set smoothing to 0 to see that the relative proportions are similar even in individual years.)
Given this, I will adjust the lead with the two common names in the first sentence, and move all of the synonyms down into the #Names section. Comments or adjustments welcome. — Michael Z. 20:35, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
Brittanica tells us “the princes of Muscovy received the title of grand prince of Vladimir from their Tatar overlords (1328).” [11] Is that when grand principality of Moscow became a thing? Or was there a separate title of Grand Prince of Moscow conferred at some other time?
Is it correct to call it just the principality of Moscow in an earlier period? I see this is used a lot in sources, but not sure to what degree it is an abbreviation or just a generic use. Should Principality of Moscow be added as another name? — Michael Z. 21:35, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
Rus' principalities. Currently, Moscow is the only one with the words "Grand" and "Duchy" in it. Especially "Duchy" does not square well with WP:TITLECON, but "Grand", too, has issues with WP:UNDUE and perhaps even WP:NPOV, namely that it was allegedly the only grand principality and thus superior to all its rivals and "the only true legitimate heir" to the Grand Principality of Vladimir (Vladimir-Suzdal), and by extension to the Grand Principality of Kiev (better known as Kievan Rus'). That this is problematic needs no explaining. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw ( talk) 07:40, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
principality of Moscow. No "Duchy", no "Grand", and on her case not even a capital P "Principality". The only states called
grand principalityin her standard work are Kiev and Vladimir. Others that may call Moscow a grand principality will also call Tver, Nizhny Novgorod-Suzdal, Ryazan etc. a grand principality, such as ruwiki, ukwiki, and bewiki. Enwiki is uniquely inconsistent. Nederlandse Leeuw ( talk) 08:52, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
It is unclear when exactly the princes of Moscow started styling themselves "grand prince of Moscow" independently of their title of grand prince of Vladimir, but the addition of "grand" appears relatively late. Vasily II of Moscow referred to himself as "grand prince of Moscow and all Rus'" (velikii kniaz' i vseia Rusi) in a 1451/2 letter to the last Byzantine emperor, Constantine XI Palaiologos.If anyone knows earlier self-identifications of the Daniilovichi as "grand princes of Moscow" specifically, and not just "grand prince" due to Vladimir, that would be interesting. Before 1451, I haven't seen this. The title of "grand prince" is only used in reference to Vladimir, not to Moscow. The whole 14th century is the princes of Tver, Moscow, and Nizhny Novgorod-Suzdal trying to obtain the Golden Horde khan's jarlig for the title of grand prince of Vladimir. Nobody called themselves "grand prince of Tver/Moscow/Nizhny Novgorod-Suzdal", at least not yet. It was all about Vladimir. Nederlandse Leeuw ( talk) 15:08, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. This discussion saw a wide variety of policy arguments raised. In particular, the principal arguments were:
Looking over the discussion as a whole, I see a high level of appetite to adopt a title that includes "Principality" rather than "Duchy", but participants were divided on whether "Grand Principality" or simply "Principality" would be the most appropriate specific title. Numbers were close and good arguments were raised on both sides, but I see "Principality" as holding a narrow edge in strength of argument; when considering that factor, in conjunction with the widespread support for moving away from the current title, I see the discussion as resulting in a narrow consensus to move to Principality of Moscow as originally proposed. ( closed by non-admin page mover) ModernDayTrilobite ( talk • contribs) 16:11, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
Grand Duchy of Moscow →
Principality of Moscow – We should rename this article for the following reasons:
Principality of Moscowis most probably the WP:COMMONNAME. The fact that
Grand Duchy of Moscowhas seen a steep rise in popularity in recent years can probably be heavily attributed to WP:CIRCULAR: the fact that this Wikipedia page has had the title "Grand Duchy of Moscow" since the mid-2000s. Compare historical trends in Google Ngram. Without this Wikipedia article influencing the Internet for the past 20 years, it's unlikely that "(Grand) Duchy of Moscow" would have seen such a steep rise in recent years. Compare how
Grand Principality of Moscowis not nearly as popular (one reason why the Requested move 18 January 2021 was rejected) as
Principality of Moscow, while "Duchy of Moscow" appears entirely dependent on "Grand Duchy of Moscow".
Grand Prince of Moscow,
Grand Duke of Moscow, or
Duke of Moscow. Check Ngrams. Per Naturalness, people should be able to associate the title with the state:
The title is one that readers are likely to look or search for and that editors would naturally use to link to the article from other articles.
Principality of Moscowsuffices. This is another reason why the Requested move 18 January 2021 was rejected, because it included the unnecessary word "Grand". Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw ( talk) 17:40, 19 August 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. Lightoil ( talk) 03:59, 2 September 2023 (UTC)— Relisting. —usernamekiran (talk) 10:30, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
In diplomatic negotiations of the 1490s and early 1500s, the Lithuanian diplomats questioned the right of Ivan III to be called "Sovereign of All Rus' ".Instead, the Lithuanians called his state
Muscovy - the term that became dominant in European accounts of Muscovy and its people.If Wikipedia was written at the time, it surely would have been the common name. Joke Kidding aside, they did that of course because some of the Rus' principalities had been incorporated into the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, so if Ivan claimed to be the "Sovereign of All Rus' ", that was interfering in the internal affairs of Lithuania. They do appear to have been fine with "grand prince of Moscow" around 1500, but that is quite late into the state's existence from 1282 to 1547. For the longest time it was just "prince of Moscow". Nederlandse Leeuw ( talk) 20:13, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
Principality of Moscowwill have to remain my first choice, although "Muscovy" is well-supported by arguments no. #2 and #4. Nederlandse Leeuw ( talk) 21:50, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
Principality of Moscowwins it from
Principality of Muscovy. Nederlandse Leeuw ( talk) 14:50, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Grand Prince of Moscow,
Grand Duke of Moscow, or
Duke of Moscow. Check Ngrams. Nederlandse Leeuw ( talk) 14:56, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
"Grand Principality" fails all 4 of the WP:CRITERIA I mentionedcare to elaborate? How is it failing Naturalness for example if it's literally the name often used in the literature? Marcelus ( talk) 05:45, 21 August 2023 (UTC)