Talk:Mezhyhirya Monastery

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleMezhyhirya Monastery has been listed as one of the Art and architecture good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 11, 2008Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on January 1, 2008.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that the Mezhyhirskyi Monastery (pictured) in Ukraine, mentioned in Nikolai Gogol’s novel Taras Bulba, is thought to have included the lost library of Yaroslav the Wise?

Did you know[edit]

Here are some ideas for a DYK nomination:

Any more? —dima/talk/ 19:57, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An expansion of the above one, still under 200 characters (with spaces included):

--Riurik(discuss) 03:37, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty good. Let's nominate it. —dima/talk/ 04:51, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Done here.--Riurik(discuss) 04:58, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I added a little note stating that it was in my userspace until 28 Dec. Hopefully that will give the article more time for chance to get on DYK. —dima/talk/ 05:02, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good article review[edit]

In many ways an outstanding article. I'd suggest taking it to Featured article status, with a little work. (BTW, this is my first GAR so if you see anything that looks unusual about it, you are probably correct)

Prose, ... clear language.
I'll guess at least one of the author's speaks English as a second language, but it only shows in spots; e.g. "In 1884, the faience factory was closed down after it failed to bring any profits (except to the factory's founder)." (Who else is supposed to get the profits?) and "During this period, its location was disclosed from the public." (What was hidden from the public? or disclosed to the public?). I think a quick once over from an experienced copyeditor would bring significant improvement. In general, I think that the quality of the prose is lowered simply because you're trying to fit in too much detail. A bit of simplification will go a long way.
  • I too think that I tried to include a lot of detail in the article (especially during my last edits to the article).. I will try to copyedit it more, but I probably won't be able to copyedit it as a native speaker of English.. —dima/talk/ 04:24, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Formatting and organization is fine. There are 3 red links - you might ask if they will ever be filled in, or is Metropolitan Micheal really notable enough for an English language Wikipedia article? (I don't know). I was surprised that the 3rd red link [Sviato-Pokrovskyi Monastery] didn't have an article already - maybe under a different spelling?
  • I have cleared one of the red links.. I don't want to start a quick stub on the Sviato-Pokrovskyi Monastery because there's a lot I could write about it, but will get around to it sometime in the near future. —dima/talk/ 04:24, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Referencing lots of appearently relevant well formatted references. But this is the main substantive problem that I see - they are all in Ukrainian or Russian, which makes them pretty hard to evaluate or use for the average English speaker. I know that you get references from reliable sources where ever you find them, and that foreign language references are not a formal negative for good article status. Nevertheless if you could find a couple in English (aren't there English language newspapers in Kiev and Moscow?) or even in French, Spanish, or German, it would help a lot of readers (and 1 reviewer). The OKO site is relied on fairly heavily - it's hard for me to evaluate whether it's reliable, but since there are so many other references .... Under external links, the Noviy Dim link seems to be purely commercial - is my reading correct that they are building cotteges on the site? If so, something should be mentioned in the article. The link to Wikicommons is not in the usual format AND there is nothing in Wikicommons on the topic.
  • I understand your concern about the references being in Russian/Ukrainian, but truly, there is nothing about the monastery in the internet (even less chance of finding anything in books). I Googled different variations of the monastery's name (Mezhyhirya, Mezhgorye, Mezhigorye, and even in German/Polish) and found either something unrelated or a short mention of the name and nothing about the monastery...
  • The Noviy Dim link is commercial, but you're right - they are building cottages on the site of the monastery... I think that it's beneficial to include it... If not, then I'll just remove it. —dima/talk/ 04:24, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is also something that can be adjusted as English language sources become available. I think in the meantime there are editors available that will be able to verify a reference should one raise questions, etc. Good job on the GAR, detailed and constructive.--Riurik(discuss) 20:41, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Broadness - fine, maybe a bit too detailed. NPOV.
Images beautiful - all appearently out of copyright.

In short, an informative, beautiful, and fairly well written and referenced article that should go further. I hope my minor criticisms help it do so. Smallbones (talk) 23:54, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll go ahead and and pass this as a Good Article. Please do look for some non-Cyrillic sources. It's a bit of a paradox - can something be this notable (and I believe it is), and be recorded in such detail, but there are no mentions of it anywhere in reliable sources in English?
Keep up the good work
Smallbones (talk) 21:36, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your great help on reviewing it! It is like a paradox, and the monastery is/was very notable (like second in importance for the Cossacks) but it was destroyed like 80 years prior, and very little/no material was printed about it during the Soviet time.. Since Ukrainian independence in '91, English sources are a lot more common on these forgotten subjects.. but not everything happens at once. Thanks again, —dima/talk/ 22:06, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Mezhyhirya Monastery. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:38, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Mezhyhirya Monastery. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:20, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Mezhyhirya Monastery. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:19, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mezhyhirya Monastery. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:55, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment[edit]

Mezhyhirya Monastery[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • GAN review not found
Result pending

The Good Article status no longer seems justified, if it ever was. The article systemically suffers from WP:OR, WP:UNSOURCED claims and claims made by non-WP:RS, failing WP:GACR no. #2. This has been the situation since January 2008, when it was promoted. The DYK with which this article made the Main Page on 1 January 2008 (10 days before achieving GA status), Talk:Mezhyhirya Monastery#Did you know, turns out to be a disproven speculation, a busted myth. This was already known to the DYK nominator, who cited the 17 September 2007 sovremennik.ws post by TatianaZ admitting that excavations in the 1990s never found any library or manuscripts. It's also unclear who believed this (MOS:WEASEL), and why it matters if it has been disproven, or why we should take seriously the hope that one day it might still be proven (TatianaZ saying 'What if [the library of Yaroslav the Wise] is really hidden in one of the dungeons, and is just waiting for the moment when it is finally removed from almost 800 years of imprisonment?' is clearly WP:CRYSTAL). Its entire claim to fame appears to be based on a refuted assumption.

The remainder of sources cited is often still questionable, ranging from newspapers or news sites which do not have the proper scholarly expertise to be making claims about what happened centuries ago, to blog posts, to museums speculating about Andrey's role, to the OKO architectural website (one of the more reliable and neutral sources, but also hardly scholarly). A 19th-century bishop can claim galore, but is not a reliable source. People want to believe lots of things about this former building, and seem to prioritise confirmation bias over reliable sources. But this is Wikipedia.

I've already removed a lot of rubbish, especially stuff related to the Mezhyhirya Residence and the WP:COATRACK on Andrey Bogolyubsky / Virgin of Vladimir, which would probably have made it fail WP:GACR no. #3, and possibly no. #4 due to the heavy focus on the political controversy of Yanukovych owning the Residence. But there is still a lot to do. In terms of being well-written and neutral (no. #1 and no. #4), the article should stop basking in "mysteries" and being allegedly "destroyed" many times, yet rebuilt every time, as if that must mean it is somehow a supernatural miracle that should be attributed to the building's religious status. I'm sure that such speculation appeals to a rather narrow audience of devout Eastern Orthodox Christians, but not "to an appropriately broad audience", and may well be WP:POV.

I think the article does not immediately WP:GAFAIL, but it needs serious work to keep its status. I've already done what I can, but I believe other editors should take a look as well. Good day, NLeeuw (talk) 13:19, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PS: This is the first time I've initiated a GAR, I hope I've done it appropriately. The tone of my rationale may be somewhat negative, due to frustrations encountered while trying to improve the article, but I think all editors involved have made an honest effort to write an interesting article. It passed the GA criteria all those years ago, but the criteria seem to have gotten stricter as Wikipedia has professionalised its standards and practices over the years. There is still a possibility that with some serious improvements it can keep its GA status. I just don't feel comfortable overhauling the article all on my own; I think it needs a broader review from the community. NLeeuw (talk) 13:27, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rationale being negative hits the spot on the mark.. I think it is accurate to state that the GA criteria is updated every now and then and has become stricter. If anyone is up to the task of updating original sources and content, that would be most welcome!
However, it is important to note that the history behind the monastery and the exact facts referenced in the article with the original sources provided will not become more available as time goes on. If anything, it will become more difficult to find such sources, since history in Ukraine is constantly being erased due to war, destruction, and constant conquest. Don't ask me - just look at the history (and present-day) itself!
I admit, this article was written a long time ago - and there may have been archaeological expeditions and new books that have come out to date that will become most useful in expanding this article with regards to the monastery itself. I'd like to say that there is more information out there that we can reflect in this article, but I could be mistaken.
BTW, props to removing the paragraphs about the Mezhyhirya Residence - to my knowledge, that Wiki article was not around at the time of this article's writing. § DDima 02:20, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@DDima Thank you for responding. I think my criticism may have been a bit too harsh, sorry about that. You're right that most text about the Mezhyhirya Residence was added only after you published the article, although you did mention at the end that there was a controversy about it. What seems to have happened is that, as the scandal unfolded over the course of 2008 and onwards, other Wikipedians added more and more off-topic information to it. Finally in December 2013 a separate article about the Residence was written, and text about the Residence in this article hadn't yet been transferred to that separate article yet. I can't blame you for that.
I should also clarify that indeed, in this time of war and destruction inside Ukraine, there are risks of sources and artefacts being lost or looted, as has unfortunately happened to several museums and heritage sites in occupied or frontline areas. It's important to cherish and protect what there still is, and documenting this on Wikipedia is one way to do it. I've been doing that myself, mostly in the area of (hand)written documents rather than architecture. It is, in fact, because I was planning to translate Mezhyhirya Chronicle from ukwiki to enwiki (which I have now completed), that I ran into this article about the Mezhyhirya Monastery, and saw a lot of problems with it.
If I could be of help in improving it, I would gladly do so. (I think the Cossack period should be its focus, and not speculations about its legendary founding during Kievan Rus'). Unfortunately, I can find only 2 English-language books on Google Books about it, both of which say very little. Google Scholar also has very few results in English. I'm slowly learning Ukrainian, but I can't really read a PDF article yet (because translation machines like DeepL or Google Translate can't help me read it), like I Antchyshkin, Запорізька Січ та грамота патріарха Йоакима (2015). Науковий щорічник «Історія релігій в Україні». So I'm afraid I won't be much help content-wise. This is one of the reasons why I said I just don't feel comfortable overhauling the article all on my own; I think it needs a broader review from the community. I'm pretty sure there are enough reliable sources in Ukrainian to improve this article, so that it is worthy of keeping its GA status. But for that, we will need Wikipedians who can read advanced Ukrainian, and I cannot do that myself. But I could aid in improving the style, grammar, structure etc. So perhaps we could work together, or ask others to assist? Good day, NLeeuw (talk) 11:27, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mezhyhirya_Monastery&oldid=1220543719"