Talk:All-Russian nation


Russophile ideology?

There are many authors, academic encyclopedias throughout history with many works who can confirm that the White-Russians were one people with the Great-Russians and Little-Russians. That is why it's not an ideology. It was an academic fact.

"Russian dialects fall into two main divisions - Great (Velikorusskij), including White (Belorusskij) Russian, and Little Russian (Malorusskij). The latter is spoken in a belt reaching from Galicia and the Northern Carpathians (see Ruthenians) through Podolia and Volhynia and the governments of Kiev...." Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 28. 1911. P. 913.
"The Russian population is composed of three large groups: Great Russians, or Veliko-Russ; Little Russians, or Malo-Russ; and White Russian, or Bélo-Russ." Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Vol. 35. London. 1873.P 350.
"Subdivisions of Russians. Three different branches can be distinguished among the Russians from the dawn of their history: - The Great Russians, the Little Russians (Malorusses or Ukrainians), and the White Russians (the Byelorusses)." The Encyclopaedia Britannica: a dictionary of arts, sciences, literature and general information". Volume 23. Cambridge. 1911. P. 884.
Alexander Guanini describes also in his book "Sarmatiae Europeae descriptio, quae Regnum Poloniae, Lituaniam, Samogitiam, Russiam, Masoviam, Prussiam, Pomeraniam... A Description of Sarmatian Europe" (printed in Kraków, 1578), which contained descriptions of the countries of Eastern Europe (history, geography, religion, traditions, etc.) that the Moscovian territory is also named as White-Russia or White-Rus.
There are many more works, books, maps who can confirm this information. --Vladislav Nikolaevitch (talk) 04:40, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
One problem here is that the word "Russian" can be used for "citizen of a Russian state," "member of the Russian people," or "the Russian language." The first quote you have clearly refers to the last of these, while the second seems to refer to the first. The third quote contradicts your point; if there were three different branches "from the dawn of their history," then clearly it's not "one people." Note also that views from the era of the Tsars is likely to be different than current understanding. I do think it is a bit confusing to lump together all geographical Russian nationalist ideas from the last seven centuries into a single Wikipedia article using only one of them as its title, but I don't think you can call the triune concept "academic fact." (One point you might have is that the triune concept shouldn't technically be called "irredentist," since irredentism advocates reclamation, and, for most of the term's history the Russian Empire had firm control over all the territory it claimed. I've called it "irredentist" on this talk page as shorthand, but a Wikipedia article should be more accurate.) Calbaer (talk) 20:05, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There are likewise many academic discussions which discuss white supremacy, natural slavery, and female inferiorism as academic fact. This is the challenge of historiography: to interpret the past through the skewed lens of its own historians. From the modern lens, it is clear that both Ukraine and Belarus exhibit distinct cultural and linguistic histories that, while certainly denied by many Russian and western scholars of the time, are nonetheless apparent. The argument you present here is essentially the uncritical analysis of past work which enables Putin's justifications for illegal aggression against Ukraine. 24.19.200.57 (talk) 21:36, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on All-Russian nation. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 14:43, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit warring of this article

Kovanja, please stop approaching the content of this article with a battleground, edit warring attitude by simply reverting other editors under the edit summary or "Stay away from Galitsian nationalist nonesence." This is not a valid content criticism, but a disregard for WP:NPOV, and merely reflects that you don't like it. If you wish to discuss this further, use this talk page, otherwise, please desist from your disruptive editing or I will have to report you to the administrators' Edit Warring Board. I'm sure you are a reasonable person, and will be happy to cooperate once you look into Wikipedia's policies and guidlines. Thank you. Iryna Harpy (talk) 04:57, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Big OR with Genetics section: MyHeritage as VER

Because

These are the most common ethnicities in X, according to MyHeritage DNA users' data

Let us remove these tables. Zezen (talk) 12:35, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]