Talk:Olga Taratuta

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Note on Heath 2009[edit]

When I came across this article, it seemed to be pulling quite closely from Nick Heath's 2009 biography on As it was a self-published blog post, I had my concerns about the source, but kept it in and clearly cited it as I expanded the article. However, I've just taken a look at it and saw that one of the sources Heath cited was the Esperanto Wikipedia article on Taratuta.

Having been through the other sources Heath cited, Avrich and Goldman, it became immediately clear that the majority of the article was pulled directly from Wikipedia. And on closer inspection, it appeared as though Heath may have plagiarised his own article from the Esperanto Wikipedia. (Telltale signs of this include mentions of the Makhnovist commanders giving Taratuta 5 million rubles, or her work at Golos Truda, which is mentioned by both Heath and EO Wikipedia, but none of the other sources) This is especially concerning given that the EO Wikipedia article didn't cite any of its own sources.

Given our previous concerns regarding citogenesis, I figured it would be best practice to completely remove all citations to Heath and any information cited solely to Heath. Most of the information cited to him is also provided by more clearly reliable sources (particularly Avrich, Dubovik and Savchenko), so that wasn't so much of an issue. The information cited solely to Heath was also relatively superfluous, so not much was lost by cutting it.

I'm bringing this up here for posterity. If anybody has any issues with the excision of this source, please feel free to say so. -- Grnrchst (talk) 15:28, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


  1. The consensus at WP:KIEV was that Kyiv is the common name only since 1991.
  2. From what I see, the English language sources refer to the subject as Olga Taratuta (or Olga Ilyinichna Taratuta). Moving the page to Olha Taratuta based on a single Ukrainian-language source is highly inappropriate. Certainly without discussion.
  3. Sucn nationality as Ukrainian-Jewish does not exist and never existed. Tataruta was a citizen of the Russian Empire, later of the Soviet Union, I do not see any evidence she spoke Ukrainian - she spoke Yiddish as her mothertongue and Russian as equal to her mothertongue.
  4. Ukraine leads a massive cultural appropriation campaign, trying to portray everyone who ever lived in their current territory as Ukrainian. We should not become the vehicle of their propaganda and follow the reliable sources instead.----Ymblanter (talk) 11:23, 11 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    1. That doesn't say that pre-1991 uses of Kyiv must refer to it as "Kiev" though. I honestly don't see the problem using "Kyiv" here.
    2. I moved it based on Viktor Savchenko's English language abstract. As Viktor Savchenko is, as of yet, the only author to write a somewhat complete biography on Taratuta, I considered it to be uncontroversial. If I was wrong to do this, I'm happy to open a move discussion.
    3. I've removed the nationality field from the infobox. If you think other changes should be made, let me know.
    4. I don't see what this has to do with this article, unless you're disputing the reliability of any of the cited sources.
    -- Grnrchst (talk) 11:46, 11 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I outlined very specific points, and I object the GA promotion until these have been addressed. Please restore Kiev, as corresponds to the community consensus (and in case you have not been there, it was really painful to reach this consensus - did she live in Kyiv, Kiev Governorate? Also please revert the move, change the spelling of her name back, and, if you feel necessary, open a RM. One all this has been done, it is ok to remove the POV template. Ymblanter (talk) 11:53, 11 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I responded to those points. I just very strongly object to your accusations of "cultural appropriation" and "propaganda", and consider it detrimental to building consensus.
    I don't understand why you insist on the use of "Kiev", especially considering the consensus points you linked here don't even insist on the use of "Kiev". I find it astounding that you consider the mere use of "Kyiv" to be POV, but don't seem to think pushing "Kiev" is.
    As for the article name, I'm happy to provisionally move it back to "Olga Taratuta", per common name policy. I just genuinely didn't think it would be a controversial move (and clearly was wrong). -- Grnrchst (talk) 12:14, 11 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Well, I insist on using Kiev for the beginning of the 20th century because non-Ukrainian reliable sources overwelmingly use Kiev for this period, and therefore the community consensus was that Kyiv should only be unambiguously used since 1991. This indeed might look like a very minor issue, but the community spent really a lot of time discussing it. If you want to probe the consensus, you should open a new discussion at Talk:Kyiv, but I would honestly advise against it. Ymblanter (talk) 14:08, 11 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I've attempted to find a compromise solution on the transliteration of Taratuta's name. Savchenko provides her full name in Ukrainian, with a Romanized transliteration. While the English language sources tend to prefer the Russian romanization "Olga", none use the Russian patronymic "Ilyinichna", so I've left that out. The Kyiv issue does indeed seem like a minor issue to me and certainly not one I thought was worth POV-tagging over. The guidelines state that Kyiv should only be used unambiguously after 1991, but doesn't say it must not be used for before 1991.
    I'm trying my best to form a consensus with you on this so I can move forward with this article. In order to do that, I really would appreciate if you could apologise for accusing me of pushing Ukrainian state propaganda. It felt like a personal attack from the very beginning and really wasn't a good starting point for a healthy discussion. -- Grnrchst (talk) 14:35, 11 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I did not accuse you of pushing the Ukrainian state propaganda, and I apologize if you perceived it like this. I think you started editing in an area which is highly contentious without realizing it, and in this area it is very easy to lose some fine balance. Of course Ukrainian sources follow Olha, because the narrative is that everybody who ever lived in the current area of Ukraine is Ukrainian and their name must be transliterated according to WP:UKR. I did not expect you to know this, or agree with this or whatever, but I believe that the balance is lost here. Whatever romanization of Kiev/Kyiv is established in the article following our conversation, there will be a stream of new users coming here to change it on a regular basis. Ymblanter (talk) 05:44, 12 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]