text:
Talk:Ignacy Domeyko

Polish, Lithuanian or Belarusian ?
Some firm evidence before anyone claims his nationality again, please. Lysy 21:03, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * Well, that's a hard question. I have a similar one: Is Alexander Lukashenko Russian? He speaks Russian 98% of the time, he reads Russian newspapers and he meets with Russians all the time. What's your answer?

 * In the same way you can ask the question about many 18th and 19th century famous personalities that were born on the territories of Rzeczpospolita/GDL what is now modern Belarus. Who was Ignacy Domeyko? Who was Tadeusz Kosciuszko? Who was Adam Mickiewicz? Who was Kastus Kalinouski? Who were most of Radziwill nobles? Who was Edward Wojnilowicz, Roman Skirmunt and Uladyslau Syrakomla? Finally, who was Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky?

 * With each of them the answer is like that for mister Lukashenka and several million other modern Belarusans. Just replace "Russian language" with "Polish language". All of them spoke Polish as their first language (just like now millions of Belarusans speak Russian as their first language), and they were reading Polish books and knew Polish culture (just like now millions of Belarusans read Russian magazines and watch Russian TV).

 * The point is that one's native language is an important part of one's national identification, but it's not the most crucial. The most crucial is your own self-perception and self-identification. In addition, you can also judge people by their deeds. So, on those terms, it's obvious that Tadeusz Kosciuszko did not have Polish identity in the modern sense. He wrote and said on many occasions that he was born a Litvin (that he is from Litva, the Grand Duchy, now Belarus; and that he views himself as the citizen of Litva). Similarly, Adam Mickiewicz wrote "Litwo, ojczyzno moje, ty jestes jak zdrowie. Ile cie trzeba cenic ten tylko dowie kto cie stracil." He identified himself with Litva, not Polish crown. The same story with the rest of the guys (and even with Nobel-prize winner Czeslaw Milosz who wrote in "Rodinna Evropa" (Native Realm) that he perceives himself as a citizen of Great Litva). So each of the above-mentioned famous personalities (Tadeusz Kosciuszko, Adam Mickiewicz, Kastus Kalinouski, Radziwill, Edward Wojnilowicz, Roman Skirmunt, Jan Sereda, Uladyslau Syrakomla, Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky) had Polish as their first language. As for their identity, it was somewhat Polish, but to a varying degree, and not really Polish in the modern sense.

 * Of course, Adam Mickiewicz wrote not only Pan Tadeusz and Dziady (although they are his key works), but also other works, that relate more to real Poland, not our Litva. So in each case, for each of those persons, there's space for speculation.

 * But the main problem is obvious: they couldn't have been something else, because there was no third choice at that time. The choice was between Russia and Poland. There was nothing in between. There was neither Litva/Litvin identity, nor Belarus/Belarusan identity. Well, there were such two identities, but the latter was quickly becoming extinct (because GDL did not exist anymore) and the former existed only marginally (mostly among Belarus villagers who didn't even care about it). So of course, between the two choices: Polish and Russian identity they were leaning to the one which was ideologically and culturally closer to them. That's only natural. (And it's only natural that modern Polish people want to have them as their own heroes.)

 * As for the concrete case of Ignacy Domeyko, I think he is a more clear case of Litva/Belarus identity. Yes, he was Polish-speaking, but everything else (perception, identity, culture) points the other way. For example, I read a very good book about him, a collection of essays and articles from our historians called "Ihnat Damiejka and the present-day Belarus". Unfortunately, it's in Belarusan, but they have translated the Preface into English.

 * So that's the situation. As for the current situation in Belarus, it's not so straight. So for example, Ignacy Domeyko is usually called Belarusian (and so are Radziwills), but for example Adam Mickiewicz is usually called Polish, Belarusian-Polish or Polish-Belarusian or even Lithuanian-Polish-Belarusian, and for example, Czeslaw Milosz is called exclusively Polish, obviously. And KGB chief Dzerzhinsky is sometimes called Polish and sometimes Belarusian.

 * Sorry for being a bit too verbose, but I think that's a very important topic. --rydel 23:53, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * I think the above is a great explanation and IMO a significant part of it deserves to be a section in the Belarusian people article, to close the issue once and for all. Mikkalai 00:29, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * Good idea, Mikkalai. I'm afraid that most of these ideas cannot be turned into concrete biographical entries. I didn't read the book, but from the blurb Rydel posted a link to it's pretty clear that there are more assumptions than facts. I. Damiejka revealed his Belarusian mentality, his heaven-born nobility through his orientation towards moral values. Our compatriot mirrors the best features of the national character such as openess, search for truth, love of freedom, pride, restlessness.. Following this path we'd have to name all people of high moral values Belarusians, regardless of their personal beliefs, their culture, language and/or political alignement. While this would be ok with me, the world we live in is not that ideal.

 * That's why I believe that most of what Rydel wrote above would be a good addition to the article on Belarusian nation. Especially that it describes whom do the Belarusians consider to be their countrymen and not who these people truly were (which, in many cases, is quite obscure and hard to judge by modern standards). Halibutt 03:02, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)

 * There are 2 main problem here. First, the fact that the people we are talking about were citizens of a country which no longer exists (see Polish-Lithuanian_Commonwealth). Second, that the concept of nation state and nationality was not the same then then it was today. To be Polish or Lithuanian or Bielorussian or Cossack (etc.) then is not the same as today, especially considering that some states/cultures (like Bielorussian) have drastically evolved since then, and would likely suprise Domeyko and others living in 16, 17, 18 even 19th century. Rydel makes good point about self-perception and the then-Polish culture (language, etc. domiance. Consider Domeyko contemporary Adam Mickiewicz, the most famous Polish poet, who when reffering to the most beautiful country wrote about what today is Lithuania (Litwo, Ojczyzno Moja...). He, like Domeyko and many others, was neither Polish, Lithuanian or Bielorussian or other-existing-today-country's-adjective. I believe they were citizens of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, not the citizens of any of today's countries like Poland, Lithuania, Bielorussia. Those countries view PLC as their ancestor (perhaps in case of Bielorussia and Ukraine they also view Russia in a similar way?), but it menas - in a way of speaking - that they are simply fragmented parts of something that was once whole. PLC was something greater then a sum of its parts, and I believe that Domeyko and others would find our discussion puzzling, amusing, and in case of some nationalist bickering (which fortunately have not found this discussion yet), saddening. I propose that a solution and compromise would be to refer to those people not as Polish/Lithuanian/Bielorusian/other, but as 'citizens of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. I believe this is what they would have wanted and this is a policy I have pursued in my articles, replacing Poland/Polish (which is most often) with Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. I believe this should be applied to Lithuanian/Bielorussian/etc. regarding that era as well. This would be similar policy to one reached in Talk:Gdansk/Vote. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 11:32, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * Most excellent proposal, Piotruś. Halibutt 13:39, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree this seems to be most sensible compromise in cases where there are controversies as to the national origin. "Born in Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth" is certainly true and informative statement and on the other hand does not indicate the nationality to be Belarusian, Jewish, Lithuanuan or Polish. You're all right, that the concept of nationality in 19th century or earlier in the PLC was not what it is today. I also agree that it would be good to expand Belarusians to explain the complexity of national descent, as described here by Rydel.
 * Just for completeness, when Mickiewicz wrote "Litwo, ojczyzno moja" he did not refer to what is today Lithuania, but Belarus. And as to his nationality, apparently his grandparents were Jewish ... :-) Lysy 16:59, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

In the 18th century, I would not refer to anyone as "Belarussian" unless they were Eastern-Orthodox or Eastern-rite Catholic, and spoke a dialect of what would now be described as Belarussian. I'd add that I see no problem with simply using "Polish" as the adjective short form for "someone from the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth," at least if they were Catholic and in the upper classes and largely spoke Polish, as most of the figures in question were (in my understanding.) john k 19:55, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It is an interesting question wether Lukashenka is "Russian". I think the peculiarity of the lands, formerly known as Commonwealth, was that the culture of its society differed much from that of its neighbors: Russia (Muscovy), Germanic states, and Crimea. The "mood" of that society should be taken in consideration when deciding who was/is who. It maybe the correct way to just mention the fact of a person belonging to that society ( nationality ), and the ethnicity, religion, and language as additional important factors. I believe that Commonwealth culture was its modus operandi, and that even at that time it was pretty clear who was who. Indeed, labeling Mickiewicz "Belarusian", or "Polish" is only obscures that true "mood", yet he is another obsticle - Polish culture had retained, apropriated, and developed many of the aspects of the common culture of the Commonwealth. It is unfortunate that the "mood" in Belarus and Ukraine had been diverted into a rather opposite direction of Muscovy. And naturally, the term "tutejszy" is hardly useful in the Enlish entries... Anchorite 03:18, May 4, 2005 (UTC)

Ignacy Domeiko was Polish speaking Lithuanian nobleman. It was usual for Lithuanian nobility of that time to speak Polish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Juraune (talk • contribs)

 * Actually, above all things, the allegiance of the person in question is important. For example, if a Pole emigrates to France and declares his allegiance to France and does not consider himself Polish, then he is French, and not Polish. The basis of nationality on some bogus concept like ethnicity is worthless (recent DNA studies show the melting pot nature of Europe, and in particular Poland -- heck, my great grandmother's last name was Berg, which doesn't sound Polish at all. You don't see me declaring myself German or Dutch or Danish or what have you). In any case, Domeyko makes it clear that his allegiance was to Poland (and he was living during a time period when nationalism was already on the rise, and the idea of patriotism as relevant to Europe certainly predates the modern idea of nationalism by centuries). --Vegalabs 00:58, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Regarding the Polishness - Why Domeyko is called a Pole? He was born in Grand Duchy of Lithuania, to a Lithuanian nobleman family, and called himself a Lithuanian. Language doesn't make him a Pole. Language becomes as a sign of nationality only after the Spring of The Nations - since 1918. James Joyce was an Englishman? Prove it. -- Ke an (talk) 04:04, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
 * There is no proof he called himself Lithuanian. Lithuania was a region not a country. If someone is from Cheshire does that mean he is of "Cheshirean" nationality. Or if someone is from Mallorca, does that make him of Mallorcan nationality? As you said only after the Spring of Nations, Lithuania gained language and identity. Also, look at Domeyko's grave in Chile. It clearly says in bold Polonia. I think that settles this. Oliszydlowski, 03:14, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
 * First clear plain stupidity and ignorance: "Lithuania was a region not a country." Lithuania is a country at least since 1253 crowning of Mindaugas. Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Second - Polishness as a people speaking Polish was formed only after Spring of the Nations - after 1918. Inscription on a grave doesn't settle this - people make mistakes and maybe not historically correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ke an (talk • contribs) 04:36, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Perhaps, but there is no obvious evidence that he called himself Lithuanian. Using Lithuanian sources is just ironically unacceptable. Using Polish sources wouldn't settle the matter either if both claim that Domeyko is theirs. How about you look into Spanish and especially English ones since this is an English language Wikipedia. Your statements sound like it's your own personal opinion. This was discussed as you can see many times and that's also what settles this. Don't forget that Lithuanian nobility became Polonized as well so the most Domeyko could say realistically is that he is of Lithuanian noble descent. Oliszydlowski, 04:43, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I would look at Polish sources very critically as much it's historiography school(or pseudohistoriography) was influenced by Endek worldview. Claiming everyone and everything in the territory of Polish-Lithuanians commonwealth Polish, but at the same time they distinguished Polonia propria and Borderlands(not so very Polish :)). Which is a stupid logical error per se.  Very typical claim of this school was made by Oliszydlowski - "Lithuania was a region not a country". If we look at biography of Domeyko: https://www.geni.com/people/Ignacio-Domeyko-Ancuta/6000000003736941924; we will find he is descendant of Lithuanian nobleman Kontrym(Kontrimas) which is clearly Baltic(Lithuanian), Domeyko(made from Dominicus) and Ancuta are often occuring surnames in Lithuania currently.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ke an (talk • contribs) 05:31, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Yet again about the origins of Domeyko. It is well known he was born to a family of Lithuanian noblemen. Next - ethymology of origins:
 * Kontrimas -> made from earlier form Kantrimas comes from Baltic,Lithuanian word "kantrus" - patient.
 * Ancuta -> made from earlier form Baltic,Lithuanian Ansas, which was made from German "Hans".
 * Domeika -> made from earlier form Baltic,Lithuanian Dominykas, which was made from Latin "Dominicus".
 * The most civilised way of attribution would be to name him as citizen of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth as proposed by Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus. Polish is simply too narow. -- Ke an (talk) 17:56, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

well, several fools have a party?
The idea to steal great Polish people is pitiful, just as this band of fools is. They probably never heard about term of "little homeland". Poles were, are and will be Polish.

 * Don't steal Copernicus as a Polish then. -- Ke an (talk) 04:05, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

He never considered himself Belarusian and no serious scholars consider him Belarusian today...--Witkacy 20:25, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

Lithuanian, Belarusian and Polish!
He never considered himself Belarusian and no serious scholars consider him Belarusian today. So please stop.--Witkacy 05:48, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Yes, Ihnat Damiejka was a person of Polish language and probably kind-of kresy wschodnie-Polish cullture. But
 * 1) the man was born in Belarus and at least this is a reason good enough to mention him as Belarusian.
 * 2) His forefathers did not migrate from Poland (oh, or you have evidence?), but were Belarusian . Even Damiejka is a Belarusian (Ruthenian, but not Polish) surname.
 * 3) In Belarus he is officically considered to be Belarusian. This can not be ignored
 * Just be fair!--Czalex 06:14, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

 * the man was born in Belarus and at least this is a reason good enough to mention him as Belarusian.

1. Belorusia dont existed at that time. 2. Milions of Poles lived befor the 2ww in todays Ukraine, Belarus and Lithuania. Even today 4% of the Belorusian population are Poles. See Demographics of Belarus.

 * His forefathers did not migrate from Poland (oh, or you have evidence?), but were Belarusian. Even Damiejka is a Belarusian (Ruthenian, but not Polish) surname.

Do you have some evidence that they NOT migrate from Poland? His surname is of no importance - are all Belarusian with ski surnames Poles? And BTW his surname was DOMEYKO and not Damiejka..

According to his ancestors last names, they were not Belorusian, but Lithuanian (Vizgird(as) and Kontrim(as)) Domeika can be perfectly Lithuanian last name as well. Part of the territory that now is Belorusia, was Lithuanian ethnic land.
 * In Belarus he is officically considered to be Belarusian. This can not be ignored.

In Belarus Lukashenko is officically a hero :)

You just ingnore the fact, that he never considered himself Belorusian and nobody do that. Please also stop to add Belarusian names for other Poles like Lucjan Zeligowski, that's ridiculously... Wielka Encyklopedia PWN:  --Witkacy 06:34, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

''1. Belorusia dont existed at that time. 2. Milions of Poles lived befor the 2ww in todays Ukraine, Belarus and Lithuania. Even today 4% of the Belorusian population are Poles. See Demographics of Belarus.''

Belorusia does not exist even today. I know only Belarus or White Ruthenia and people who can not write correctly. There where never "MILLIONS" of Poles in Belarus - several tens thousands migrated to Belarus between WWI and WWII - that's all!

 * His forefathers did not migrate from Poland (oh, or you have evidence?), but were Belarusian. Even Damiejka is a Belarusian (Ruthenian, but not Polish) surname.

Do you have some evidence that they NOT migrate from Poland?

I was the first to ask, so - go ahead!

For your inspiration here some links to what I have found concerning roots of the Damiejka family (unfortunately Russian only).

Damiejka family were Litvin.

''Домейко - литовские дворянские роды. Первый из них, герба Долэнга, происходит от Константина Ивановича Визгирда-Домейко, владевшего поместьями в 1659 г., и внесен в VI часть родословной книги Виленской губернии. Второй род, герба Дангель, происходит от Юрия-Казимира Семеновича Контрыма-Домейко (умер в 1682 г.). Из его потомков Александр Фаддеевич был виленским губернским предводителем дворянства (1856 - 77). Этот род Домейко внесен в VI часть родословных книг Виленской и Минской губерний. ''
 * http://www.rulex.ru/01050607.htm
 * http://www.slovarik.ru/slovari/beo/?slovo=4980
 * Poland not mentioned at all
 * 'hope you don't have trouble reading cyrillics.
 * Damiejka considered himself as Litvin, probably spoke Polish as mother tongue but was Belarusian (Litvin) of origin. So, I suppose it makes sence to singify him as both Polish and Belarusian--Czalex 17:15, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

 * )) Polish and Belarusian, but his ancestry was actually Lithuanian.

,, , , etc, etc ....

"... In the year 2002 we have the 200th anniversary of Ignacy Domeyko's birthday /1802-1889/ an outstanding Polish patriot and scientist. On this occasion Polish Post together with Chile Post will issue a post stamp ..."

"Damiejka considered himself as Litvin, probably spoke Polish as mother tongue but was Belarusian (Litvin) of origin"

No. He did not, and he never used the name Domejka ...

"Belorusia does not exist even today. I know only Belarus or White Ruthenia and people who can not write correctly. There where never "MILLIONS" of Poles in Belarus - several tens thousands migrated to Belarus between WWI and WWII - that's all!"

I have said milions of Poles in Belarus, Ukraine and Lithuania... Poles migrated after the WWI? No Poles in todays Belarus in times of the PLC? and partitions of Poland? That's interesting... BTW: 4% of 10,310,520 = 400 000 Poles (today).

However... He was a Pole, and your own opinion dont change simply facts...--Witkacy 07:40, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

It's not just my opinion - these are facts! :) Thank you for the links, but we are not speaking about of what nationality Ihnat Damiejka is considered to be, but about his origin. I gave you links where it is said that Damiejkas are Litvin (Belarusian) noble family. If you claim Damiejka to be Polish, please give reference to where it is said that Damiejkas migrated to Belarus from Poland.

Meanwhile I will translate the Russian text for you:

''Domeyko are Litvin (Lithuanian) noble family. One branch, of the Dolega arms, comes from Konstantin Ivanovich Vizgird-Domeyko, who owned lands in 1659 and is put into the part No VI of the Vilna gubernya nobility book. The second branch, of the Dangel arms, comes from Jury-Kazimir Semionovich Kontryma-Domeyko (died in 1682). Of his ancestors Alexander Fadeevich was the Vilnia gubernya nobility chairman (1856-77). This branch of the Domeykos is put into part VI of the Vilnia and Minsk gubernyas''

(bold by me) --Czalex 17:15, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

It's enough. He was born in family of noble Lithuanians, his surname is Lithuanian. After taking citizenship of Chile he said: "I will never change my citizenship now, but god gives a hope for me, that even it will be Cordillera, or Paneriai - i will die as Lithuanian.". Also he took part in rising of 1830-1831 and was in only of LITHUANIANS formated regiment. In his memories he wrote: "General staff was very glad with US, LITHUANIANS". So i can't see reason to ignore Lithuanians just because he wrote in Polish. Then. Is Irishman speaking English - Englishman? Or is Scotsman speaking English - Englihman? --Egisz 11:55, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I added refs, if any problems will rise again, give me a note . M.K. (talk) 12:17, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I have his memoirs and i'm pretty sure - he had never called himself Pole in contemporary way - Koroniarz. It's clear that he understand Poland as common state of Korona and Lithuania. And he use the word "koroniarz" while speaking about Poles. I don't know what we should do now.. Egisz 17:46, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Domeyko vs Damiejka

 * Regardless of rather harsh attitude of Witkacy, there is some serious point in what he writes. Most of all, if we followed your logic we'd have to quote also other translations or transliterations of his name (which was one, the other versions seem just that). For instance, he was born in Russia, so a Russian rendering should be mentioned. He was also born in former Grand Duchy of Lithuania, so perhaps a Ruthenian or Lithuanian version could be mentioned..? Finally, the area he was born in what soon after his birth became France, so how about adding Ignace Domeyko..?

 * Anyway, all these translations of his name were not what he signed his works with. Why to pretend it was not so? Halibutt 09:01, May 24, 2005 (UTC)

 * Well, concerning the writing of his name - here is the same logic as with when we call Lithuanian Dukes Algirdas, Vytautas etc though they never called themselves like this. Damiejka is considered to be Belarusian (at least we can not deny his direct relation to Belarus), there are about him in Belarusian language, so for it being easier to find info about him it might be useful for readers of this article to place the Belarusian name here (does it really take that much space?).--Czalex 17:15, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

3-revert rule
Both of you guys exceeded the limit. Please stop. mikka (t) 21:38, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Polish/Lithuanian/Belarussian
I( suggest you both review all talk at this page. Both sides have their reasons. The only possible solution is, like I wrote, to expand the article "Belarusians" with explanations and refer to it in all questionable cases :Domeyko, Dzierzhynski, Mickiewicz, Napoleon Orda....

There is a third side, that you forget. Litvin is Lithuanian.

Also, please keep in mind that for Belarus today "reclaiming" somer names in not the matter of stealing of someone's glory, but a matter of pride for their own people. I don't see contradiction in being both Pole and Litvin at the same time. In Great Britain there are Scots, and there are clans among Scots. Nothing unusual to have a "layered"/"nested" attribution. mikka (t) 22:40, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Indeed, nothing wrong with it as long as we keep the 20th century nationalism out... Halibutt 23:00, May 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Be careful with slapping labels. You probably meant 21st century. Or you do want to keep Polish nationalism of Pilsudski out as well? BTW, I recall a very fervent 20th century killer of 20th century nationalism while being Father to All Soviet Peoples. Many people love to dig in genealogy trees deriving their families from King Arthur's knigts, from Pilgrims, from Rurik, from Muhammad. Why some peole deny this hobby for Balarusssians? mikka (t) 23:28, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
 * You know, it is not about deriving one's roots from Jesus Christ or King Arthur. It's about reviving Belarus' history and the truth of people who are Belarusians by birth, though known as Polish/Russians etc. Being Polish geologist for Damiejka doesn't mean that he can not be Belarusian scientist at the same time. One thing our friend Witkacy is unable to understand is that Belarus was claimed to be part of Poland at that time. So, Minsk, Hrodna and Mahilou could easily be called "cities in Poland", just because "Poland" used to be a name for a wider territory than nowadays.--Czalex 17:12, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Czalax, I usually try to stay out of this petty nationality conflicts, but I will make an exception in this case, since your arguments are so easy to counter. Consider the existance of the phenomena known as time. You see, those cities you mention were once in Poland (specifically, Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth]]. At another time, they were also the cities of the Russian Empire. Of course now they are in Bielarus and thus are Bielarussian. Nobody disputes that. Just as nobody disputes they were once not-Bielarusian, as that very country didn't exist until early 20th century. Same with people. Many people who lived in those territories in those times considered themselves Poles, Russians, Lithuanians, Jews...but very few were Bielorussian, since that country - that nationality - didn't exist then. Do also remember that due to polonization much of Bielarus, Ukrainian and such cultures trace their roots - and true national heroes - to rural areas. That Bielarus exists now - and people born there are Bielorussian - nobody disputes. But even now there are lot of people living there who have Russian citizenship, and let's not forget about those who emigrated to Russia proper after collapse of Soviet Union. If they feel Russian, aren't they Russian? Same with Domeyko. This just proves that being born in one place, and even living there does not make one a member of a state that exists there now - even if it was created soon after their births. And Bielarus was created over a century after Domeyko death! How on earth could he have considered himself a member of a country that would not be formed for many decades? Sure, he would surely agree that he was born in the territory/district/region/voivodship of Bielorussia, same as today's Poles would claim they are 'Małopolanin' or 'Wielkopolanin' or 'Warszawiak' - but those are not nationalities. Finally, as Witkacy points out, Domeyko called himself a Pole. In light of that evidence, if Bielarusian sources he is Bielarus, I am afraid this does not prove he is, just that they are sadly mistaken. You can't make black white, and vice versa.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 18:01, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * While you are saying some correct things, I am afraid you are confusing the notion of nationality and ethnicity. We are speaking about Yotvingians, Krivichs, Wends, although there was no Yotvingia, Krivia, Wendia (of course, there were various warlords who controlled certain "prinicipalities"). If czalex may present solid reasons to believe that Domeyko, may trace his roots to Belarusian ethnos, let him write a section. At the same time, I agree that this would be a only secondary classification, just like an attempt to make a point by calling him a Chilean geologist, which is basically correct, but not a phrase in the intro. mikka (t) 18:32, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * People declare their nationality themselves, without this assumption not a single national census would make any sense. Now ask yourself, what nationality did/would Ignacy Domeyko declare if asked ? Just my 3 cents. Lysy 19:15, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * You again are confusing "nationality" and "ethnicity". Please go, read these articles, and then we shall probably talkthe same language. (or fix the corresponding articles if you disagree with definitions there and tell me to read myself :-) 19:35, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, let me quote from nationality article then: "In Central and Eastern Europe, ..., the cognates of nationality is understood as a synonym of ethnicity". So how can I confuse notions that according to that article are considered synonymous in the part of Europe that we're discussing here. Are we talking the same language now ? :-) Lysy 20:19, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * We are speaking English here, not Central European. Cognates are quite often "false friends", you know. Another term pertinent to the current discussion is "ethnic origin". And it occurs to me now, this is probably what our Belarusian friend has in mind. mikka (t) 00:22, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I agree with the fact that a person declares his nationality. Additionally, ethnicity is a largley bogus concept, esp. in the light that Poles, as with Europe in general, is a mixed bundle of people, particularly such cases. There is no proof either way anyhow. If Domeyko declared himself Polish, then he is Polish. Also, a note about Mickiewicz: it is quite naive to use the first line of Pan Tadeusz as some sort of "evidence" of what he considered himself as. He is, as is well known and accepted in academia, refering to the geographical region of Lithuania. Anyone with any understanding of poetics can see that. It's just sorry to see some of these counties that have only recently been formed because of a recent "nationalist consciousness" try to acquire random people to try to boost their nationalist self-esteem. That's like the Italians trying to credit themselved with Roman culture. --Jonassen

It's just sorry to see some of these counties that have only recently been formed because of a recent "nationalist consciousness" try to acquire random people to try to boost their nationalist self-esteem. That's like the Poles trying to credit some people what where born hundreds if not thousands of kilometers from ethnic Poland and who may have never been to these lands, nor felt ties with them, claim these people (and peoples) were Poles in contemporary meaning of this word, trying to credit themselves with Commonwealth culture, just because these peoples talked Polish. Probably person, who has Latin inscription on his grave also could be made "Roman" by Italians like Poles do with all those random people from other countries. :) But wait, wasn't all the artists, who built 95% of Baroque architecture in Poland, Italians? No, they where... Poles. Check their wiki sites. Bartłomiej Berrecci, Tomasz Dolabella, Jan Maria Bernardoni, Andrzej Spezza, Maciej Trapola, Jan Trevano, Tomasz Poncino, Wawrzyńec Senesa, etc. sounds very Polish to me. :D Some recently formed national states, acquiring random people are still very young... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.32.253.10 (talk) 20:42, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Section proposal
Here a proposal for the section:

===Roots=== Domeyko (Домейко, Дамейка, Damiejka) are a noble family with origin in Minsk and Vilno regions. One branch, of the Dolęga arms, comes from Konstantin Ivanovich Vizgird-Domeyko, who owned lands in 1659 and is put into the part No VI of the Vilno gubernya nobility book. The second branch, of the Dangel arms, comes from Jury-Kazimir Semionovich Kontryma-Domeyko (died in 1682). Of his ancestors Alexander Fadeevich was the Vilno gubernya nobility chairman (1856-77). This branch of the Domeykos is put into part VI of the Vilno and Minsk gubernyas Because of his Belarusian origin Domeyko is considered a person of national notability in Belarus.

what do you think of this? --Czalex 18:47, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Sorry, my grasp of English seems to be to weak to comprehend what you've just written above. What is e.g. part VI of the Vilno and Minsk gubernyas ? And what all these have to do with Ignacy Domeyko ? Were these people that you mention members of his family ? I'm not trying to be difficult, but am just confused now. Lysy 19:11, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * As to the proposal, it contains certain inaccuracies. The marszałek szlachty of the vilnian gubernya in the years 1855-1878 was not Alexander Fadeevich but Aleksander Domeyko, indeed a relative of our Domeyko, but by no means his ancestor. He was brother to Kazimierz Domeyko and Ignacy's cousin. Halibutt 01:02, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Alexander Fadeevich Domeyko and Aleksander Domeyko is the same person ;)--Czalex 23:02, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

What is definitely known of Ignacy Domeyko's ancestry? Did it in fact include Rusyns or Belarusyns? If so, why not share the glory and describe him as "a Polish geologist and mineralogist of partially Rusyn [Belarusyn?] descent who is also claimed by some Belarusyns as a Belarusyn national hero"? logologist 01:46, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * As always, Logologist seems to put all our ideas in a beautiful English package :) Sounds good to me. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 09:50, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * "Ignacy Domeyko a Polish geologist but also of 1/31 Ruthenian, 1/45 Lithuanian, 1/1628 Tatar, 1/55552 Ukrainian and of 1/9909090909009090909090909090 of every nation descent (his grand, grand.. father was probably Noah)" ? ;) Domeyko called himself a Pole and was btw a great patriot, and that is most important. Fyodor Dostoevsky's family was of Polish descent (and he even did not like Poles..) should we start an edit-war and claiming that he was a Polish writer??... :) --Witkacy 11:47, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * I'd rather trade Domeyko for Dzerzhinsky ;-) sorry, I could not resist it. Lysy 16:04, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Yes, it's true. But I'd say not by some Belarusians, but simply by Belarusians, because the consideration of Damiejka as of a Belarusian prominent person is quite common.--Czalex 23:02, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Czalex/Rydel
Pls read this: "Ignacy Domeyko – Spiritual Bridge between Poland and Chile" "....Pablo Domeyko, the grandson of Ignacy Domeyko and the son of Kazimierz Domeyko had the presentation on the history of the house of Domeyko in Cueto Street in the old district of Santiago. The house has been taken care of by the subsequent generations of Domeyko family. The most serious contribution to its maintenance was made by Dona Hortensia Perez Tupper, the widow of Kazimierz Domeyko and Dona Anita Domeyko Alamos de Salazar – the only living granddaughter of Ignacy Domeyko. Since our early childhood we were acquainted with the authentic relics of Saint Casimir, with the picture of Our Lady of Ostra Brama, the picture of Adam Mickiewicz and Odyniec, the medals of King Vladislaus Jagiello and Saint Hedwig, the Queen of Poland, King Jan Sobieski and others who kept up the spiritual contact with Poland and its eternal values, said Pablo Domeyko in his speech." more on

etc, etc ....
 *
 * ,
 *
 *
 *
 * (PWN encyclopedia)

And stop your reverts...--Witkacy 15:13, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

 * 1) Then please go to all these pages: Stanislav Shushkevich, Alexander Lukashenko, Vasil Bykau, Max Mirnyi, User:Czalex, User:Rydel, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc. and correct their nationality to Polish.
 * 2) Read my comments above. --rydel 22:39, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

 * 1. And you to: Roman Polko, Izabella Scorupco etc., etc. and correct their nationality to Belorusian...--Witkacy 23:35, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

Domeykos quotes:

Domeyko I.: Listy do Władysława Laskowicza [Letters to Władysław Laskowicz], Instytut Wydawniczy Pax, Warszawa 1976

 * He experienced the pain of longing for his native Poland particularly strongly in Chile, and it seemed that he would not last till the end of his six-year contract. The letters from Europe, dispatched by sea mail, had taken a mere... three months to arrive in America, at that time: "I have never felt so bad as I do now and it is only in God that I look for my consolation, strength and rescue. For indeed, when I was leaving Poland, I had so many people in this world who had loved me as their own child, and I too loved so many people, that I almost forgot about God. Yet, since that time all of the ones who loved me so much, have died... (p. 67)

 * In March 1846, in a letter from Coquimbo addressed to Władysław Laskowicz in Paris, he wrote the following: I see the whole world open before me; the only place which remains sealed off is Poland and I suddenly feel the atmosphere is so close around me that at times it is difficult for me to breathe (p. 69)

 * His fifteenth Easter in Chile [1847], Domeyko spent in the country’s capital Santiago: It is hard to spend one’s fifteenth Easter outside one’s native country. If throughout the whole year of one’s wandering life, one constantly feeds on longing as if it was one’s everyday bread, on the solemn days of grand holidays, this longing becomes doubled and I can think of nothing else but my country [...] I tell you that until my native land loomed closer to me than my old age, I did not care for it [...], today when I see my old age closer to me than my country, I feel much the worse for it (p.88-89)

 * In his letters addressed to his friends in Paris he asked mainly for news of Poland. He did not lose hope for better times to come: I can still feel the strength and readiness to hardships and to sufferings within me, yet I would be glad to live long enough to see the day when one could freely work for Poland, and not wander aimlessly through God knows what land [...] And if death finds me working on alien land, this will not be without benefit for Poland particularly if among some distant tribe, the furthest possible from us, they will remember the Polish man, will wish Poland well and be supportive towards it (p. 104-105)

 * I like Chile, but I long for Poland (p. 390)

--Witkacy 00:33, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Domeyko's place of death
Sorry, this won't give me rest: if Domeyko "returned to Europe" after May 22, 1884, then how did he die January 23, 1889, in Santiago de Chile?

The beautiful Domeyko quotes, above, should be placed in Wikiquotes. logologist 01:09, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

 * To trzeba zmienic, w 1884 przyjechal do Polski na 4 lata (pozwiedzal tez Europe), gdzie otrzymal miedzy innymi doctor honoris causa uniwersytetu jagiellonskiego, ale wrocil do Chile.--Witkacy 01:52, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Jeszcze jeden cytat (w czasie pobytu w Polsce):

When during his visit to the Krakow Academy, he was asked how it came about that he had not forgotten his native tongue, Domeyko replied: "how could I have forgotten if I have always thought in Polish, prayed in Polish and loved in Polish" (vol. III, p. 107/108). When proposing the toast at a reception, he stated: "I struck a hammer against the rocks of the Cordilleras, so that the echo would smother the nostalgia after Poland" (p. 116)."

--Witkacy 01:52, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Domeyko's family
I gather Domeyko married and had a family. If so, it would be well to include some information on this in the article. Also, I suggest placing in Wikiquote his toast regarding "the rocks of the Cordilleras." logologist 15:49, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

To all Belarusians, Lithuanians, Ukrainians and Poles
I've read the discussion with real interest. I will say in advance that I am Polish, though I wonder whether all of you would agree with that. My ancestors were French nobles and had to leave France due to the French Revolution. They bought an estate in Lithuania. Their son fought in the January Uprising and was imprisoned. My family had to sell their estate to buy him out. With the remaining money they bought a couple houses in Kovno. The son eventually married my great-grandmother, who was from East Prussia. They moved to Pinsk (Belarus today). However, they still had problems with the Russian tsar and eventually fled to Lvov. From there they were forced by the tsar to move to Khabarovsk. After Poland regained independence, the Committee for Polish Refugees offered to take some of their children to Poland. Only four of them were of a proper age, among them my grandfather.

They always considered themselves Polish, though they neither came from Poland nor had even ever lived there according to our present borders.

But my point is not to argue that everyone is Polish, only to ask all of you what we consider by our nationalities. Over two hundred years of living in one country (plus over two hundred years in the Union) and over one hundred years of living under common occupiers are not to be disregarded. I understand that if we claim everyone as being Polish, then other nations like Belarus will not have their heroes at all. But please let us think for a moment what our nationalities, cultures, histories really are. Can we say that we would be the same people today if there had not been a Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth? Our countries or country were never homogenous before. What we are today is a mixture of all of us. The real question is: will we agree on our common history at last, or are we now going to say that those times were a mistake and we have nothing to do with each other? Please think about it before we start to quarrel about songs, legends, food, clothes etc. I don't really think there is a problem who Domeyko was, only that we have a problem about who we are. Can't we just presume that we all come from one country in which all our ancestors lived and the history is common? I really think that the term, "citizen of PLC," should be agreeable to everyone. I'm not saying that a Belarusian should feel more Polish than a Pole feels Belarusian, but I'm certain that we all feel the bond with each other. We, all the nations in the Commonwealth, influenced each other and that is what may be called our culture now. Our fate is now separated, but the sources of it will never change. So maybe instead of looking for the differences in the past, we should rather admit our similarities nowadays when referring to our history. Maybe in the main article about the Commonwealth, the role of other nations should be underlined more, so that everyone feels that it concerns him more personally. I know that everyone is mentioned there, but maybe you can suggest more particulars to show the individuality of Belarus in the country which was homeland to all of us.

I'm not sure whether you like the idea, but sometimes I feel that we still treat history as the communists did. I read an announcement about Kosciuszko from the Belarusian Embassy in the USA. Not even one word about the Poles. I saw a Napoleonic Wars exhibition in Vilnius. On English signs all the information referred to Lithuania only, not even the word “Commonwealth” under maps, uniforms etc. What about the Polish Eagle on them? I also read an article here about Polonization. Maybe I misunderstand something, but it sounds as though all non-Poles were forced to speak Polish. Then what about the 60% of PLC citizens who did not speak Polish just before the Partitions? I really think that first of all you should decide how you feel about the Commonwealth. Either you were equal citizens of a great country with common interests, and then all the people like Mickiewicz, Kosciuszko, Domeyko and many others, wherever they were born, were your folks as well as ours, or you feel you were unjustly suppressed and then you can't claim your connection to these individuals, as your interests were obviously opposed.

Sylwia

P.S. I understand writing names in Cyrillic, but I don’t understand spelling them variously in the Latin alphabet. I personally hate it when people cannot spell my name properly.

P.P.S. One of my grandpa’s brothers who was brought to Poland together with him died in the Warsaw Uprising, while two of his brothers who had stayed in Khabarovsk watched the smoke over Warsaw as Russian Army soldiers on the opposite bank of the Wisła River. History! SylwiaS 06:14, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Amen. All these peoples once were part of one great commonwealth, and may be so again (some already are) as members of the European Union.  Therefore it would seem to behoove them all to be civil to their once and future compatriots.  logologist 09:31, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * applauds Sylwia*. Well said. I wage battles on various English-speaking historical forums to make ppl use the term PLC instead of Poland (most often) when reffering to PLC from 16th to 18th century. And the same problem is causing trouble here. When somebody refers to the 17th century person as Pole, this should always be an abbreviation of PLC, not Poland. Pole then was a more general term, encompassing ppl from GDL, Cossacks and many others, not meaning only 'inhabitant of Poland proper'. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 15:17, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * 100% true. I have nothing to add :) --Czalex 23:02, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

First of all, it was interesting to wrote what you wrote, and I agree with some points, but this post just highlights that you don’t fully understand what other ethnicities which were part of the union feel.

If a person is American of Italian ethnicity, does it mean they are no longer ethnically Italian? Even if they fully identify with America and say ethnicities is a thing of the past, does it change the fact that their origin, their ethnicity, is Italian? And if another Italian-American says about this guy “he is of Italian ethnicity”, does this mean this guy feels “oppressed” by America and has no right to identify himself with America?

I’m half Polish and half Belarusian. From the Polish side they were intellectuals, and from the Belarusian side they were people who became nobles during the Great Duchy of the Lithuania, they fought in the Kościuszko uprising against Russia and though they spoke Belarusian and were ethnically Belarusian, they considered themselves Poles and you can’t doubt their loyally. The fact that they were Polish by self identification and nationality, doesn’t change the fact that they were of Belarusian ethnicity, and if someone says that because I say that they were of Belarusian (at the time called Litvin) ethnicity then I don’t have the right identify with the union of Lithuania (which was mostly Belarusian then) and Poland… I find it a bit rude to be honest. Being a part of it doesn’t mean you have to give up on your origins.

For example, no one doubts that Kościuszko was a Polish hero and he fought for Poland and he identified himself as a Pole, the problem starts when some nationalists try to take monopoly on him. It’s like either you consider yourself a Pole and stay quite about the ethnic origin, either you are no longer a part of the union. Which is not really fair. The whole point is that the ethnicity, the origin of the person, doesn’t contrast the Polish nationality or the loyalty to Poland. When in Belarus or Lithuania they have exhibitions not mentioning Poland about such figures I also feel uncomfortable, but I understand why it happens, because in the rest of the world those characters are referred to as Polish but their ethnic origins are totally ignored, so Belarusians and Lithuanians don’t fell the need to mention Poland due to the fact everybody knows about it anyway. I saw a really good exhibition about Kosciuszko and Warsaw, and not a word was said about the Union and about the fact his family origin.

Also, the Union had a long history, and regarding to being a part of it or being oppressed by it it’s not so black and white. Someone might feel like they were a part of it, but at some points they feel like they were oppressed, again, like Italians in America. They are very patriotic, but they do feel like they were discriminated at a certain point. Also, oppression doesn’t have to be something a person is conscious about. For example! Kosciuszko’s family was of Belarusian ethnicity, but they were Polonized due to the fact the union then encouraged the polonization of all of it’s citizens. Were they oppressed or no? It’s not they really resisted being Polonized, and they didn’t feel humiliated by it, but when a Belarusian learns about it, he does feel uncomfortable because Belarusians in fact were the majority in the Great Duchy of Lithuania, their language used to be the official language, and they are suppose to be in an equal union in Poland, so how come the people are encouraged to forget their own language and to speak Polish? Is that’s what’s suppose to happen in an equal union? So they are still loyal to the union, but they feel that with that issue they were oppressed, even if they didn’t feel it at the time it happened.Danton's Jacobin (talk) 07:51, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Belarusian? Belarusyn?
As this page has become a focus on matters involving Belarus, a question for our colleagues of that nationality: Is a citizen of Belarus properly termed a Belarusian or a Belarusyn? And is the adjectival form of "Belarus" either of the above? logologist 09:43, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * In English it's definately Belarusian--Czalex 23:02, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * How is it in the original language? logologist 00:18, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

From a student
Hey I am an archaeology student specialising in Balts in the early medieval (Yatviegs and Prussians) from Warsaw and I'm sorry that I don't have a wiki account but this just botheres the hell out of me and I fell I should contribute because many people here from both sides of the fence have a too modern view of how the past looked! First of all it was much different and you could say much simpler. I posted this in another talk page but I feel it would be more important to post it here for all to see. please dont kill me :)

Of course Kosciuszko was of ruthenian/rusin (NOT russian) descent! His name suggests that! But he was a citizen of the commonwealth, he was szlachta which was a specific state of people who had their own mythology and traditions. The Commonwealth was a multinational country and many people who had non polish roots considered themselves SZLACHTA and therefore part of the Polish culture which was it's main component (others include Turkic (especially), Lithuanian, Latin and Ruthenian culture which formed the metling pot). Hence Kościuszko was a Pole in the SZLACHTA sense just like Radziwills (sorry Lithuanian friends for the Polish spelling), who polonised in the 16th century, Wisniowieccy, a very powerful ruthenian clan and maaaany others. They where SZLACHTA, gentry, nobility, aristocracy and they had a strong tie to the SZLACHTA culture which came out of Poland. City dwellers, jews and peasants did not feel this tie that's why after the fall of the commonwealth Lithuanian could be reconstructed by Tadeusz Wróblewski because the local peasants still spoke it (and quite interestingly it was an archaic form from the medieval. Wróblewski obviously himself was SZLACHTA and spoke Polish even though he lived in Lithuania.

Also let me point out the names of some prominent polish politicians in recent years : Miller, Hausner, Huebner, also check out the wiki-article on John Albert Habsburg who was a polish soldier during WW2. "Poland" was a melting pot of many cultures and many ethnicities that were tied by a common grand culture (Sarmatianism, "polish" baroque). In the cities most were Germans or Jews, peasants only felt local ties and only were the subjects of the king and the gentry was very diverse! Potocki, Koniecpolski were medieval polish families... Radziwills came out of Lithuania, Wisniowieccy, Glinscy, Ostrogscy, Sapieha were Ruthenians (actually most magnate families were ruthenian). I guess you could compare it to the situation in the US.

The important question is when did the modern polish nation form? In the XIXth century. The culture and feeling of a grand national tie started applying to the peasantry (80% of the populace)... Mostly thanks to literature... What was the link between a Poznan city shopkeeper under the prussian partition and a farmer in western ukraine? Mickiewicz, Sienkiewicz, the myths and pathos of national uprisings. Also the XIXth century is the time of revival of Lithuanian nation which has the same roots but grew different branches.

btw the great polish researcher Joachim Lelewel is a national hero in Belgium where he fled to after the 1831 uprising. The Belgians treat him as his own.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.233.191.226 (talk • contribs) 17:15, December 20, 2006

Today's edit:this is not Unesco claim but a claim by a Lithuanian site that Domeyko was Lithunian
Likely a regional branch of Unesco. It is in lithuanian and I can't possibly known what they claim. Citation with translation would be required. Additionally even that claim would be a claim among sources stating him Polish.--Molobo (talk) 20:36, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * original statment "Aš jau niekuomet nesugebėsiu pakeisti savo pilietybės, bet Dievas man suteikia vilties, kad nesvarbu kur - ar tai būtų Kordiljerai, ar Paneriai - mirsiu lietuvis" translation provided in article. So stop your reverts. Thank you. M.K. (talk) 20:41, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Source where the statement was issued ? And did he meant Lithuania in terms of nationality or cultural belonging-after all Mickiewicz also calls Lithuania his homeland and he was Polish. You realise that the term can have many meanings-cultural, geographic and national. Anyway-there are multiple sources of reliable nature that call him Polish.--Molobo (talk) 20:52, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Provided statment present his remarks, per Wp:V and WP:RS policies it is perfectly valid edit in contrast to the reverts and speculations; btw, wikipedians are prohibited to conduct OR per WP:NOR.M.K. (talk) 20:58, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Source of the statements, reliability of the source ? That Lithuania doesn't mean just state but cultural sphere and geographical one is obvious as seen in case of Żeligowski or Mickiewicz who viewed themselfs as Lithuanians yet Polish. --Molobo (talk) 21:02, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I dont care here about Želigovskis and Mickevičius, provided web page is under © UNESCO; article written by PH.D in history Reda Griškaitė, perfectly valid per WP:RS. M.K. (talk) 21:07, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Trying to claim that Domeyko belongs to only one country is a sad example of nationalism. Here's a good article, whose title sais it all: Ignacy Domeyko: Geologist, ethnographer and citizen of the world. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 21:16, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Fell free to add WP:RS sources rather to remove them and the information which they have. M.K. (talk) 21:20, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Here, why don't you add this quote: "he always regarded Poland as his motherland" from the official Polish governmental website? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 21:32, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Care to present person in question own words, m? M.K. (talk) 21:33, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

"I can still feel within me the strength and readiness for hardship and suffering, yet I would like to live long enough to see the day when I might freely work for Poland, and not wander aimlessly through God knows what land.[...] And if death finds me working on alien soil, this too will not be without profit for Poland, particularly if among some distant tribe, the farthest possible from our country, they will remember a Pole, will wish Poland well, and will be supportive toward her." — from Listy do Władysława Laskowicza (Letters to Władysław Laskowicz), Warsaw, Pax, 1976. 85.222.54.163 (talk) 13:29, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Have you ever read his memoirs? There clearly You can see that he understand Poland as united country of Korona(The Crown) (now we would say Poland) and Lithuania. And he never consider himself as Crowner. Only as Lithuanian or Pole, and Pole in contemporary meaning, not in todays. Egisz 22:47, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Rename
I suggest rename this article to the Spanish name Ignacio Domeyko. It is much more neutral than Polish one and in the other side Domeyko was Chilean citizen so we should use his official name. Hugo.arg (talk) 20:20, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I support your proposal fully. Cheers, M.K. (talk) 09:38, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * How popular is that variant when compared to others used in English literature? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 15:49, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't know about English literature but I tried various Google results (general, English, from UK, etc) and there are always much more results with Ignacio Domeyko than Ignacy Domeyko. Sure, some info from authoritative English literature would be an advantage to make a decision. Hugo.arg (talk) 10:37, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Low-grade edit war on quote
There's been a slow edit war, recently intensified, about the inclusion of a statement of Domeyko's sourced to UNESCO and to the former president of Lithuania, Valdas Adamkus. Both of these are strong sources. In this case it's inappropriate to use the edit summary of "Anon vandalism reverted" when removing the quote and its sources - please see WP:Vandalism. It's a content dispute. Could those who think the quote doesn't belong in the article pls state their reasons here. Novickas (talk) 23:18, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 one external links on Ignacy Domeyko. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080619052435/http://www.unesco.lt:80/domeika/biografija/ to http://www.unesco.lt/domeika/biografija/#2
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081218012246/http://www.president.lt:80/lt/news.full/9433 to http://www.president.lt/lt/news.full/9433
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.skc.edu.by/vydanni/damiejka-zmiest.htm

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

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 14:15, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Disputed nationality
Yes, yet again, but this time conclusively: 1. This is English-language Wikipedia. If Poles, Lithuanians, Belarusians or Chileans (or Russians!) want to claim him as having been exclusively of their nationality, they are welcome to do so. NOT here. 2. Belarusian claim is an anachronism. No Belarus before 20th century, only Lithuania (multi-ethnic, multi-lingual). We'll leave it at that. 3. Polish claim is insufficiently referenced. Definition of sufficient here would be reference to where he (himself) claims to be Polish. 4. Publications which claim Domeyko as Polish have NOT been removed, however they are politically anachronistic and also lazy. One way to improve this would be to source scientific instead of popular references. Just because 3 random mass-market books say Domeyko was Polish is not good enough. 5. Please discuss here any further changes to the text as per the nationality dispute. It is not acceptable one ethnicity warn other(s) in hypertext against changing nationality (!). If in doubt please read Wikipedia rules. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.26.202.156 (talk) 15:35, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

 * Your comment above constitutes original research.  Volunteer Marek   16:18, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

 * I don't personally see any dispute, even in other Wikipedias, databases or sources. Both Polish and Chilean identities are most frequently found or cited, which is factual. Merangs (talk) 02:46, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Yup, this is all one user’s original research.  Volunteer Marek   17:08, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Other Wikipedias, as you know per relevant policy, bear no relevance on any particular Wikipedia. 213.222.183.137 (talk) 21:38, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Ignacy Domeyko


text:
MELS Movement of Botswana

The MELS Movement of Botswana was an anti-revisionist Marxist-Leninist communist party in Botswana without parliamentary representation. Themba Joina, a practicing lawyer, was the president of the organization. The name MELS is derived from (Karl) Marx, (Friedrich) Engels, (Vladimir) Lenin and (Joseph) Stalin.

MELS emerged as a study group inspired by Mao Zedong and Pan-Africanism, founded at the Shashe Senior Secondary School in 1984. Its founding general secretary was Christopher Phatshwe. The basic political documents of the movement were drafted by Christopher Phatshswe and Thomson Proctor. Branches of the movement were formed at different educational institutions, such as the University of Botswana, Senior Secondary Schools and teacher training colleges. According to Joina, the group had contacts with the Black Consciousness Movement of Azania (BCM(A)) and the Pan-Africanist Congress of Azania (PAC) in neighbouring South Africa and MELS activists received political trainings from these groups. The MELS group constituting itself as a political party in 1994. Following Phatshwe's death, Mosalage Ditshoto became the new general secretary of the party. As of 2008, Mpho Mokano served as the youth secretary of the party.

The MELS Movement advocated for socialist policies, calling for support to unemployed and the setting up of Student Representative Councils across the country. MELS Movement decries the Botswana Democratic Party rule as 'neo-colonial'. Regarding regional issues, MELS Movement opposed the positions of Ian Khama's government towards the contemporary political situation in Zimbabwe (charging the Botswana government with having sided with the Movement for Democratic Change in Zimbabwean politics). At the 2011 annual delegates conference of the party in Molepolole, Joina condemned the NATO attack on Libya and called on the African Union to intervene.

At the time of the 1994 parliamentary election, MELS joined the United Democratic Front, a coalition of parties opposed to both the BDP and the BNF. No MELS nor any other UDF candidate was able to get elected. The party contested the 1999 general election, but merely received twenty-two votes (0.01% of the national vote). Prior to the election, Joina stated that the party only possessed one campaign vehicle and thus party activists had to move by foot to reach voters. Following the election the MELS Movement candidate in the Gaborone West constituency, Ndiye Tlhatlogang, charged the Independent Electoral Commission with irregularities.

At the 2009 general election, the party presented candidates in four parliamentary constituencies and two in local constituencies. None were elected. In total the party got 292 votes (0.05% of the national vote). The party contested the 2010 by-election in the Tonota North parliamentary constituency, fielding Mbayani Tshekedi Phalalo as its candidate.

The party merged into the centre-left Botswana Congress Party in 2013.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: MELS Movement of Botswana


text: User talk:24.123.82.90

title: User talk:24.123.82.90


text:
Talk:Sk8er Boi

Merge Request
This article or section should be merged with Avril Lavigne. A specific song is a topic too limited for its own entry. DDerby
 * No it isn't. There's a ton you can write about these popular singles. Everyking 21:14, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Perhaps, but that would be a number of still-small articles that could be put on album pages or on the singer's main page with much more convenience. The article is only relevant as it relates to the singer or her album, and is appropriate on such a page. DDerby 04:52, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I heavily disagree — for one, this page was just created yesterday (o_o), and two, it is being developed with time. I mean, just look at some of the other music artists pages we have done: Gwen Stefani's "Cool", Kelly Clarkson's "Behind These Hazel Eyes" and "Because of You", several of Mariah Carey's songs, along with Britney Spears' and Christina Aguilera's songs.
 * This page is not going to be merged with Avril's section. Plus, her page already requires much work. Winnermario 23:37, September 11, 2005 (UTC)

Boy vs. Boi
Does the Wikimedia foundation have enough money to form a lynch mob to go after people who spell boy "boi?" If so, I'd be interested in talking to someone about getting a grant. --The Amazing Superking 18:45, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Rotzloffel. By the way, 'boi' is your concern over 'sk8er'? When this came out I could not understand the lyrics as I then had not yet controlled a sensory disorder and couldn't understand words in noisy environments, exempli gratia: lyrics. I looked it up on YouTube to realize I can understand the lyrics right now, to after fifteen seconds realize that not only the music is extremely cheesy, the clip I had never witnessed also makes me want to hurt a random person considerably, but the lyrics are the mark of either thorough intellectual challenges or simply extreme pressure from record companies. This is really what caters to thirteen year old youth yes. I was twelve then I think, my whole class loved it and couldn't believe I did not. How she moves in that clip is too stupid to be funny. The idea that rock is 'different' is also funny. If you can survive and enjoy The Threnody to the Victims of Hiroshima I am more impressed. Niarch (talk) 02:52, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Not liking a song isn't important enough to complain about on a discussion page. 21:03, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Repeating lyrics verbatim in critique
Sounds lame and lazy.

A lot more too could be discussed on the vexed issues of unrequited love, or Lavigne's Kiplingesque take on how men develop character, or her assumption that punks will have better outcomes in life than ballet dancers.

its just about how the little wannabe rockers think they're better than people who do ballet, or work hard, or even dress "preppy", this song just says that anyone who isnt a "sk8erpunx" isnt gonna be succesful, and one day they'll turn on the tv and see the wannabe rockers are "rawking it up on on mtv" (singing some crap song they sort helped to write and occaisionally strumming a guitar), you know the channel that says rock is "in" right now! oh, and when the word "boy" is spelt as "boi" it actully means a lesbian who is very tomboyish, not a totally "hawt" boy in baggy clothes who can skate!

 * Whatever. As long as slang exists on wikipedia, I'm cool wit' it.

i whanted to know when i looked this song in wikipedia the historu of the song name and deates of the people involved. i many readrs wiil be intersted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.172.189.195 (talk) 11:24, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Lyrics
Heya p-pols! I was da 1 who added da lyrics of da song 2 da "Sk8er Boi" page! Hope u lyk it!

Crazeeflootgirl 22:50, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

 * We do not, now disintegrate on my very command at once. Niarch (talk) 05:30, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Huh, so there are funny people on Wikipedia. --BiT (talk) 19:12, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

 * Lyrics seem like a good idea to me... Dragon798 (talk) 21:39, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Sk8er Boi: The Movie
i dunno if anyone else heard about this or if anything happened but i did once hear the some one was to turn the song into a movie. i never heard a release date or anything but if anone knows if they changed there moind or some thing it would be worth while

 * Movie news added, see article. Wl219 08:53, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

 * I do remember hearing about the song being made into a movie shortly after its release, but since, I have heard or read nothing more about it; whether it was in development or whatever. I always wondered what happened to it. When I first heard about it, I wanted to go see it and told friends about it. Jeanlovecomputers (talk) 06:05, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Sk8er Boi -2-.jpg
Image:Sk8er Boi -2-.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 11:02, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

from:no one

Mentionings in Tv episodes
These I have found so far:

his dad having a tape of him singing "Sk8er Boi. http://www.tv.com/malcolm-in-the-middle/tiki-lounge/episode/379403/trivia.html
 * In the "Malcolm in the Middle" episode "Tiki Lounge" on of the members of the Booster Club quotes

 * In an episode of "Sabrina, the Teenage Witch", Avril Lavigne can be seen performing "Sk8er Boi" with her band.  http://www.tv.com/sabrina-the-teenage-witch/bada-ping!/episode/203954/summary.html

Link down of reference for Hong Kong single hits chart
Either these does not work, therefore, the single chart top position can't be proved. http://www.997metroshowbiz.com/chart/international/021228.html http://www.997metroshowbiz.com/ Profession (talk) 10:50, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Should the meaning of sk8er boi be mentioned?
A thought just struck me that it might be a good move to explain what "sk8er boi" means, and why. I know that to me and probably most people it's fairly obvious but there are of course always those who speak bad English or those not up with the current slang that wouldn't get it. I'm not talking about any drastic changed, maybe just adding something like "[...] where "Sk8er boi" is L33t sp33k (i don't know whether this qualifies as l33t or not) for "skater boy", where the 8 is used to represent at due to its similar phonetic pronunciations." I'm not sure myself whether this is a good idea or not, so I decided not to be bold and rather ask about it here. I'm not likely to visit this discussion again, so I hope you can reach a nice conclusion. :) --BiT (talk) 12:53, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

 * wouldn't hurt having it in the article in my opinion --Darth NormaN (talk) 18:34, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

8 represents ate, how it's used here.--Launchballer (talk) 06:42, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Sk8er Boi
Would it be accepetable to dowload the file with this name?--Launchballer (talk) 06:40, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * which file do you mean? Darth NormaN (talk) 12:20, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Avril Lavinge Genres
Please no one change the genres or anthing else I update. But I wanted to discuss with you that I will be putting music samples and the music videos and I will be putting genres and getting them reliable resources for everything I article I update. I will be going to (AllMusic) and (Billboards) for the music genres and making the music samples with (Audacity) and making each one thirty seconds total. I think I will just be editing the templates and not the whole article. Im not really that good at updating sentences. But please if I ever do anthing wrong that beyond wiki purposes feel free to put it on my talk page or anthying I update just correct the mistakes. Instead of deleting them. I will be putting them on different pages of Avril Lavinges albums/songs to let everybody know that I will be updating Thank You Sprite7868 --Sprite7868 (talk) 11:21, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * please, see WP:SAMPLE for specific samples lenght, not all songs are allowed to have a thirty seconds of lenght --♫Smanu! 19:12, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Avril is not punk! Green Day is punk, Offspring is punk, but Avril isn't! She's to poppy to be punk! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Revilal90 (talk • contribs) 13:14, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

This is outrageous. Avril Lavigne clearly already said that her genre is not punk rock in 2002. Girlfriend and her third album may be pop punk, but Sk8er Boi is not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cleanwater97 (talk • contribs) 12:27, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

How
This song is how I found Avril in the first place :D

-A Skater —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.48.212.108 (talk) 21:19, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Article title
Per MOS:TM:
 * Avoid using special characters that are not pronounced, are included purely for decoration, or simply substitute for English words (e.g., ♥ used for "love"). (note that the film Se7en is given as an example)
 * Follow standard English text formatting and capitalization rules even if the trademark owner considers nonstandard formatting "official"

Hopefully the pagemove vandalism can stop now. – Chase  ( talk ) 16:31, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * 1. The page moving is not vandalism. Disruptive - yes, vandalism - no. 2. See WP:COMMONNAME and WP:Common Sense. Nouse4aname (talk) 13:14, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Note that in the case of Sk8er Boi, the "8" is actually pronounced. In the case of Se7en, the stylised "7" is purely decorative - we don't pronounce it "se-seven-en", do we? Perhaps we should correct the spelling of "Boi" also? Nouse4aname (talk) 13:29, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

 * Regardless, the "8" stands in for actual letters which is the kind of styling we do not endorse. You are going against what MoS clearly states to do in cases such as this, which is considered vandalism. – Chase  ( talk ) 19:09, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

 * I see you haven't been around too long. Please take a read of WP:Vandalism so that you understand exactly what is and what is not considered vandalism before accusing others of vandalism when it is nothing of the sort. Also, try reading WP:MOSTM more carefully. Nouse4aname (talk) 09:48, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

 * Don't treat me like I'm stupid because I'm new here, because I'm not. I read MOS:TM very carefully, and it states that numbers/symbols standing in for words ("8" standing in for "at") is styling we don't permit in article titles here. Perhaps you are the one who should be reading more carefully, instead of ignoring this policy and trying to make others look incompetent. – Chase  ( talk ) 22:37, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
 * You are right on one point, and wrong on another. It should be at Skater Boy, and I don't see that Nouse4aname has a leg to stand on on that issue. As for being vandalism, no, it isn't. It's just people that think they are above guidelines, not people with an actual intent to damage the encyclopedia.—Kww(talk) 23:12, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually I don't believe I am "above the guidelines" and I'll thank you not to make such accusations again. The fact is, MOSTM does not explicitly deal with such an example, whereas WP:COMMONNAME does - the most recognisable name is Sk8er Boi, not Skater Boy. There seem to be numerous other articles that need changing in light of this, including 4ever (album), 4ever (video), 3 Fools 4 April, 2moro (album), 2U (album), Christmas Is 4 Ever, 4Ever Blue, 2Nite, 2wenty 2wo, 4 Play, 2 Fast 2 Furious (soundtrack), 2 Fast 2 Furious, 4 Real (Crystal Kay album), 2Gether (album), 2Gether: Again, 2ge+her, 4Him (album), 4Him, 2 Hell with Common Sense, 5150: Home 4 tha Sick, 4 Runner (album), 4 Runner, 13eaver (album), 4 Tha Hard Way, 2 Future 4 U, 5ive (album), 2 Much Drama (although the moving of some of these pages I would agree with). Now, this is about far more that WP:OTHERSTUFF. This is about correct interpretation of MOSTM and COMMONNAME. MOSTM does not encourage us to change the actual name of a song/band/album/company/film etc. It deals specifically with inconsequential non-standard formatting, such as random capitalisation or replacing the letter "B" with a "3" or an "S" with a "5". These numbers in place of letters are not pronounced. They are purely decorative and thus unnecessary. This is not the case for Sk8er Boi. The 8 is technically pronounced, whereas the purposefully incorrect spelling of "Boy" as "Boi" should not be corrected, just as we do not correct spelling mistakes in direct quotes. MOSTM does not state never use formatting such as Sk8er, but to "Avoid using special characters that are not pronounced, are included purely for decoration, or simply substitute for English words". Additionally WP:Common Sense and WP:COMMONNAME override MOSTM, although COMMONNAME applies only to spelling/naming issues and not capitalisation issues as it deals specifically with search terms - random capitalisation does not generally affect searching in wikipedia. Nouse4aname (talk) 10:02, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Personally, and considering the various examples I have given above and the possible wide ranging implications of this page move, perhaps this discussion should be continued at MOSTM with the aim of introducing a specific example dealing with letters/number substitutions to the guideline... Nouse4aname (talk) 10:14, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
 * My apologies. Looking over the history, it's obvious that there is a good-faith argument that MOS:TM doesn't apply in this case. I don't see it, myself, and would have replaces all those "4"s with "for"s. Perhaps a discussion at MOS:TM is in order. I agree with you on "Boi", BTW. That was a mistake in my original comment. Looking over your examples, I think "5ive" and "13eaver" are clear-cut cases of decorative writing. A case can be made either way for the rest.—Kww(talk) 13:45, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I completely agree that MOSTM does apply in this case. What I query is the interpretation of MOSTM in this instance, and whether MOSTM should perhaps be made more clear in dealing with such issues. Nouse4aname (talk) 09:34, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I have started a thread regarding this issue at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(trademarks). Please continue relevant discussion there. Nouse4aname (talk) 09:47, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Dead external links to Allmusic website – January 2011
Since Allmusic have changed the syntax of their URLs, 1 link(s) used in the article do not work anymore and can't be migrated automatically. Please use the search option on http://www.allmusic.com to find the new location of the linked Allmusic article(s) and fix the link(s) accordingly, prefereably by using the Allmusic template. If a new location cannot be found, the link(s) should be removed. This applies to the following external links: --CactusBot (talk) 10:46, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=Ayg09ke9tsq7z
 * ✅  ~ [ Scott M. Howard  ] ~ [  Talk  ]:[  Contribs  ] ~  04:48, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

pronounciation
i think as with any word on wiktionary and many other words on wiki a pronounciation should be included. I am still confused if she says skinner (like the simpsons principal) or skater (like roller skater). Also WHAT DOES THIS MADE UP WORD MEAN? Please include it in the article (i get the song but not its title even ater reading the lyrics) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.230.3.250 (talk) 22:15, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Sk8er equates to "Skater", as "Boi" equates to "Boy". A "skater boy" is a boy who skates. Once I figure out how to make a pronunciation I'd add it.  I can see how it might be somewhat confusing to those not familiar with "1337 speak" / LOLtalk.  ~ [  Scott M. Howard  ] ~ [  Talk  ]:[  Contribs  ] ~  23:02, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Sk8er Boi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1470503/20030312/lavigne_avril.jhtml
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.btvision.bt.com/music/decade-2/

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 21:34, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Sk8er Boi. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090312053148/http://www.mtv.com/bands/l/lavigne_avril/news_feature_071202/index.jhtml to http://www.mtv.com/bands/l/lavigne_avril/news_feature_071202/index.jhtml

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:15, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sk8er Boi


text:
Template talk:Commonwealth realms

flag
Should the flag displayed really be the English royal Ensign? All of the other Commonwealth Realms have their own royal ensigns. I know it's a bit difficult to work out *what* flag to put there, but still. . . Slac speak up!  21:05, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * It is either that or the Queen's personal flag (see [[Image:Personal Flag of QEII.gif|100px|thumb]]? Astrotrain 21:48, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC)

 * Personally, I think the Queen's personal flag would be better. Slac speak up!  23:27, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * The Commonwealth Realms don't really have a flag. The closest you could get would be the Union Flag since it was the flag of the British Empire, and I know it has some sort of status in Australia. Southafricanguy (talk) 21:55, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

appear

 * If this template is not going to appear on the articles for the Commonwealth Realms, I feel there is no point in having it. I'm inclined to nominate it on TfD, so that a consensus can develop over whether or not it should be kept.  If it is to be kept, it should plainly appear in the articles.  But there's no point in adding it against the wishes of the editors of the articles in question. Slac  speak up!  22:57, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * please see my comments on user talk:Cyberjunkie regarding this issue. clarkk 02:11, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Relevancy/Appropriate placement
The placement of this template in country articles has caused considerable disquiet, especially with regards to Australia and Canada. Testament to this fact is the breakdown of a never-begun discussion, and the continuing "edit wars" betwixt users Astrotrain and SimonP. I unwittingly became embroiled in an issue I didn't imagine would be so large, and that I was oblivious to, until Clarkk caught me up. To make my views clear, I dislike the proliferation of templates on country articles for reasons of aesthetics and practitibility. The "Commonwealth Realms" template, I think, could be a useful template if it were placed in an article of more direct relevance. Such placement could be in either "Queen of..."/"*Country* monarchy" or "Government of...". So the question I would like to propose, is not whether the template should be deleted but what it should link to. Thoughts?--Cyberjunkie 06:04, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * Also, where should this discussion be carried out? At present, it is spread over numerous user and country article pages, which is hardly condusive to discussion. I seen some suggestions of continuing talk to WikiProject Countries, but the only discussion there really is about "Commonwealth of Nations". Please notify me if a single location is 'out there'.--Cyberjunkie 06:08, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I noticed what they do in United States is put templates in the body of the article, under the main headings. Does anyone that think this would be a good solution to the problem of "template creep" at the bottom page? Slac speak up!  00:08, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * Not really, because it still enlarges the size of the article overall. And the United States article has only done this once, and contains only three templates, one of which (Related Topics) is standard. Besides, in placing the politics template under the politics section of the article, the editors at United States are proving the point that templates should be placed where relevant - and that is precisely what needs to be sorted out with this template.--Cyberjunkie 03:33, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

~A Commonwealth Realm by definition is a country so the template belongs on pages associated with the country, not merely its head of state. If a template is relevant to a country it belongs to a country. Fear ÉIREANN \(caint) 20:48, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Agree Astrotrain 21:02, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * The common practice is to put such templates on specific sub-articles. Countries are members of the WTO, but WTO belongs on the "economy of..." pages. Similarly NATO goes on the "military of..." pages. The Commonwealth realms should thus reasonably go on the "monarchy of..." pages. - SimonP 21:54, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

Don't act the fool
Your vandalism of templates is getting tedious and will have to be taken further. Don't act the fool, Simon. You know very well that the WTO is an organisation. NATO is an organisation. However Commonwealth Realms are countries, not monarchies. So they go on the page about the country. But then you already know that, which is why you tried to sneak in changes into the template to redirect the links to countries to pages about monarchies. And why you keep trying to add in non-country topics like the Balfour Declaration and other issues just to remake the template in a way that will allow you to justify deleting it from pages. It is as blatently dishonest and mischievous as when you tried to add in dodgy doctoring to category:Westminster System, etc. Your behaviour at this stage will be raised with others. It is simply part of your own man campaign to bully everyone into doing what you want on templates. Fear ÉIREANN \(caint) 22:55, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Please check your facts. If you look at who originally introduced the new version you will note that it was not I. WTO members are countries just as much as Commonwealth Realms are, so I'm not sure who is "playing the fool" here. - SimonP 23:15, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

The WTO is an organisation. It has countries in it. A commonwealth realm is a country and nothing else. There is no organisation called Commonwealth Realm. Stop being ridiculous. Fear ÉIREANN \(caint) 23:22, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
 * The Commonwealth Realms are obviously a group of countries. Why else would this template exist if there were not a group of nations known as Commonwealth Realms? It is clearly not an international organization, but it is still a group of countries. If a commonwealth realm is a country and nothing else and this grouping is irrelevant then please list this template on TFD. - SimonP 23:34, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

Commonwealth realms, as you well know, as 16 countries who share a constitutional monarch, though in each the monarch reigns as the native head of state. So it makes logical sense to link each country through the template to others who share a communal monarch, as they all shared at interlinked constitutional evolution. But that doesn't interest you. All you is to delete templates from articles and you make up all sorts of ridiculous reasons to justify your war on templates. Fear ÉIREANN \(caint) 23:41, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Agree Astrotrain 12:48, July 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * So why are the constitutional links of the Commonwealth realms more important than the historical links of the Commonwealth itself or the Francophonie, the economic ties of the WTO or OECD, the military links of NATO, or the political ties of the G8 or UN. That it is not an international organization per se (rather an international institution) does not mean it is automatically more relevant than an organization. I also find it odd that you continue to view my anti-template drive as some fringe majority when my opinion has consistently been supported by others as is backed by several policy pages, while your own "abolish the category system in favour of templates" view is held by no one other then yourself. - SimonP 23:50, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

 * Yet more gross representation. (But then we are all used to that in your campaign.) The constitutional structure of a state is a primary issue, as anyone with a modicum of understanding of history or politics knows. And no, I don't want to abolish categories. I just had to stop you making a mockery of them as in Category:Westminster System where you tried to make up your own Simon says . .  versions that existed nowhere on the planet. Fear ÉIREANN [[Image:Flag of leinster.png|30px]]\(caint) 00:30, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
 * When you stated that "I think we should bin the ludicrous category system altogether" on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries you were referring to Category:Westminster System? I am a historian by training and I would personally feel that a state's economy is vastly important than its constitutional structure, but that is my POV just as your von Ranke view is yours. I personally don't feel that either of our POVs need to be added to every country article. - SimonP 00:46, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

There is a long list of templates representing a country's connections to other countries that could be added to a country's page presents a serious problem: if all are added, the page becomes unwieldy and violates the guidleine on length of articles. If only some are added, then we end up with a dispute over which ones are most important. It is going to be inherently POV to argue whether sharing a figurehead monarch is more important than being part of an economic association or a military alliance. To avoid this, I think it is best to include the template on branch pages that relate to the nature of the country's connection with other countries. In other words, include the Commonwealth Realm template on the Monarchy in Canada page, include the G8 template on the Politics of Canada page, etc. Ground Zero 12:44, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Not so. Firstly it is ludicrous to link an articles on countries via a template not on countries. Secondly, constitutional functions are by definition the most important link. By definition before one defines how an entity is run, one must the structures by how something is run. This template is as such more important than other templates because it is constitutional, not institutional in nature. Fear ÉIREANN [[Image:Ireland coa.png|20px]]\(caint) 17:21, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

 * "Firstly it is ludicrous to link an articles on countries via a template not on countries." (1) I don't know what this means -- could you please explain this? (2) Please leave out words like "ludicrous", they are unnecessary. Let's try to have a civil discussion here.
 * On your second point, I understand your point of view that the constitutional functions are the most important things to a country, but disagree with it. In my opinion, the constitutional monarchy in Canada has almost no influence on how decisions are made. A country's economic and military relationships are far more important to what goes on in the country on a day-too-day basis. But that is just my opinion. I am arguing that neither of our views on this should be reflected, but that we avoid getting into an argument over which templates are more important. A new tempalte has been created for the United Kingdom article to address this same issue: it puts the links to the templates relating to international relationships all together on one template. So anyone wanting information on Commonwealth Realms or on the G8 or on NATO can find it easily on the one template. Please take a look. I think that this is an excellent compromise that can bring this debate to an end. Ground Zero 17:31, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * What Jtdirl is describing is the POV of those who follow the institutional/structural approach. This view, often considered to have been first developed by Aristotle, is a perfectly valid one held by many political scientists and also some historians. However, it is far from the only view, or even a majority view. Seeing constitutions as the "the most important link" is far from a universal opinion. - SimonP 17:40, July 18, 2005 (UTC)

Commonwealth Template
Seeing as how Wikipedia basically becomes more advanced every month and we can now "hide" or "show" template contents (especially for really large templates), why not create a Commonwealth template with all the countries of the Commonwealth in it (not just the Commonwealth Realms or Commonwealth Republics)? Also was there ever such a template to begin with? 208.138.38.88 04:58, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Rhodesia
I removed Rhodesia. It was never a commonwealth realm. Gerard von Hebel (talk) 12:14, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

"monarchies" or "kingdoms" ?
Technically since the United Kingdom's monarchies were merged, wouldn't it be one monarchy represented in various separate kingdoms? As opposed to multiple monarchies? CaribDigita (talk) 06:33, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

title: Template talk:Commonwealth realms