Talk:Mstislav Mstislavich

Learn more about this page

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Middle Ages Low‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Russia: History / Military High‑importance

	Russia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the history of Russia task force.
	This article is supported by the Russian, Soviet, and CIS military history task force.

Ukraine Low‑importance

	Ukraine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ukraine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ukraine on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.UkraineWikipedia:WikiProject UkraineTemplate:WikiProject UkraineUkraine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

One of the most popular? edit

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Where on earth was the statement that Mstislav Mstislavich was "one of the most popular and active princes of Kievan Rus'" sourced from? Most popular with whom? His contemporaries (the ruling elite; members of the court; peasants; his parents and best friends... or was his popularity attributed by later historians?)? Who, then, were the other most popular princes and how was their 'popularity' determined? According to whom? At least one very, very reliable and verifiable source which clarifies how this conclusion was drawn is needed to back up such a sweeping, subjective statement.

This entire article smacks, not only of non-neutral POV writing, but lacking in any serious sourcing other than generalised references to a couple of texts.

A review of "The Crisis of Medieval Russia 1200 to 1304" reads:

"Written by long time Professor of Russian language and literature John Fennell the lack of historical awareness or the confidence to engage critically with the sources and scholarship shows in this limited political run through that focuses on northern Russia.

The discussion of the career of Danilo of Galich is extremely poor compared with that of Aleksandr Nevsky despite the published and translated latin sources for the former. There is no mention of the Papal contacts with the Russian Princes although these are also published and available in translation. There is no discussion as to why the Princes spent so much time fighting over Kiev and no discussion of the pre-Mongol steppe despite a long tradition of on going contacts and interactions. There is also no use of archeological evidence or discussion of trade and commerce despite surviving treaties.

Fennell's views on 'western aggression' and the tangled scriptorial tradition of the surviving written Russian sources are also impeccably orthodox when really those concepts still need a good vigorous shake."

As for Michael C. Paul, he's a virtual unknown and only obtained his PhD recently and has only published a handful of papers appended to minor journals or self-published. Surely there must be more reliable sources outside of his essay? --Iryna Harpy (talk) 04:50, 29 September 2013 (UTC)Reply

Add topic