Talk:Seven Wonders of Ukraine

Possible dyk wording

Great work done on this article, to which I wish I had contributed more. As for the dyk suggestion, the most obvious - perhaps - variant is to go with something like this:

• ...that "Y" is one of the Seven Wonders of Ukraine?

or

• ...that "Y" and "Z" are recognized as part of the Seven Wonders of Ukraine?

others...--Riurik^(discuss) 03:13, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Version nominated:

• ...that Khotyn Fortress and Kiev Pechersk Lavra are part of the Seven Wonders of Ukraine?--Riurik^(discuss) 01:59, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

looks good. Thanks! --Boguslav 04:49, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Great article! Thanks, Boguslav. As for what to mention, we should optimize depending on whether we want to put practical or diversity issues as our top priority. From the practical POV, we want to attract editors to read and copyedit the more developed articles. They would also have more wikilinks that would carry more people to other UA-related articles. The downside of this approach is that most developed UA-related wp-articles tend to be Kiev-related for understandable demographic reasons. So, if we want to shoot for diversity, we need to go another way around. As a compromise, one Kiev place and one diversity place is a good idea. Of Kievan places, Lavra is currently a better article than St. Sofia. So, let's stay with it. As we do not have yet a Khotyn Fortress article, why not use Khortytsya instead? --Irpen 05:42, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I would have had no objections, but given the time constraints we did not make the substitution. My reasoning was partially based on the geographic distribution, quality and diversity. So for the Khotyn Fortress, the Khotyn entry was used b/c it had a picture of the fortress even though it had no entry yet. I also thought that as far as ease of pronounciation goes Khotyn Fortress would be more appealing to an average Enlish reader than Khortytsya, but that's a subjective call.--Riurik^(discuss) 02:12, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

get the order right!!

was this article perchance posted by someone from uman, with friends in zaporizhzhya?? plus, do you really think english speakers will never be able to click on the hyperlink and read the official ukrainian site, in which the correct order clearly is:

1) Kamyanets-Podilsky (reserve) 2) Kyiv Pechersk Lavra (ie the Caves Monastery) 3) Sofiyvka 4) St Sophia's Cathedral, Kyiv 5) Khersones Tavriysky 6) Khortytsya 7) Khotyn Fortess

shame on you if you're trying to distort the facts, and shame on you for being so silly that you include a link that proves your own inaccuracy. (hey, not all english speakers are monolingual.) hoist by your own petard there :-) if you've just got it all muddled, i still think you should fix it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.129.147.21 (talk) 19:19, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I see that you are not familiar with wikipedia's norms where one of the basic tenets is to assume good faith. That said, you're attention to detail is commendable. Yet, the order listed on the English wikipedia is actually correct. The order on the homepage of the official website is given alphabetically (in Ukrainian), whereas wikipedia lists the seven wonders in the descending order of points earned.--Riurik^(discuss) 18:37, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

order...

okay, ruirik,

sorry about that. should have explored ukrainian website more obviously. i stand corrected.

good faith...?. oh, there are so many misnomers on wikipedia, i'm afraid i still approach it with complete and utter scepticism! absolutely nothing personal and sorry if you took it that way, didn't mean it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.142.183.68 (talk) 11:38, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

lol, not at all; taking things personally while on wikipedia, one won't last long. And ditto for the misnomer of "good faith" if there ever was one. Best wishes on your work.--Riurik^(discuss) 17:46, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Sections order

Ladies and gentlemen, the current sec order reflects ambiguity of the article's scope. If this is about List of the wonders (which is only logical for an unprepared reader; readers, remember?) than the listing goes first. The present order is more suited for a standalone article on the nomination programme itself. Which I believe should be the blanket one for Natural Wonders as well. I'd go for a list-dominated page.

Oh, and was there any Engineering Wonders subprogramme? 02:03, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Merge (and notability concern)

No evidence stages II and III of this initiative (Seven Natural Wonders of Ukraine and Seven Wondrous Castles and Palaces of Ukraine) are notable, almost all references point to a single website (7chudes.in.ua). At best they could be merged to Seven Wonders of Ukraine, which may be notable (hard to judge given all coverage is in Ukrainian). Either way, we don't need an article for stages of this initiative, all can be listed on a single page (this one). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:49, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

  Y Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 12:56, 28 October 2022 (UTC)