Talk:List of Russian aviators

Yes OK

Good idea but I think you should limit the scope of the list somewhat as there have been MANY thousands of pilots in the soviet Union and Russia. The term Aviator also includes Aircrew which would swell the numbers by a considerable factor. Anybody else any thoughts, maybe develop some notability guidelines for this list?Petebutt (talk) 17:31, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't think that there are even one thousand articles on Russian or Soviet pilots on en-wiki. And the list is intended to cover not all Russian aviators, but only those that were particularly famous - those who set some records or were military heroes. If you want to limit the scope of the list with some such criteria, just write them in the lede of the list. However, the list is not big right now, and not much need doing it. GreyHood ^Talk 17:39, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

OK, it will probably be self-regulating. Let us write a policy down that only persons with articles already written be enterred in the list. This will, in effect, apply notability guidelines.

So, criteria could be:-

1. Must be aircrew.

2. Any of the following

Senior military rank in a Russian or Soviet Air Arm.

Senior position in the aviation industry.

Achievements recognised by a National Award.

Recognised Military achievements.

Petebutt (talk) 16:47, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes, this seems good, and seems that all aviators already on the list pass one or several of those criteria. But still I'd add an achievement of significant non-military world records as another criterion (altitude and longitude of flights, invention of new aerobatic maneuevers etc.) and winning of international competitions (like World Air Games) as yet another criterion. GreyHood ^Talk 17:19, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

THIS PAGE IS ABSOLUTE NONSENSE

If you want to make a page 'famous soviet pilots,' that's one thing. but to put, say, Kozhedub on page of famous RUSSIAN pilots is just ridiculous bullshit. he was NEVER russian and for him to somehow be credited as a 'Russian' pilot because some parts of the soviet union became indepentent russia later is an error of such giant proportions, it's rather disgusting.

I propose deleting this whole page, as the conflation of 'Russian' and 'Soviet' pilots is an intractable problem. You can have lists of soviet pilots and lists of russian pilots. there can be some overlap, of course, but in no universe would they possibly be the same list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.63.113.121 (talk) 13:52, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Kozhedub spoke Russian, spent most of his life on the Russian territory and died in the Russian capital, Moscow. Besides that, Kozhedub was a citizen of the USSR, of which Russia is the legal successor. GreyHood ^Talk 14:26, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Bullshit. Kozhedub spoke Ukrainian, because he was the Ukrainian and Ukrainian was his native language. I speak 8 languages and it does not mean I am a citizen of 13-15 countries. He was born in Ukrainian People's Republic before installation of USSR (1925), and Ukraine was simply occupied by Russia, had own government in exile and fought for independence. That means he was neither Russian. So, your explanation is lame and absolutely wrong. It is the same to say the Canadians are British. Please, stop the propaganda of Russism - you insults the entire Ukrainian nation by all that nonsense! --91.193.164.246 (talk) 01:52, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Greyhound: you are simply wrong. There is no concept of "legal" HISTORICAL succession to the USSR (the concept of succession existed only to facilitate, for example, transfer or embassies.. this doesnt mean that all of a suddent all non-russian soviet history becomes 'russian!'. You made this up out of nothing. The USSR died and several independent nations sprung up in its place, all of which can claim legacy from the USSR's accomplishments and failures. In the specific case of Kozhedub: that he spoke Russian no more makes him Russian than speaking English makes Lady Ga Ga English and you know it. Kozhedub was born of Ukrainian parents and has Ukrainian ethnicity. His citizenship was USSR, not Russia. He never flew an aircraft for Russia. He is not a "Russian Pilot." Your claim that he died in Moscow is irrelevant. Many people die in a lot of places. Or, do you propose that de Seversky be removed from the list because he left Russia in disgust? If you want to make a list SOVIET pilots, then Kozhedub belongs. Otherwise, your blatant attempt to coopt the accomplishments of non-Russians into 'Russian' glories is transparently pathetic.

68.63.113.121 (talk) 19:31, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

There is a de jure and de facto succession of Russia to the USSR, and it is much wider than transfer of embassies. In Russia Kozhedub is considered Russian pilot and he rightfully belongs to Russian history, since he served in the Red and the Soviet Army, of which Russian Army is the main successor. Kozhedub spent most of his life on the modern Russian territory, and if he would have died just several months later than August 1991 (the actual date of his death), he would die while being legally a citizen of the Russian Federation. So whatever his ethnic heritage was, he was as good as a rightful citizen of Russia by modern standards. And there is really nothing to argue about. GreyHood ^Talk 19:51, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

What utter tripe! THE MAN WAS NOT RUSSIAN BY ANY REASONABLE DEFINITION OF THE TERM. Therefore, he is not a "Russian Pilot." Russians might think that sticking feathers up their backsides makes them chickens, but this does not make it true. Being the "main successor" does not give you the right to simply assume everything was yours! You are basically arguing that, for example, that Charlemagne should be considered an Italian hero because the Vatican is in Rome. You are simply waving your hands and using nonsense terms like "modern standards." WHAT UTTER RUSSIAN NATIONALIST PROPAGANDA NONSENSE! There was a Union. It is no more. Russia got the embassies due to a legarl quirk. This does NOT give russia sole right to the history! Of course there is an issue here. The issue is that you are a Russian nationalist. I notice you ignored my claims about de Seversky. I notice you ignore my sensible suggeestion to make a SOVIET pilots page. So really, there IS something to talk about. 68.63.113.121 (talk) 20:10, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Don't go into personal attacks and accusations in nationalism, please. The fact that Kozhedub can be rightfully considered Russian by one criterion doesn't change the fact that he remains Ukrainian by another criterion. It is not as simple as RUSSIAN ==> NOT UKRAINIAN, or otherwise. Both Russia and Ukraine have strong relation to Kozhedub. My facts are fair and strait:

• Kozhedub studied on modern Russian territory
• Kozhedub spent most of his life on modern Russian territory
• Kozhedub commanded regiments that were formed or situated on modern Russian territory, and successors of these regiments continue to exist in Russia
• Kozhedub died on modern Russian territory and is buried in Moscow
• Kozhedub spoke Russian
• Kozhedub's wife was from Moscow
• Kozhedub's family continued to live in the Russian Federation after his death

The strong relation of Kozhedub to modern Russia is obvious. Kozhedub may be included into the lists of Soviet aviators or Ukrainian aviators if ever such lists are created. But obviously he has a place in the list of Russian aviators too. GreyHood ^Talk 21:12, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

On one hand I apologize being so strong in my overt condemnation of you as a Russian nationalist. On the other hand, it remains clear that you will say anything and do anything to try to coopt the heroic image of Kozhedub into a Russian page where it so clearly does not belong. I notice that you have stopped your claimed key test of 'citizenship' now that that's been proven to be nonsense. So, let' go through your list one by one.

• 1. I studied in England for over 10 years. I am not English. This is not relevant.
• 2. Kozhedub spent his life in the Soviet Union. We don't write that Julius Ceasar is a famous Italian and we don't put him on lists of famous Italians, since when he lived, Italy did not exist.
• 3. Karl Marx worked and died in London. He does not belong on a list of famous English people.
• 4. Kozhedub died in the Soviet Union. Julius Ceasar is buried in Italy and yet is not Italian nor does he belong to Italian history.
• 5. I speak English yet am not English.
• 6. My wife does not share my national origin and yet I am not her national origin.
• 7. Kozhedub is not his family.

The person who was Ivan Kozhedub was a Soviet pilot of Ukrainian ethnic origin. He never fought for "Russia", since this country did not exist as a country for the time that he was alive. Maybe his children will take Russian citizenship; when they become famous pilots, they can rightly be put on this list. Likewise, if his wife became a famous pilot, she can be put on this list. However, Kozhedub himself WAS NOT RUSSIAN ETHNICALLY, DID NOT HAVE RUSSIAN CITIZENSHIP, and DID NOT FLY FOR RUSSIA. Therefore, he fails all reasonable tests for being included on a list of Russian pilots. You bring up peripheral stuff that is supposed to overwhelm just by being repetitive, but a close look at your points reveal them all to be irrelvant canards. Kozhedub belongs on the following lists: List of Soviet Pilots. List of Ukrainian (ethnicity or citizenship) pilots. He does NOT belong on a list of Russians, as the term 'Russian' can not be seen as applying to him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.63.113.121 (talk) 21:45, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

• Regarding citizenship. There was no such thing as Soviet Russian citizenship or Soviet Ukrainian citizenship. There was just Soviet citizenship and there were Soviet citizens. Yet the post-Soviet states, like Russia and Ukraine, view many of the people that had exclusively Soviet citizenship and not modern Russian or Ukrainian citizenship as part of their historical legacy, and claim these people as part of their history. And this is perfectly normal and understandable thing. No one in his right mind would forget the entire era of his national history only because the country changed its name and borders. I hope you won't try to present it in the ridiculous way that all those people who died before 1992 have absolutely no relation to the modern Russia or Ukraine. They DO have connection to the modern history of Russia and Ukraine via their origin, their families and offspring, and the places they lived in. It is obvious and clear.
• Kozhedub had a Soviet citizenship. There is no Soviet Union anymore. Yet we can't simply say that there is no any modern country Kozhedub has a relation too. There is Ukraine (on its modern territory he was born), and Russia (on its modern territory he spent most of his life and died). Both Russia and Ukraine can rightfully view Kozhedub as a major figure in their history. Ethnicity has nothing to do here. There were many Soviet citizens that were ethnically Ukrainian but yet were born and lived in the Russian SFSR, like now many ethnic Ukrainians live in the Russian Federation. And note please, that all lists of Russians on Wikipedia include people not on the basis of their Russian ethnicity which is a hard thing to define, but on the basis of their being Russian citizens or subjects, or just inhabitants of Russia's predecessor states in case when citizenship is hard to define legally (like in the case of the Soviet Union or ancient Russian states).
• Regarding your answers to my seven points. This is all very nice to give an example with yourself in one case, while with Caesar and Marx in other cases. But we speak about all these points as applied to one single person. And basically these points desribe a very simple situation: an ethnic Ukrainian born in the Ukrainian SSR moved to the Russian SFSR and spent most of his life and died there. His family recieved Russian citizenship very soon after his death, and he would recieve it too if he had lived several months longer. He is buried in Russian soil. And he was buried there not 2000 years ago, but 20 years. This is a great difference.

Summary: Kozhedub belongs to the list of Russian pilots just on the basis he was a Soviet citizen and de facto lived in the Russian SFSR. This is very well enough for the non-ethnic list of Russian people. And there are no good reasons why we should include only ethnic Russians into the lists of Russian people or exclude the people exclusively with the Soviet citizenship from such lists, this is not in the line with the general practice on the Wikipedian lists of people. Since I'm not inclined to go edit warring, I'll wait sometime for your answer to these arguments or revert to the original version of the list otherwise. GreyHood ^Talk 22:44, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

'Summary Against: contrary to what is written in 'Summary', I have NEVER argued that one must be of Russian ethnicity. This is a bit of FUD that Greyhood has written to try to confuse the issue. However, to be a 'Russian (pilot)' at least one of the following reasonble tests must be met by the pilot in question:

• Must be ethnic Russian (Kozhedub fails)
• Must be citizen of Russia (Kozhedub fails)
• Must self-identify as Russian or identify with uniquely Russian identity (Kozhedub fails: his biography clearly indicates that he viewed himself as a Soviet citizen)
• Must have flown fought or flown for Russia (Kozhedub fails)

Kozhedub fails all of these very clear tests of being a 'Russian pilot.' In fact, he even fails this insufficient test:

• Must have lived in the country of Russia (Kozhedub fails: he lived in the country of the Soviet Union).

If Kozhedub had made declarations about his love for Russia (as opposed to the Soviet Union) or fought for Russian-from-Soviet independence or identity, then he would be Russian. However, he did not. In fact, one has very real reason to suspect, given his politics, that he was not exactly supportive of the idea of an independent Russia. He was a Soviet of Ukrainian ethnic origin through and through. Yes, Russia is an inheritor of the Soviet legacy. But, just because is it is the largest, this does not mean that it is the only one. There was no 'Russian Space Program' before 1991 - there was only a Soviet one. Likewise, there was no Russian army, navy, or air force from the end of the Bolshevik revolution through the end of the Soviet state. The people building the Soviet state were consciously anti-nationalistic from a citizenship standpoint, though their ethnicity was an unavoidable accident of birth. It is very understandable why Russians would want Kozhedub to be part of their history; he was a heroic figure. However, just *wishing* that it was so does not make it so, just like English football fans might have wished that Roy Keane were English but not Irish - even if Roy Keane spent much of his professional career in England. How can you get Kozhedub on this list? Change the name of the list to something like 'Russian Pilots and Pilots Who Worked in the Russian SSR or Russia'. but when you write 'Russian Pilots' and then put Kozhedub under that, you are making a strong statement that he *was* Russian - a statement that is utterly and totally false in every reasonable sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.63.113.121 (talk) 23:16, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Note: I agree not to revert back to the version which you consider controversial, until we have discussed it properly and reached full understanding. Please do the same courtesy for me and don't include the information which is not within consensus or understanding yet. GreyHood ^Talk 23:21, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Note response: absolutely not. Having failed in all of your arguments, you are simply trying to win 'by default.' The only way we will come to agreement is if you convince me that he was 'Russian.' So far, your 'conditions' have been completely arbitrary nonsense, such as 'We consider him Russian if he was Russian or Soviet,' which is like saying 'it is a cat if it is a cat or a dog.' I'm sorry - I'm NOT going to let you push through false history 'by default.' The only 'consensus' position I see here is to rename the title of the article to not imply that he was Russian, BECAUSE HE CLEARLY WASN'T. 68.63.113.121 (talk) 23:30, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't quite understand your last response. I just proposed not to add to the list anything controversial for someone of us until we discuss it properly and make all our arguments clear. Note that I don't put Kozhedub onto the page in my latest edits. Now my answer to your previous post.

OK lets discuss your proposed tests.

• Must be ethnic Russian (Kozhedub fails) - As for me, this is irrelevant test. This is not a list of ethnic Russians (and you agreed with it), and Russian ethnicity is a hard thing to define.
• Must be citizen of Russia (Kozhedub fails) - Kozhedub was de jure citizen of the USSR and de facto lived in the Russian SFSR. This would grant him Russian citizenship immediately if he lived few months longer. Anyway, the proposed test must be modified to Must be citizen or subject of Russia or its predecessor states, since otherwise we can compile only the list of the modern Russian pilots. Since we are talking about aviators, the predecessor states in question are the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union/the RSFSR - whether we choose the USSR or the RSFSR, Kozhedub passes the test.
• Must self-identify as Russian or identify with uniquely Russian identity (Kozhedub fails: his biography clearly indicates that he viewed himself as a Soviet citizen). Many people who considered themselves Russian before the Revolution turned to consider themselves Soviet in the Soviet era, and after 1991 many people who considered themselves Soviet turned to consider themselves Russians. So if we speak about nation, there is a clear succession, at least in the case of those living on the territory of the Russian SFSR. If we talk about ethnicity, this is another test discussed earlier.
• Must have flown fought or flown for Russia (Kozhedub fails) - Kozhedub flew for the Red and Soviet Army, which was succeded by the Russian army (most of personnel and equipment, all of the nuclear arms and the foreign property were inherited by the Russian army, as well as most of traditions, symbolics and names of military divisions). He studied in the Academy in Monino which exist in Russia until this day. He fought in the regiment from Ivanovo (Russian SFSR). He was a commander of the Moscow air defence forces which exist until this day. So again, if we take successorship (and we have to do it, otherwise we'll have only the people from the modern Russian Federation) we see that Kozhedub is directly connected to what is now Russian Army and Air Force.

Now the other things:

• If Kozhedub had made declarations about his love for Russia (as opposed to the Soviet Union) or fought for Russian-from-Soviet independence or identity, then he would be Russian. - Russian-from-Soviet independence is a pretty ridiculous thing.
• Yes, Russia is an inheritor of the Soviet legacy. But, just because is it is the largest, this does not mean that it is the only one. - We have discussed it already. Ukraine also inherited the Soviet legacy, including the heroics of Kozhedub. But the memory is not the same as territory of property - both countries can have it. And in this particular case both countries have good reasons to share it.
• There was no 'Russian Space Program' before 1991 - there was only a Soviet one. Likewise, there was no Russian army, navy, or air force from the end of the Bolshevik revolution through the end of the Soviet state. - de facto these Soviet things mostly have turned into Russian ones, and in many respects also de jure.
• Your examples with Irishmen and Englishmen are incorrect If we talk about citizenship, that would be rather Irishmen and British.
• Change the name of the list to something like 'Russian Pilots and Pilots Who Worked in the Russian SSR or Russia' - Ok, lets change the name to Aviators from Russia and the Soviet Union. Or may be to Aviators from Russia and the Russian SFSR - but wouldn't this latter proposal be redundant as to just the List of Russian aviators? GreyHood ^Talk 00:13, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello Again: First of all - I agree with your taking the extra commentary out of the header. Sorry I missed it. However, I continue to find your other arguments completely unconvincing:

• I don't think that 'Russian Ethnicity' is irrelevant. A clear-cut case of Russian ethnicity would make somebody a legitimately 'Russian pilot.' I don't want to throw away people from the list for no reason - if I see a list titled 'Russian pilots', I think it is safe to say that I expect to see pilots of Russian ethnicity.
• Kozhedub did not live in Russia, as the state did not exist until after his death. So, your "if if if he had lived" is a dead end. But even if he had lived... Marx lived, worked, and died in London. Nobody ever puts him on a list of 'British' or 'English' writers because, in a word, he wasn't.
• The successor state to the USSR is *not* Russia. It is *a* successor state. This is one key fact that you seem to miss over and over again. Russia is one of many. If i had a salad with lettuce, tomatoes, onions, and carrots and then unmix the ingredients, the carrots are still carrots, not lettuce, even if the lettuce is the majority. Yes, there was a technical detail to give certain physical assets to russia because it was the largest state. however, *history* is not something that is so passed along. To wit, no lists have julius ceasar as an italian.
• 'Have turned into' is not 'are.' Additionally, your basic contention is false. Ukraine, for example, also has its own air force and so forth built from Soviet stock as did and do many other countries. Again, you seem to only see 'well, this is the biggest therefore we will throw this word 'de facto' on it while clearly ignoring all the evidence otherwise.' IT IS NOT DE FACTO IF CLEAR COUNTEREXAMPLES EXIST, SUCH AS NOT LESS THAN 10 AIR FORCES, FOR EXAMPLE, WHICH WERE MADE OF EX-SOVIET PERSONNEL AND EQUIPMENT. I don't know why you are so blind to this obvious fact. Please stop using 'de jure' and 'de facto' as if they mean anything here. The only 'de jure' dealt with issues of embassies--not hitory.
• I agree with 'Aviators from Russia and the Soviet Union.'. I prefer this to 'Aviators from Russia and the Russian RSFS' since this is not accurate. For example, the Armenian aviator listed there was neither 'from' russia nor the RSFSR. I still think the best answer is to have seperate lists - one for soviet, one for russian, one for armenian, one for air force, one for imperial russia, etc. Many pilots would be on several list, but this gives the most accurate picture to readers without the need for 'interpreation'
• "all the nuclear arms inherited by russian army" = FALSE. In case you don't know, Ukraine had these, and voluntarily gave them up in what turned out to be a somewhat naive but genuine hope for peace and promises of economic help from the west. But, Ukraine had them. Again, "most" is not the same as "all." This is the core of the problem.
• Russian for Soviet independence is not at all a ridiculous thing. Any number of 'dissidents' worked towards this goal and many lost their lives and freedom. Ultimately, you can even say that people like gorbachev and yeltstin worked towards this. Of course there were more people in non-Russian republics who wanted away from the Soviet union, but of course there were many in Russia too, including thousands of defectors. In the case of history, people like Taras Shevchenko fits the bill for Ukraine - there was no Ukrainian state while he lived and he did much of his work in St. Petersburg - but I think we can agree that he is Ukrainian because that's how he identified himself and he strove broadly towards an independent Ukraine. Kozhedub did no such thing. He was embedded in the Soviet system, and, if history turned out differently, it is not hard to imagine him leading a flight attacking a group of 'counter revolutionaries' or seperatists.
• as far as question of both ukraine and russia both being inheritors - I agree. Which is why, if the title of the page is appropriately changed, he can stay. however, he's not a 'Russian pilot', and this is the core of the problem. That title puts a label on him and a few others that simply doesn't work.
• I live in England, so trust me that I know what I'm talking about there. My talk about Irishmen and Englishmen is NOT incorrect, since I wasn't talking about citizenship - I was talking about self-identification and ethnic identity. Roy Keane was born in Cork, unquestionable Ireland (Republic of Ireland). But let's say he was born in Belfast. Well, could he be English and play for England? Absolutely. There are plenty of people in Northern Ireland who self-identify as English. There's no DNA test or 'who your grandparents' are - it's simply who you say you are. In the world of football this has huge implications since this whole 'United Kingdom and Ireland national teams' issue raises all sorts of interesting issues about identity.
• back to Kozhedub: by your logic of monino, should we list every cosmonaut who flew from baikonour as a 'Kazakh Cosmonaut?' Absolutely not. It's simply that's where the facility was. Moscow was the capital of the USSR, so it is natural that people flocked there for various purposes. Likewise, we don't call Nikolai Valutin a 'Ukrainian General' because he a) did his major work in Ukrainian SSR b) died in Ukrainian SSR. This would be crazy. He was a soviet general (by citizenship and political leanings) or a Russian general (by ethnicity).
• Lastly, let's look at this statement of yours: 'Many people who considered themselves Russian before the Revolution turned to consider themselves Soviet in the Soviet era, and after 1991 many people who considered themselves Soviet turned to consider themselves Russians. So if we speak about nation, there is a clear succession, at least in the case of those living on the territory of the Russian SFSR.' Again, this is again you turning 'most' into 'all' and also irrelevant since Kozhedub died before Russia was an indepentent nation. Kozhedub may have chosen to settle in Russia after communism fell - given that he was very old, it may well have happened, but it simply didn't. Remember, many people who lives on territory of USSR didn't take Russian citizenship - they went for Israeli, Canadian, USA, etc citizenship. Likewise, many people living in RSFSR during glasnost took advantage of opportunities to return to their ethnic homes in, for example, the Baltic states, and also there have been people moving from non-Russian republics (especially Central asia) back to Russia. So, again, most is not the same as all.
• Have a good night.

68.63.113.121 (talk) 01:25, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello. Here are my responses:

• Ethnicity. You may expect to see ethnic Russians on the list of Russians, but there is a double meaning of the word Russians in English, corresponding both to Russian words Rossiyane (Russian citizens of any ethnicity) and Russkiye (ethnic Russians, though sometimes the word can mean the same as Rossiyane). Russia is a multiehhnic country, and even those people who claim Russian heritage abroad may be in fact Russian Jews or Russian Germans etc.
• Russia before 1991. Russia and even Russian Federation DID exist as a separate republic within the Soviet Union before 1991 (the RSFSR - the Russian Soviet Federative Republic, even in the documents of the Soviet era it was often called just the Russian Federation). The succession of modern Russia to the RSFSR is recognised universally, and its sovereignity over the same territory is obvious. Nothing to argue about here. The question of Russia's succession to the USSR as a whole is more complex. In its international obligations (treaties, debts, embassies, foreign bases and property) Russia clearly DID succeed the USSR. Most Soviet-based internationally important organisations turned into Russian ones.
• Russia is *a* successor state - yes, internally. But on the international legal level Russia is *the* successor to the USSR. And Russia is *the* successor to the Russian SFSR.
• Military succession and nuclear arms - The similar situation - Russian military is *a* successor to the Soviet one in terms of personnel and property, but *the* successor on the international level de jure. At the same time, de facto Russian military is the *main* successor to the Soviet one, and de facto, as of the present situation, not that of early 1990s, Russian Rocket Forces are the main and sole successor to the Soviet Rocket Forces and nuclear arms.
• Independence of Russia from the Soviet Union. Here we have the full dissolution of the Soviet Union and Russia's succession to the RSFSR internally, and to the USSR internationally. "Independence" from the state which you actually succeed, whose rights you have and whose obligations you fulfill, is pretty ridiculous concept. Dissidents etc. have no relevance here.
• Monino etc. Kozhedub studied and worked on modern Russian territory and in Russian military divisions, and actually lived on modern Russian territory for most of his life until his death. I'd consider any person of any ethnicity who lived in Kazakh SSR for a long time until his death as good as a Kazakh citizen and a person worth of inclusion to the lists of Kazakhs. Just Monino or Baikonur separately is not enough of course, but in combination with other parts of biography and actual life in the Russian SFSR or Kazakh SSR they do.
• My talk about Irishmen and Englishmen is NOT incorrect, since I wasn't talking about citizenship - and I was talking about citizenship and only about citizenship from the very beginning, and the list is compiled along the citizenship lines.
• most is not the same as all - yes. I just was talking about the fact, that many people of different ethnicities that didn't identify themselves as Russians before 1991 started to do so after 1991. And now many old people living in Russia (though some young people too) continue to identify themselves as Soviet and not Russian when they speak about their nation. This self-identification as Soviet doesn't mean, of course, that we can't list those people as Russians, Ukrainians etc. The same may be applied to the period before 1991. Bah, Ukrainians even list the Kievan Princes as Ukrainians, even though there was no Ukrainian self-identification in the ancient Rus'.

So what we have here (try to refute these numbered points if you can):

• 1)When compiling the lists of Russians we must include the citizens of modern Russia of all ethnicities and the citizens or subjects of Russia's predecessor states of all ethnicities (basically you already agreed with this).
• 2)Citizenship is defined either as formal one in case it is clearly documentally defined (this applies practically only to the modern Russian Federation), or as the actual prolonged living on the territory of modern Russia or its predecessor states and de facto having the rights and responsibilities typical for a citizen.
• 3)Russia is the successor to the Russian Soviet Federative Republic in terms of territory, property and population, both de jure and de facto. The legal rights are well established here, and there is even wider sussession to the USSR as a whole, though legally limited to the international role, obligations and property, not all the territory and people of the former USSR as of 1991. (If currently you disagree with this, it is just your personal stance; both legally and actually the situation is exactly as I have described it, just try to do some search on the web)
• 4)Kozhedub was the citizen of the USSR, so he was the citizen of the country which legally was succeeded by Russia on international level.
• 5)If the previous point is not enough, lets take exclusively the succession of modern Russian Federation to the Russian SFSR. We have no de jure citizenship of Kozhedub in the Russian SFSR or in the Ukrainian SSR since there was just the common Soviet citizenship, not regional one. But both Ukraine and Russia can claim Kozhedub as their de facto citizen on the basis of place of his birth and his youth life in the first case, and on the basis of actual place of most of his life, his death and his burial in the second case (in addition there is Kozhedub's family who continued to recieve certain social benifits from the Russian state because of Kozhedub's being the Hero of the Soviet Union - so basically, the Russian Federation legally recognised that Kozhedub was as good as its citizen).

I think now it is pretty obvious that Kozhedub can be included into this list whether we name it the List of Russian aviators or the List of Russian and Soviet aviators. But I still agree to rename the list if it is a quick solution for our argument on this page. GreyHood ^Talk 09:02, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Again,

• 'Russian' - you keep telling me this like I am not understanding it, while you are the one who is really missing the point here. I fully support a *broad* reading of the term 'Russian' based on ethnicity, citizenship, or self-identification. however, Kozhedub fails *all* of these tests. Of course there are many russians who are not ethnically russian just like there are many french who are not ethnically french. however, this is not what you are proposing - you are proposing for example to make Julius Caesar into an italian, which is simply false.
• Russia is *the* successor state internationally? BULLSHIT. This is an encyclopedia, not a source for common misconception by uneducated idiots. Every intelligent person in the world knows that the Soviet Union broke up into several countries. Again, however, this completely misses the point: the Roman Empire became several countries - Julius Caesar DID NOT become Italian!
• You continue to totally and utterly confuse the 'leglitic' succeesion with 'historical' succession. Italy is the 'de facto' and 'de jure' successor to the Roman Empire. JULIUS CAESAR IS STILL NOT ITALIAN.
• Let me repeat: JULIUS CEASAR IS STILL NOT ITALIAN. I dont know how much clearer this can be. Kozhedub fails every possible test of 'Russianhood' just like Ceasar fails every possible test for 'Italianhood.' Kozhedub simply WAS NOT RUSSIAN any more than you are an alien beause in 2145 aliens will come and take over Earth. you are NOT a 'de facto' citizen of Juputer because at some point after you die aliens come from Jupiter. you simply are not. you are a citizen of where you live. Kozhedub was a citizen of the USSR. NOT RUSSIA.
• I'm going to repeat this over and over again since you keep repeating this ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT about 'de jure' and 'de facto' even though it's beenshown to be wrong: I NEVER CLAIMED THAT KOZHEDUB IS A CITIZEN OF UKRAINE. I claimed that he is of UKRAINIAN ETHNICITY, which he is. If I say: "that guy is French", i mean either that he hss:
  • FRENCH ETHNICITY {for Kozhedub: UKRAINIAN)
  • FRENCH CITIZENSHIP (for Kozhedub: USSR)
  • SELF-IDENTIFICATION AS FRENCH (for KOzhedub: USSR)
  • WORKS OR EXPRESSES STRONG FEELINGS FOR FRANCE (for Kozhedub: USSR)

There is NO 'Russia' in this list. NONE. ZERO. ZILCH. NADA. Karl Marx is not 'de facto' British. Julius Ceasar is not 'de jure' Italian. Catherine in the Great is NOT a Soviet 'de facto' citizen. Adolf Hitler is not a 'de jure' Pole. Trotsky is not a 'Famous Mexican.' Hemmingway is not a 'Cuban Writer.' Ernie Pyle is not a 'British Journalist.' and Ivan Kozhedub is a SOVIET PILOT (citizenship) or UKRAINIAN PILOT (ethnicity), with the term 'SOVIET' being more useful in his case. He cannot be Russian since he fails any and all tests of being 'Russian'; the country of Russia did not exist during his lifetime. His wife is a SOVIET CITIZEN of RUSSIAN ETHNICITY. People like Iskander Mahmudov are RUSSIAN OLIGARCHS because they are RUSSIAN RESIDENTS OR CITIZENS - actually living in a country called Russia even though he is of UZBEK ethnicity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.63.113.121 (talk) 10:10, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

No need in such emotional reactions. Once again, I've given you the five points that in excessive detail show the logic under which Kozhedub is included into the list of Russian citizens and citizens of Russia's predecessor states. Yes, he was etnic Ukrainian, had a formally Soviet citizenship and perhaps Soviet self-identification, but he was also actually living in the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic, which by all means was the predecessor of modern Russian Federation. The country of Russia didn't sprang up from the sea floor in 1991, it did exist in 1917-91, just like the country of Ukraine etc (they even were co-founders of the United Nations). They just were the parts of one union, of one big sovereign country. These are facts and you can do nothing but accept them.

The citizenship, understood mainly as the actual living in the country or predecessor state and having all related rights and responsibilities, is the only universal criterion available for inclusion into such nation-based lists of people.

• Lets take Taras Shevchenko. He was the subject of the Russian Empire at the time when Ukrainian identity was just forming. Should he be excluded from the list of Ukrainians? No. He was ethnic Ukrainian in modern understanding, born and lived on the territory of modern Ukraine.
• Lets take Nikolay Kostomarov. He was ethnic Russian with Malorussian ancestry, born on modern Russian territory, had a Russian identity (though he claimed that there were several subtypes of the Russian identity, including his own, Malorussian), he was the subject of the Russian Empire, yet he moved to modern Ukrainian territory and now is considered Ukrainian. Should he be excluded from the list of Russians? No. Should he be excluded from the list of Ukrainians? No.
• Lets take Yaroslav the Wise, the top person at the list of The Greatest Ukrainians, depicted on Ukrainian bank notes. He is considered Ukrainian, even though 1000 years ago there was no Ukraine, no Ukrainian identity, not even the name Ukraine, NONE. ZERO. ZILCH. NADA. The relationship between Yaroslav and modern Ukraine is of the same order as relationship between Julius Caesar and modern Italy. Yet Yaroslav is considered among The Greatest Ukrainians, and is on the List of Ukrainians. By your criteria he should be removed from that list (neither Ukraine at that time, nor Ukrainian identity). Should he really? I think not. Why? Because he actually lived on the territory of modern Ukraine and played a great role in the history of Kievan Rus', which is considered a predecessor state to modern Ukraine. The same situation with many other ancient Russian people. The similar situation with Kozhedub and modern Russia, except the fact that relationship between the RSFSR/USSR and modern Russian Federation is far more obvious and more close in time than relationship between the Kievan Rus' and modern Ukraine.

Would you be consistent and go as far as applying your criteria for removal of the Greatest Ukrainian from the lists of Ukrainians? ;) I think not. GreyHood ^Talk 11:38, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Sigh. Look again at the four criteria: 1. Citizenship. 2. Ethnicity. 3. Self-identification. 4. working for or in a natioal cause. Shevchenko fails test 1 since there was no country of Ukraine. However, he clearly passes tests 2, 3, and 4. I'm tired of repeating myself. you're clearly not paying attention. Kozhedub fails all four tests. KOZHEDUB FAILS ALL FOUR TESTS.

With regards to yaroslav the wise:: I agree with you. He should not be on a list of famous Ukrainians by my criteria. However, one might argue that the question is a bit more complex in his case since he existed in a time before countries existed as we know them now. One might argue that Yaroslav the Wise had Ukrainian and/or Russian "ethnicity" - but this is highly debatable. Certainly, again I turn to Julius Ceasar - he lived on the territory of modern Italy. However, nobody claims that he is an 'Italian historical figure.' Likewise, the Byzantine emperors are not 'Turkish heroes.' So, in short, yes, I mostly agree with you that Yaroslav the wise should not be listed under 'Ukrainian heroes.' Rather, there should be a link on 'Ukrainain heroes' and 'Russian heroes' pages to 'heroes of Ukraine/Russia predecessor states' or something like this. If you call him a 'Ukrainian hero', you imply that he knew sometihng about Ukraine or self-identified himself as Ukrainian - he didn't. He also clearly didn't identify himself as 'Russian' in the sense that we now understand the term to mean.

Kostomarov: again, look at my list. Kostomarov CLEARLY fits under criteria 3 and 4. he took an extraordinary step to write in the ukrainian vernacular and about ukraine as a separate entity when this was unpopular. In other words, he was a 'revolutionary' who believed in and was party to a national identity cause in a way that kozhedub WAS NOT. That kozhedub spoke russian was not a symbol of his 'pro russianhood' - this was simply the lingua franca of his time and place in society. I also have no idea what you mean by 'malorussian.' Unless I am misunderstanding, this is not a legitimate term - it is perjorative term used by Russians who like to pretend that Ukraine is 'little russia.' Kostomarov, according to wikipedia, is of mixed Ukrainian and Russian ancestry. Therefore, he partially fulfills criteria 2 as well. 68.63.113.121 (talk) 11:56, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Malorussian is not a pejorative term, that's how Kostomarov identified himself. In fact Malorussia or Little Russia actually means the core Russia around Kiev as opposed to the Greater Russia outside. And Kostomarov didn't work for the Ukrainian national cause, he used the term Malorussia for Ukraine and considered it a part of Russia and Malorussian people a subtype of Russian people. His actual cause was Federalism, not independent Ukrainian nation, of which he knew nothing. And yet Kostomarov, as well as Shevchenko, are both considered Russian and Ukrainian simultaneously. Shevchenko actually wrote 2/3 of his literary works in Russian and 1/3 in Ukrainian. He mentioned Ukraine only 200 times in his multiple works, while typically using the term Malorussia and acknowledging that Great Russians and Little Russians are one people, though different subtypes. And he actually didn't call for sovereign Ukraine, he just wrote in Malorussian dialect and was in conflict with central authority, like many Russian intellectuals were at that time. It was only after Shevchenko's death that Ukrainian nationalists interpreted his works in a such a way that they became a basis for Ukrainian nationalism.

Back to Kozhedub. He passes citizenship test (citizenship defined as actual living on the territory of the corresponding republic in the Soviet era, when there was no regional citizenship), and I've shown how and why. You haven't refuted the logic. And by the way, Kozhedub fought for the Soviet Union, that means he fought to save all the Soviet Republics, including Russian SFSR, from nazism, and so he fought to save the Russian nation among others.

And yes, if you are indeed an educated person just read the articles successor state, Russia, the Soviet Union. Read the sources such as this UK-based source: The Russian Federation is recognised in international law as continuing the legal personality of the Soviet Union which was dissolved on 31 December 1991. Read that on the 12th June 1991, which is still the national day of Russia, the Russian SFSR declared its sovereignity and priority of the laws of the Russian SFSR over the laws of the Soviet Union. So basically Kozhedub lived about two months in the state that declared itself sovereign and not just a territorial division of the Soviet Union. GreyHood ^Talk 12:30, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

1. You asked whether Shevchenko and Kostomarov should be on UKRAINIAN lists. I told you why yes. Since you are apparently either totally incapable of logic OR are just being purposefully deceiptful, you twist my statement that they should be on UA lists into saying that they shouldnt be on Russian lists. I never said this. They should indeed be on Russian lists since they pass any of several tests. 2. Kozhedub was not a citizen of Russia. Julius Ceasar was not a citizen of Italy. It doesn't matter how many times you repeat the same nonsense as to 'living on the territory of something that later became something else,' it doesn't matter. your 'logic' that he should be in the list of 'Russian pilots' because he fought for the Soviet union, an entity that fought to suppress regional identities and indepent national identities is beyond Kafkaesque. By your logic, he should also be listed as a Kyrgyz hero. This is clearly wrong. He's not Kyrgyz. He's not Russian. He was a soviet citizen of Ukrainian ethnicity. Julius Ceasar is not Italian. DEAL WITH IT. You mentioned that I have not refuted sometihng - please tell me again what it is, since frankly, you keep repeating the same bullshit arguments over and over again that it's getting quite old and I may have lost track of some molecule that I haven't yet totally and completely refuted. 3. This 'successor state' argument of yours has been thoroughly discredited. Please stop repeating it. As has been pointed out to you, 'successor state' as you are referring to it is a legalitic construct that refers to the transfer of certain physical assets, such as embassies. Anybody with two brain cells realizes that 'history' and 'historic legacy' do not automatically transfer. Or, put it another way - is Timur Amur (Tamurlame) also a figure of Russian history? After all, if the Soviet Union is a successor state of Tamurlame's empire and Russia is the Successor state of the Soviet Union, then it follows that Tamurlame must be Russian. You'd have to be INSANE to argue this, and yet this is exactly what you are arguing with Kozhedub.

You have utterly and totally failed to reply to any of my now dozens of counterexamples. I have presented you with clear thinking and consistent application of principle for everybody from Ceasar to Shevchenko to Tamurlame to Yaroslav the Wise to Kozhedub. You have failed utterly to provide any sort of counterexamples or response to my numerous claims of absurdity - such as claiming that Gagarin was a Kazakh Cosmonaut under your logic. Hell, by your logic, I think we should count Paul Tibbets as a famous Russian Pilot since he saved tens of thousands of Soviets from dying fighting the Japanese in Mongolia and China.

As far as 'malorussian' not being a pejorative, WIKIPEDIA DISAGREES. Look it up. The term is simply not used today as anything but a pejorative.

I think you are simultaneously a good person actually trying to good but also are very warped by a nationlistic mindset that is fixated on the idea of making a Russian out of Kozhedub when he clearly was not a Russian by any sense of the word. We have already proposed a soluton that we both ageree with: either: a) change the title to 'Russian and Soviet Aviators' or b) have separate lists (most correct and useful solution). 68.63.113.121 (talk) 13:13, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

• Shevchenko and Kostomarov... you twist my statement that they should be on UA lists into saying that they shouldnt be on Russian lists - I never said anything like this. On the contrary, I continued to question whether they should be on Ukrainian lists when both identified themselves as Malorussians, and Kostomarov even was born ouside of modern Ukraine. And I said that they are considered both Russian and Ukrainian simultaneously. Earlier I proposed the modern location of their place of birth (Shevchenko) and life (Kostomarov) as the simpliest criterion that resolves the question positively.
• you are apparently either totally incapable of logic - I had a number of school and university courses in logic, my marks were excellent and I use logic everyday when doing programming.
• OR are just being purposefully deceiptful - no, I've worked for a long time on various Wikipedian lists, and all I do is just trying to establish some universal, consistent and reasonably broad criteria for inclusion of items into the list. And before accussations in deceiptfullness you should read more carefully what I write, and not accuse me in the kind of twisting I've never done.
• Kozhedub was not a citizen of Russia. Julius Ceasar was not a citizen of Italy. There are about 1900 years between Caesar and modern united Italy, and several months between the death of Kozhedub and the final dissolution of the USSR, while the sovereignty of Russia actually was proclaimed while Kozhedub was living in Russia. In addition, there is no legal succession and uninterrupted statehood between Ancient Rome and modern Italy, and Ancient Romans were very different people from modern Italians. On the other hand, there is an uninterrupted succession between the USSR or RSFSR, and the Russian Federation, and the same people that populated the RSFSR became the citizens of the Russian Federation, when the terms Soviet and Socialist were excluded from the name of the country a day before the final dissolution of the Soviet Union. So your comparison with Caesar is not relevant enough, and stop repeating it please.
• your 'logic' that he should be in the list of 'Russian pilots' because he fought for the Soviet union this is not exactly my argument, and this is not my may argument (that is broadly defined, or de facto citizenship). I just expressed the view that fighting for the Soviet cause meant also fighting for Russian and Ukrainian survival and, so, Russian and Ukrainian national causes. My previous arguments were about the fact that Kozhedub served in the RSFSR-based military divisions that still exist today, and that Russian military is the main successor of the Soviet one, but that were just additional features.
• the Soviet union, an entity that fought to suppress regional identities and indepent national identities - this is not a correct view. The Soviet authorities actually promoted regional identities and identities of constituent republics. Until the mid 1930s there was a special campaign dedicated to that, korenization. And there was huge Ukrainization in the early USSR. Later such politics were scaled down and the focus shifted to building the common Soviet identity, but that didn't cancelled or very much affected major ethicities, such as Ukrainians. And the number of books published in Ukrainian in the Soviet time, as well as the quality and quantity of Ukrainian-based and Ukrainian-themed cinema still hasn't been surpassed by modern independent Ukraine.
• By your logic, he should also be listed as a Kyrgyz hero. - if he had spent most of his life in Kyrgyz SSR, he definitely should have been listed as a Kyrgyz hero, wherever his actual place of birth had been and whatever ethnicity. It is pretty clear. But this is not the case with Kozhedub.
• You mentioned that I have not refuted something - please tell me again what it is - I repeat that I've shown my logic in excessive detail in five numbered points above. You have not shown that any of these points contain wrong information or unreasonable proposals. You just continued to insist on your own tests and repeat that under no logic the citizens of the USSR can be considered the citizens of Russia or its predecessor states, which is obviously wrong. The logic is fair and square in the case of the Russian SFSR: the citizens of the Soviet Union who lived in the Russian SFSR BECAME citizens of the Russian Federation when the RSFSR was renamed and the USSR dissolved (or even earlier, when sovereignty had been declared, but it is not a very clear matter) ==> the citizens of the Soviet Union who lived in the Russian SFSR WERE the citizens of the predecessor state of the Russian Federation (and in addition to this obvious thing, the Russian Federation is also the legal successor to the USSR as a whole).
• 'successor state' as you are referring to it is a legalitic construct that refers to the transfer of certain physical assets, such as embassies - it is more than this, I've already mentioned the details to you.
• Anybody with two brain cells realizes that 'history' and 'historic legacy' do not automatically transfer. - bah, they transfer much easier than assets or embassies ;) Modern Russian textbooks in history view the USSR as the predecessor state of Russia, and teach the history from the pan-Soviet perspective, not like the Ukrainian or Belorussian or other post-Soviet textbooks, which present their national history mainly as events related to their modern national territories. And Russia clearly identifies its state continuity with the RSFSR and the Russian Empire, as well as acknowledges its legal succession to the international role, assets and obligations of the Soviet Union as a whole. All this is recognized internationally and can't be refuted.
• if the Soviet Union is a successor state of Tamurlame's empire - it is not. Tamerlane's empire ceased to exist centuries before the formation of the Soviet Union, which was the successor to the Russian Empire that just conquered some of the former territories of Tamerlane's empire. But those conquests were not a union, they changed nothing in the central Russian government and didn't affect the sussession line to the Tsardom of Russia.
• You have utterly and totally failed to reply to any of my now dozens of counterexamples. - I've replied to your main examples, but OK, lets review some more:
  • Karl Marx is not 'de facto' British - yes, but he was de facto British citizen, and maybe de jure too. And he was expelled from Germany and France and forced to settle in London as the best place for his revolutionary activities. Unlike him, Kozhedub chose to settle in Moscow and live there until his death by his own free will, nobody expelled him from the Ukrainian SSR. He was a clear case of internal migration within the USSR.
  • Catherine in the Great is NOT a Soviet 'de facto' citizen. - of course, she isn't. But she was a ruler of predecessor state to the Soviet Union.
  • Adolf Hitler is not a 'de jure' Pole - how it is related to our discussion?
  • Trotsky is not a 'Famous Mexican.' - the same situation as with Marx. Trotsky was expelled from the Soviet Union, not changed his place of living and citizenship by free will.
  • Hemmingway is not a 'Cuban Writer.' - He lived just about ten years on Cuba and returned to the USA where he died, and he didn't denied or declined his American citizenship..
  • Ernie Pyle is not a 'British Journalist.' - how it is related to our discussion?
  • People like Iskander Mahmudov are RUSSIAN OLIGARCHS because they are RUSSIAN RESIDENTS OR CITIZENS - actually living in a country called Russia even though he is of UZBEK ethnicity- Kozhedub actually lived in a country called Russian SFSR (often just Russia), a part of the sovereign Soviet union (often called Russia). He died in Russia when it is already had claimed full sovereignty.
  • Byzantine emperors are not 'Turkish heroes.' - Turks generally don't claim their state succession to the Byzantine Empire, which was conqurered by the already existing Ottoman Empire, which had been preceded by other Turkish states.
  • I have presented you with clear thinking and consistent application of principle for everybody from Ceasar to Shevchenko to Tamurlame to Yaroslav the Wise to Kozhedub. - I also have presented consistent application of principle of de facto citizenship PLUS state & territorial succession to all these persons. **Ceasar is not on the list of Italians because there is no direct succession between modern Italy and ancient Rome (however if we acknowledge indirect succession, we may compile something like the List of Greeks - still with a clear division between Ancient and modern Greeks).
  • Tamerlane is not on the list of Russians because his Empire was not a predecessor state of Russia.
  • Shevchenko is on the list of Ukrainians because he was born on the territory that is now Ukraine, and was a subject of the Russian Empire, of which Ukrainian Republic was one of the successors after 1917 (note that Shevchenko was a subject of the Russian Empire in the whole).
  • Yaroslav the Wise was a ruler of a predecessor state of Russia via the uninterrupted Rurikid Dynasty and via the line of statehood interrupted only by the tributary dependence to the Golden Horde (which however didn't affected the internal organisation and administration of the Russian principalities, nor eliminated international role of their governments completely). Yaroslav the Wise on the list of Ukrainians in fact is nearly as controversial as Ancient Greeks on the list of modern Greeks or Romans on the list of Italians, however there is a widespread concept of Ukraine's succession to Kievan Rus'. And I predict that any your possible attempts to eliminate Yaroslav from the list of Ukrainians will be fruitless - there will be scores of user who will readd him. And here my methods of compiling the broadly-defined national lists are clearly better than yours.
• You have failed utterly to provide any sort of counterexamples or response to my numerous claims of absurdity - such as claiming that Gagarin was a Kazakh Cosmonaut under your logic. - I've answered about Kazakhstan already. I'll answer again, specifically about Gagarin: he didn't live on Kazakhstan territory for most of his life, nor he died there, nor was born there. Besides that, the Space program of the Soviet Union was inherited mainly by Russia. And note that your own tests lead to not so very muxh absurd, but still unacceptable results such as delisting of the Greatest Ukrainian from the list of Ukrainians.
• Hell, by your logic, I think we should count Paul Tibbets as a famous Russian Pilot since he saved tens of thousands of Soviets from dying fighting the Japanese in Mongolia and China. - I never promoted any such logic. I just said, and said btw, that Kozhedub de facto fought for Soviet and for Russian and for Ukrainian national cause, he fought to save these nations.
• As far as 'malorussian' not being a pejorative, WIKIPEDIA DISAGREES. Look it up. The term is simply not used today as anything but a pejorative. - We were talking about Kostomarov, who considered himself (as well as the most inhabitants of the modern Ukrainian territories at that time) to be Malorussian. The term was not pejorative until the 20th century. And the term is not pejorative in Russia or among Russians. You wrote; Unless I am misunderstanding, this is not a legitimate term - it is perjorative term used by Russians who like to pretend that Ukraine is 'little russia.' - and you are misunderstanding. The term is pejorative mainly among the Ukrainian nationalists: some of them are insulted when the term is used by Russians, and some of the Ukrainian nationalists themselves use the term as pejorative against non-nationalistic and pro-Russian Ukrainian citizens.
• I think you are simultaneously a good person actually trying to good but also are very warped by a nationlistic mindset - would you call me simultaneously Russian and Ukrainian nationalist because I support the inclusion of Yaroslav the Wise to the list of Ukrainians? ;) Once again: I'm just trying to establish some universal, consistent and reasonably broad criteria for inclusion of items into the list.
• when he clearly was not a Russian by any sense of the word - he was a de facto and by some definition de jure citizen of the closest predecessor state of modern Russia. I've already shown how and why. And afterall, if he would go to the street demonstration in the mid 1991 after the proclamation of Russian sovereignty, he and the other public would likely be addressed to as the citizens of Russia. GreyHood ^Talk 17:42, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
• change the title to 'Russian and Soviet Aviators' . OK. I'm tired of this long discussion and if any other user will support the renaming, let's go with it. The problem that there are hundreds and thousands of other lists of people on Wikipedia wich should be renamed or significantly contracted if we apply to them the same criteria that you've proposed, and the list of Ukrainians ironically will be number one among those lists, since there was no Ukrainian national cause or self-identification until the end of the 19th century. And I'd prefer to be consistent when compiling the different lists of people, and I don't want to impose unnecessary restrictions on the list of Ukrainians and other such lists. GreyHood ^Talk 17:42, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't have time for this crap. You are clearly delusional if you think that a Soviet pilot fought for the Russian and Ukrainian national cause or that the Soviet Union was a bastion of multiculturalism other than occasional periods of slightly less repression done as political sops. you continue to use words like "most" to create a "food chain" of history where everything goes to Russia and nothing anywhere else. You take a "leglistic" view using this nonsense terms "de jure" and "de facto" when they suit you, and then turn around and use a completely arbitrary set of criteria when that suites you. You seem to imply that Marx should be listed as an English or British hero, and that Trotsky should be listed under Mexican heroes. You totally ignored the fact that Shevchenko passes 3 out of 4 elements of my broad tests to be considered "Ukrainian." You appear shocked that the term "malorussians" is not considered a perjorative by Russians. This is like being shocked that the term "nigger" is not a perjorative in the minds of the klu klux klan. You appear to call the Ukrainian SSR a "nation", which is high comedy indeed. Yes, it had a UN seat as compromise - many baltic, etc "nations" didn't. Again, you missed my point about Tamurlame: you claim that because somebody who is not ethnically Russian did something for the Soviet union, that this becomes a 'Russian' accomplishment. For example, space achievements in Kazakhstan, according to you, becomme 'Russian' accomplishments, even if headed by Ukrainians like Korolev. So, therefore, why not call Tamurlane Russian? his accomplishments were done in the land of the former USSR - he did it 'for the uzbek people', let's say, so therefore 'for the soviet people', and, therefore for the Russian people according to your "alice through the looking glass" logic. Per your logic, it's not actually enough that his empire was not a predecessor state of russia - since by things you said elsewhere, it's enough that it was a predecessor state to the soviet union (which his state was), and therefore according to you, a predecessor to russia since "... bla bla bla most bla bla bla .." Just as hemmingway didn't deny his us citizenship, kozhedub never denied his soviet citizenship.

I think you really hang yourself with this one:

• • Catherine in the Great is NOT a Soviet 'de facto' citizen. - of course, she isn't. But she was a ruler of predecessor state to the Soviet Union.

so, let's make a parallel statement:

Kozhedub is not a Russsian 'de facto citizen.' - of course he isn't. But, he was a pilot in a country that was a predecessor state to several countries, Russia included.

I know you'd love to steal people like Kozhedub, Korolev, and the like and call them Russians instead of malorussian khakhols.

kozhedub chose to settle in MOSCOW, USSR, which was the capital of the country he lived in - THE USSR. kozhedub never chose to settle in "Moscow, Country of Russia", since the thing did not exist. He went to the capital because he was in the SOVIET military, not because he as in the russian one. It is 100% certain that if the capital of the soviet union were bishkek, he'd go to bishkek because it was the capital of the country for which he fought and flew.

about yaroslav the wise: as i said, i dont think he belongs on a list of ukrainians or russians. there are nationalist morons on all sides. yaroslav the wise was neither ukrainian nor russian in any identifiable sense. the empire of which he was part was a predecessor to both the modern ukrainian and russian states, but he deserves to be listed as neither a "Ukrainian" nor a "Russian" has he was neither. However, with careful naming of the lists, he could go on either list.

this is the last bit of comedy that i will comment on: "Modern Russian textbooks in history view the USSR as the predecessor state of Russia, and teach the history from the pan-Soviet perspective." Do you want me to tell you what North Korean or Turkemen textbooks say? What nationalist politicians put into their textbooks does not make truth. In fact, it takes intelligent and principled people to stand up to politically motivated revisionism, including the pompous jingoism that defines modern russia.

please let's just change the title of the article.

68.63.113.121 (talk) 18:16, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

You are again accusing me in nationalism and not reading carefully what I've wrote, instead of just taking some of the steps of the quite logical schemes and definitions that I've proposed and refuting them.

• Soviet Union was a bastion of multiculturalism other than occasional periods of slightly less repression done as political sops. - yes, Soviet Union was a bastion of multiculturalism. The cultures of most major and minor ethnicities blossomed in the Soviet Union. Repression was political and ideological, not ethnical, with few possible exceptions, such as jews in the later period. There were, of course, some cases of harsh dealing with separatism and collaboration with Nazis, but this is not the same as suppressing multiculturalism.
• to create a "food chain" of history where everything goes to Russia and nothing anywhere else - once again, if I insist on including some people on the list of Russians, I don't say that these people should not be included to the list of Ukrainians or other such lists.
• You take a "leglistic" view using this nonsense terms "de jure" and "de facto" when they suit you, and then turn around and use a completely arbitrary set of criteria when that suites you. - I do not turn around, and I continue to insist that legal de jure as well as de facto succession of states obviously have relevance here.
• You seem to imply that Marx should be listed as an English or British hero, and that Trotsky should be listed under Mexican heroes. - you've misunderstood me. I said that they were expelled from their own countries, and despite Marx might be de facto citizen of Britain while Trotsky that of Mexico, they still were castaways in those countries who intended to return to their home nations if there would be such a possibility.
• You totally ignored the fact that Shevchenko passes 3 out of 4 elements of my broad tests to be considered "Ukrainian." He was of Malorussian ethnicity and identity (Ukrainian ethnicity in modern interpretation), and he didn't intend to serve for the cause of independent Ukrainian nation, this was just a later interpretation by the true Ukrainian nationalists. Your tests are pretty much arguable in the case of Shevchenko.
• You appear shocked that the term "malorussians" is not considered a perjorative by Russians. - Am I? No. Firstly, I'm not shocked by anything in our discussion anyway. Secondly, I was always aware that the term is not considered a perjorative by Russians. The term khokhols may be considered pejorative by Russians when they use the term against Ukrainians. The term Malorussians is considered pejorative mainly by Ukrainian nationalists when used by them or applied to them. Can you really read what I write?
• You appear to call the Ukrainian SSR a "nation", which is high comedy indeed. - Firstly, I called it so in a very special context. Secondly, the term is broad enough to be applied to the Ukrainian SSR if you wish so. The Ukrainian SFSR may be called one of the constituent and founding nations of the Soviet Union, well represented in its government and among its leaders.
• you claim that because somebody who is not ethnically Russian did something for the Soviet union, that this becomes a 'Russian' accomplishment. - I never claimed this. I just said that anybody who fought for the Soviet Union against Nazism, fought also for Russia and for all other constituent republics of the Union.
• space achievements in Kazakhstan, according to you, becomme 'Russian' accomplishments, even if headed by Ukrainians like Korolev - Kazakstan was only the launch site. Still it may be proud of its role in the Soviet Space program and consider those accomplishments as its own as well as Sovet, as well as Russian etc. Korolev was mixed Russian and Ukrainian by ethnicity, and he worked mainly in Moscow.
• So, therefore, why not call Tamurlane Russian? his accomplishments were done in the land of the former USSR - he did it 'for the uzbek people' , Tamerlane was not by any definition a citizen of predecessor state to the Soviet Union as a whole and to the Central Soviet government, and more so he wasn't a citizen of predecessor state of Russia. We may speak so about Tamerlane and the Uzbek SSR, and in this case there'd be no direct state succession.
• Kozhedub is not a Russsian 'de facto citizen.' - of course he isn't. But, he was a pilot in a country that was a predecessor state to several countries, Russia included. - yeah if we speak about the USSR in the whole and in a broad sense of succession, but is there any problem? No, since Kozhedub lived, died and was buried on the Russian territory, not on the territory of other countries. And other countries are not state successors to the Russian SFSR by any definition. And also, see the problem - we are talking about successors and predecessors, but I understand them in the restricted sense of the legal state continuity or the Succession of states theory, and you seem to understand them in the broader sense.
• I know you'd love to steal people like Kozhedub, Korolev, and the like and call them Russians instead of malorussian khakhols. - I'd advice you to avoid such a clear show-offs of misconduct, personal attacks and accusations. And you simply don't understand the term Malorussians and its usage. Khokhols is spelled with o, not a, and doesn't necessarily mean something pejorative. And once, once more again - I don't want to steal anything, I am perfectly well with the fact Kozhedub and Korolev are ethnic Ukrainians or have Ukrainian ancestry. I don't want them to be called Russians instead of Ukrainians or Malorussians. I want them to be called Russians along with Ukrainians or Malorussians. These people are clearly a common historical legacy of Russia and Ukraine. They memory of them can and must be shared, they are not property that should have only one owner.
• kozhedub never chose to settle in "Moscow, Country of Russia", since the thing did not exist. - Moscow was also the capital of Russian SFSR, and Russia didn't sprang up from the sea floor after 1991.
• He went to the capital because he was in the SOVIET military, - he stayed in the capital because he married a woman from Moscow. The clear case of internal migration within the Soviet Union.
• there are nationalist morons on all sides. yaroslav the wise was neither ukrainian nor russian in any identifiable sense. still he is considered Russian in Russia and Ukrainian in Ukraine, and basically you just called a very significant proportion of the Ukrainian population morons - they voted Yaroslav number one in the TV show The Greatest Ukrainians. And again, there is an identifiable sense to call Yaroslav Ukrainian, and even more so Russian (he was the ruler of Rus', afterall).
• Do you want me to tell you what North Korean or Turkemen textbooks say? What nationalist politicians put into their textbooks does not make truth. Not nationalist politicians, but serious historians. And there were never any other kind of hisorian textbooks or historical views in Russia.
• In fact, it takes intelligent and principled people to stand up to politically motivated revisionism - in this case revisionism is exactly what you do - claiming that Yaroslav the Wise the ruler of Rus' has no relation to Russia, or that Russian SFSR or USSR is unrelated to Russia and not its legal predecessors, which they are. In case of relation between Russia and the Russian SFSR it is pretty ridiculous by any means, because it is the same country whose name was just stripped from Soviet and Socialist.
• please let's just change the title of the article. - if other users would support such a solution. And again, there are hundreds and thousands of lists of people of various nationalities composed along the lines of even broader inclusion criteria, and there is no reason why we should rename exclusively this list to avoid the problem. Besides that, Kozhedub clearly fits into the List of Russian aviators because he served in the RSFSR-based military divisions, lived mostly in the Russian SFSR and died in Russia which already had proclaimed its sovereignty. GreyHood ^Talk 20:21, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

KEEP but change name to List of Soviet aviators

f the jingoistic Ukrainian wants a List of Ukrainian aviators , so be it. The list is worth-while as it would allow someone ignorant of Soviet aviation the chance to learn more, with a lot less affort.Petebutt (talk) 12:37, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Time for a show of hands

No more jingoistic posturing just vote, keep or delete, with a SHORT precis of your reasonsPetebutt (talk) 12:41, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Uh, Pete (and others)

Polling for an answer to a debate is against WP standards and practices, remember?

However, it is time to consider how to either improve the list if it continues, or whether to delete it as not worth the effort. Helpful civil comments can spark solutions no single individual can imagine on their own.

Georgejdorner (talk) 19:06, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Recent changes

As the current of discussion seems to be sweeping toward KEEP, I have taken the liberty of beginning to enter Russia's World War I fighter aces.

Please do not interrupt the AfD discussion because of this; too many good suggestions are happening, to want to cut this process short. I even have spotted one possible improvement that might be useful WP-wide.

Georgejdorner (talk) 18:16, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Suggested improved notability criteria

The AfD discussion is running unanimously toward KEEP. I wanted to summarize useful suggestions from the discussion, and use them to clarify notability criteria for this list.

Present criteria:

Subject must be an aircrew member.

Notability can be established by one of the following:

Subject held/holds senior rank in a Russian or Soviet Air Arm

Subject held/holds a senior position in the aviation industry.

Senior military rank in a Russian or Soviet Air Arm

Has achievements recognized by a national award

Recognized military achievements

I suggest the following revisions/clarifications to produce these improved criteria:

Must be an active aircrew member to be eligible. While service in the Russian or Soviet air arms establishes qualification, a pilot's nationality may be denoted in disputatious instances by footnoting, etc. Listing here will not preclude listing elsewhere under another nationality.

Notability to be established by one of the following:

1. Subject holds/held senior position in Russian or Soviet Air Arm (Note: Because colonels traditionally command regiments, usually colonels and above qualify), or

2. Subject has committed notable military feats such as becoming a flying ace, or

3. Subject holds/held a senior position in aviation industry, or

4. Subject has achieved a national or international aviation record feat, or

5. Subject has/had achievements recognized by national or international awards.

I might add, that I think the idea of posting notability criteria on the Talk page is brilliant. What better way for the reader to know why an article was written?

If there is any other input to these notability criteria, please post it here instead of on the AfD discussion page.

Georgejdorner (talk) 16:43, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

That's good. I think the criteria may be posted not only on the talk page, but in the lede of the list as well. GreyHood ^Talk 17:17, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

AfD closed, with a unanimous KEEP.

AfD discussion closed at 0735 on 9 December 2010 as a unanimous KEEP, with many great suggestions for article improvement.

I wish to thank all those who participated in the discussion. It was one of the most useful explorations of possible improvements in an article that it has been my pleasure to read.

Georgejdorner (talk) 15:15, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

File:29277015 pokr.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:29277015 pokr.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests August 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 00:42, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Lydia Litvyak.JPG

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:07, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Chkalov 1937.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:11, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Gromov Mihail Mihajlovich 1934.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:22, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Gromov Mihail Mihajlovich 1934.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:35, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Aerodrome.com sources used in article are unreliable

Per the discussion of Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_361#RfC:_Reliability_of_theaerodrome.com, aerodrome citations in this article should be checked and replaced by better sources where available. GraemeLeggett (talk) 10:23, 30 December 2021 (UTC)