Talk:Defenders Day (Ukraine)

Future reference?

I found some interesting stuff about this new holiday on Kyiv Post today. But I'm on a wikibreak now. So I am parking if here:

• http://www.kyivpost.com/guide/about-kyiv/new-oct-14-state-holiday-has-orthodox-cossack-roots-399592.html
  — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 17:30, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

 Done; I just incorporated information from above link into the article. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 17:48, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

first celebrated

according to this site it was first celebrated in 2014. I don't read Ukrainian so I can't check the reference given for 2015. http://www.timeanddate.com/holidays/ukraine/defender-day --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 13:59, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

It was first celebrated in 2014, but starting from 2015 it become day off because of new bill adopted by Verkhovna Rada on 5 march 2015 [1]--Sanya7901 (talk) 15:19, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Its first celebration was in 2015 said a much better source then the one I just removed and the source I removed was http://www.timeanddate.com. http://www.timeanddate.com. appears to be a Wikipedia clone thus not a wp:rs per WP:USERGENERATED. Besides a president decreeing a holiday can not be considered a "celebration". And president Poroshenko signing a decree to create the holiday is all what happened on 14 October 2014 regarding this holiday. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 20:30, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

On second glance http://www.timeanddate.com does not look user generated so much. But the website does definitely not look like scholarly or journalistic one. In the edit were I removed it as a source I replaced it with a journalistic one. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 21:02, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Defender of Ukraine Day. 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/20150119185601/http://ua.112.ua:80/suspilstvo/v-instituti-nacionalnoyi-pam-yati-proponuyut-vidznachati-den-zahisnika-ukrayini-14-zhovtnya-126615.html to http://ua.112.ua/suspilstvo/v-instituti-nacionalnoyi-pam-yati-proponuyut-vidznachati-den-zahisnika-ukrayini-14-zhovtnya-126615.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:06, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

The name of the article

On December 31st, the article was renamed by @ProhibitOnions: from 'Defenders and Defendresses of Ukraine Day' to 'Defenders of Ukraine Day'. Their justification was that there's 'No need for the weird word "defendress"' and "defender is already gender-neutral".

Well, the Ukrainian word захисник can also be gender-neutral. In fact, it was called the "Day of Defender of Ukraine" until 14 July 2021. Shouldn't the English and other translations also reflect this change to 2 nouns (if possible)? "This word sounds weird to me" is simply not a good argument, especially when the word in question isn't new nor rare. --Underfell Flowey (talk)

English doesn't have grammatical gender like Ukrainian does. There's no reason to make up words to address an issue that doesn't exist in English. It's better to explain the changes to the Ukrainian title as the article does now. -ProhibitOnions ^(T) 07:29, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Again, the word isn't made up, it's extremely old. The Century Dictionary of 1911 has it, also showing a quote from Elizabeth I (dated 1586) to illustrate. English may not use it as often as Ukrainian, but that doesn't justify not using it in translations. If we follow your logic, we may go as far as to rename Actors and Actresses Union Awards to Actors Union Awards, and change all modern duchesses to dukes. --Underfell Flowey (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 08:42, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

@ProhibitOnions: I decided to change the name of the article anyways. (sorry?) There aren't many new English sources for this topic. We can hope that there will be more articles about it this October in light of recent events. Also, I must admit that some, if not many, of my points were pretty far-fetched. --Underfell Flowey (talk) 20:10, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

The word "defendress" is not in common use, and the suffix -ess has a much different vibe in genderless English than feminine suffixes (-ka, etc.) do in gendered languages - it is often seen as sexist and demeaning, as there is no male equivalent, and marks a deviation from the norm. (So a defender CAN'T be a woman?) "Actress" is a rare exception of a word that uses it, but even here there is a move toward the inclusive word "actor"; the name of a Spanish union translated into English can hardly offer definitive proof that a different word in a different context is OK. We should avoid contrived constructions to match gender issues in other languages that do not exist in English. -ProhibitOnions ^(T) 17:27, 3 May 2022 (UTC)