Talk:St Volodymyr's Cathedral and Charles Darwin: Difference between pages

(Difference between pages)
Content deleted Content added
Alex Bakharev (talk | contribs)
Recent Edit war
 
Barbara Shack (talk | contribs)
 
Line 1:
{{dablink|For other uses see [[Darwin (disambiguation)]]}}
==Old talk about seizure moved to a new article's talk==
[[Image:Charles_Darwin_1881.jpg|thumb|right|200px|In his lifetime Charles Darwin gained international fame as a controversial and influential scientist.]]
Please find old talk at [[Talk:St_Volodymyr%27s_Cathedral_ownership_controversy#Talk_formerly_at_Cathedral.27s_article_moved_here]]
 
'''Charles Robert Darwin''' ([[February 12]], [[1809]] – [[April 19]], [[1882]]) was a [[United Kingdom|British]] [[natural history|naturalist]] who achieved lasting fame as the originator of the [[theory]] of [[evolution]] through [[natural selection]] and [[Sexual selection]]. ''[[Jean-Baptiste Lamarck]] had already developed a different theory of evolution and claimed that acquired characteristics were passed on.''
==Vintage image==
Please check the link of the vintage image. According to its source web-site, it is an old photoshot. OTOH, I won't argue with specialists who think it is a watercolor. Just thought I bring it up. See http://travel.kyiv.org/kyiv/oldphoto/ok_79.htm --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 21:56, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
 
He developed his interest in natural history while studying first medicine, then [[theology]], at university. Darwin's [[The Voyage of the Beagle|five-year voyage]] on the [[HMS Beagle|''Beagle'']] brought him eminence as a [[geology|geologist]] and fame as a popular author. His [[biology|biological]] observations led him to study the [[transmutation of species]] and develop his theory of natural selection in 1838. Fully aware of the likely reaction, he confided only in close friends and continued his research to meet anticipated objections, but in 1858 the information that [[Alfred Russel Wallace]] now had a similar theory forced early joint [[publication of Darwin's theory]].
 
His 1859 book ''The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life'' (usually abbreviated to ''[[The Origin of Species]]'') established evolution by [[common descent]] as the dominant scientific theory of diversification in nature. He was made a [[Fellow of the Royal Society]], continued his research, and wrote a series of books on plants and animals, including humankind, notably ''[[The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex]]'' and ''[[The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals]]''. His last book was about [[earthworm]]s.
==Brief mention of the controversy==
 
In recognition of Darwin's pre-eminence, he was buried in [[Westminster Abbey]], close to [[William Herschel]] and [[Isaac Newton]].
To Irpen and other people itchy to reverse this. Please behave in a civilized manner, consult with the rest of the Wikipedians on this page prior to modifying the text that resulted in so many arguments. Thanks --[[User:Andrew Alexander|Andrew Alexander]] 04:45, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
:I merely corrected a factual error, because Kiev Metropolitan's see of ROC was an UOC by then, hence it was incorrect in the article. I simply rephrased it. As for those itchy, look who's talking. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 04:52, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
::"The factual error" is corrected. It was Moscow Patrirchate, was it not? Please don't rephrase without a good reason. --[[User:Andrew Alexander|Andrew Alexander]] 05:05, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
 
== Life ==
Andrew Alexander, your fuss and returning to revertion and deletion cycles is absolutely unwarranted and bad faith. I am sorry if this hurts your feelings.
=== Early life ===
[[Image:Charles Darwin 1816.jpg|thumb|190px|The seven-year-old Charles Darwin in 1816, a year before the sudden loss of his mother.]]
{{main|Charles Darwin's education}}
 
Charles Darwin was born in [[Shrewsbury, Shropshire]], [[England]], on [[February 12]], [[1809]] at his family home, the [[The Mount, Shrewsbury|Mount House]]. He was the fifth of six children of [[Robert Darwin|Robert]] and [[Susannah Darwin]] (''née'' Wedgwood), and the grandson of [[Erasmus Darwin]] on his father's side, of [[Josiah Wedgwood]] on his mother's side, both from the [[Darwin-Wedgwood family|Darwin–Wedgwood family]], a prominent English family which supported the [[Unitarianism|Unitarian]] church. His mother died when he was only eight. When he went to the nearby [[Shrewsbury School]] the next year, he lived there as a "[[boarding school|boarder]]".
First of all, it was not "MP" but "UOC", check the registration documents of the organization, easily googlable. It is a factual and non-controvercial info.
 
In 1825 Darwin went to [[University of Edinburgh|Edinburgh University]] to study medicine, but his revulsion at the brutality of surgery led him to neglect his medical studies. He studied [[taxonomy]] with a freed black slave from South America, and found his tales of the South American rainforest absorbing. In Darwin's second year he became active in student societies for [[natural history|naturalists]]. He became an avid pupil of [[Robert Edmund Grant]], who enthusiastically followed the theories of [[Jean-Baptiste Lamarck]] and Charles's grandfather Erasmus concerning evolution by acquired characteristics. Grant's pioneering investigations of the life cycle of marine animals on the shores of the [[Firth of Forth]] found evidence for ''[[homology (biology)|homology]]'', the radical theory that all animals have similar organs and differ only in complexity. Darwin took part in these investigations, and in March 1827 made a presentation to the Plinian society of his discovery that the black spores often found in oyster shells were the eggs of a skate leech. He also sat in on [[Robert Jameson]]'s natural history course, learning about [[stratigraphy|stratigraphic]] [[geology]] and assisting with work on the collections of the [[Royal Museum|Museum of Edinburgh University]], then one of the largest museums in Europe.
The mention of controversy is relevant? There is nothing non-factual or excessive in two sentences. Those who want to read about UNSO will indeed go to a different article and no one is returning it here for now. Ukraine needs your service in writing new articles more than in vandalizing them via deletions of what you think is unflattering. [[Ukrainian architecture]] or [[Petro Doroshenko]] and many other things are waiting for you and others to cover them. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 05:09, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
 
In 1827, his father, unhappy that his younger son had no interest in becoming a physician, enrolled him in a [[Bachelor of Arts]] course at [[Christ's College, Cambridge|Christ's College]], [[University of Cambridge]], which would qualify him to be a clergyman. This was a sensible career move at a time when [[Anglicanism|Anglican]] [[parson]]s were provided with a comfortable income, and when most naturalists in England were clergymen who saw it as part of their duties to explore the wonders of God's creation. At Cambridge, Darwin preferred riding and shooting to studying. Along with his cousin [[William Darwin Fox]], he became engrossed in the craze at the time for the competitive collecting of beetles, and Fox introduced him to the Reverend [[John Stevens Henslow]], professor of botany, for expert advice on beetles. Darwin subsequently joined Henslow's natural history course, becoming his favourite pupil and coming to be known as "the man who walks with Henslow". When exams began to loom, Darwin focused more on his studies and received private tuition from Henslow, whose subjects were mathematics and theology. Darwin became particularly enthused by the writings of [[William Paley]], including the [[teleological argument|argument of divine design in nature]]. In his finals in January 1831, he performed well in theology and, having scraped through in classics, mathematics and physics, came tenth out of a pass list of 178.
:Dear Irpen, unfortunately you again refuse to accept the neutral arbitration done by people like Mikkalai. This is not your private document, which you can edit as you wish fit. There were a lot efforts involved in getting the compromise. Instead you again start editing the text, e.g. removing "spiritual" in fron "leaders" when talking about Ukrainian top clergy. What does this accomplish? And even Volodymyr Sabodan aknowledges his alliegence to the Moscow Patriarchate. So why deny it here? --[[User:Andrew Alexander|Andrew Alexander]] 06:27, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
 
Residential requirements now kept Darwin at Cambridge until June. In keeping with Henslow's example and advice, he was in no rush to take holy orders. Inspired by [[Alexander von Humboldt]]'s ''Personal Narrative'', he planned to visit the [[Madeira Islands]] to study natural history in the tropics with some classmates after graduation. To prepare himself, Darwin joined the geology course of the Reverend [[Adam Sedgwick]], then in the summer went with him to assist in mapping strata in [[Wales]]. Darwin was surveying strata on his own when his plans to visit Madeira were dashed by a message that his intended companion had died, but on his return home he received another letter. Henslow had recommended Darwin for the unpaid position of gentleman's companion to [[Robert FitzRoy]], the captain of [[HMS Beagle|HMS ''Beagle'']], on a two-year expedition to chart the coastline of [[South America]] which would give Darwin valuable opportunities to develop his career as a naturalist. His father objected to the voyage, regarding it as a waste of time, but was persuaded by [[Josiah Wedgwood II]] to agree to his son's participation. This voyage became a five-year expedition that would lead to dramatic changes in countless fields of science.
OK, this is at least a discussion instead of your vandalizing. Let's discuss this all right. I will restore spiritual if you insist. As for the rest, Mikka made an honest mistake when he wrote ROC, and I corrected that. The UOC is indeed under the Patriarch of Moscow but UOC is an UOC and to call it "Moscow Patriarchy" instead is a huge distortion. FYI, there is no organization called Moscow Patriarchy at all. [[Japanese Orthodox Church]] is also under the Patriarch of Moscow. Go to that article and JOC with MP there. Then, enjoy the responses. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 06:39, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
 
=== Journey on the Beagle ===
On second thought, I think "spiritual" leaders is not too encyclopedic since it carries certain approval flavor. Am I wrong? If so, I don't mind it restored. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 07:07, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
{{main|The Voyage of the Beagle}}
 
[[Image:HMS_Beagle_by_Conrad_Martens.jpg|thumb|245px|right|[[HMS Beagle|HMS ''Beagle'']] surveying the coast of [[South America]], where Darwin's research began.]]
What can be said? There is not a slightest desire for any compromise. Yes, there IS a Wikipedia page called [[Ukrainian Orthodox Church - Moscow Patriarchy]], yet YOU deny this to be the "correct name". Everyone in Ukraine knows that Church under that name, yet Irpen thinks it's wrong. And no, no way top clergy can be called "spiritual leaders", that would be too nice to 22% of the Ukrainian population who claim allegience to that church and those leaders. This is Russian imperial arrogance and attitude at its prime. It took 100+ reverts to get the agreeable format, and even that format needs to be messed with afterwards. Amazing. And sad.--[[User:Andrew Alexander|Andrew Alexander]] 19:41, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
The ''Beagle'' survey took five years. Darwin spent two-thirds of this time exploring on land. He studied a rich variety of geological features, [[fossil]]s and living organisms, and met a wide range of people, both native and colonial. He methodically collected an enormous number of specimens, many of them new to science. These specimens later established his reputation as a naturalist and made him one of the precursors of the field of [[ecology]], particularly the notion of [[biocoenosis]]. His detailed notes formed the basis for his later work and provided social, political and [[Anthropology|anthropological]] insights into the areas he visited. While there, Darwin read [[Charles Lyell]]'s ''Principles of Geology'', which explained geological features as the outcome of gradual processes over huge periods of time, and wrote home that he was seeing landforms "as though he had the eyes of Lyell": stepped plains of shingle and seashells in [[Patagonia]] appeared to be raised beaches; in [[Chile]], he experienced an earthquake that raised the land; and even high in the [[Andes]], he was able to collect seashells. He theorized that [[coral]] [[atoll]]s form on sinking volcanic mountains, and a survey of the [[Cocos (Keeling) Islands]] supported his theory.
 
In South America he discovered fossils of gigantic extinct [[megatherium|megatheria]] and [[glyptodon]]s in strata which showed no signs of catastrophe or change in climate. At the time, he thought them similar to African species, but after the voyage [[Richard Owen]] showed that the remains were of animals related to living creatures in the same area. In [[Argentina]] two species of [[Rhea (bird)|rhea]] had separate but overlapping territories. Darwin found different [[mockingbird]]s on the nearby [[Galápagos Islands]], and on returning to Britain he was shown that Galápagos [[tortoise]]s and [[finch]]es were also in distinct species based on the individual islands they inhabited. The Australian [[marsupial]] rat-kangaroo and [[platypus]] were strikingly different animals. This made him remark that "An unbeliever ... might exclaim 'Surely two distinct Creators must have been [at] work'." In the first edition of ''[[The Voyage of the Beagle]]'', he explained species distribution in light of [[Charles Lyell]]'s ideas of "centres of creation"; however, in later editions of this ''Journal'' he foreshadowed his use of Galápagos Islands fauna as evidence for evolution: "one might really fancy that from an original paucity of birds in this archipelago, one species had been taken and modified for different ends."
:First of all, the name of the WP article and the name of the organization is not necessarily the same thing as the ongoing debate with Chernihiv related topics shows. FYI, the official name of the Church is UOC. Yes, it is sometimes referred to as UOC-MP in the press but often it is referred to simply as UOC, search the archives of the [[Mirror Weekly]] yourself. On top of that, the church definitely call itself just the "UOC".
 
Three natives of [[Tierra del Fuego]] returned with the Beagle as missionaries. They had become civilized over the previous two years, yet their relatives appeared to Darwin savages little above animals. Within a year, the missionaries had -in Darwin's opinion- reverted to savagery.<!--Please specify what "savagery" they returned to, as this term is a highly loaded one.--> Yet they preferred this and did not want to return to civilization. This experience and his detestation of the slavery he saw elsewhere convinced him that the widespread concept of inferior races was incorrect, and that humanity was not as far removed from animals as his clerical friends believed.
:You, OTOH, called it just "MP" which is an outright nonsense. As for the Mykhailo Denysenko or [[Patriarch Filaret]] being called a "spiritual leader", I say it is possible. 22% is a significant chunk of population even thought he is considered excommunicated and, as such, not even a monk, and even less so a church leader, from the canon law POV as well as by a significant share of Ukrainians. In view of this, I think that "spiritual" is unnecessary, but as I said above, I admit that it is possible to disagree on this. We can reinsert "spiritual" as well. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 21:44, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
 
While on board the ship, Darwin suffered from seasickness, in October 1833 he caught a fever in Argentina, and in July 1834, while returning from the Andes down to [[Valparaíso]], he fell ill and spent a month in bed. From 1837 onwards Darwin was repeatedly incapacitated with episodes of stomach pains, vomiting, severe boils, palpitations, trembling and other symptoms, which particularly affected him at times of stress, such as when attending meetings or dealing with controversy over his theory. The cause of [[Charles Darwin's illness|Darwin's illness]] was unknown during his lifetime, and attempts at treatment had little success. Recent speculation has suggested that in South America he caught [[Chagas disease]] from insect bites, leading to the later problems. Other possible causes include psychobiological problems.
::I suggest you writing a "Russian Orthodox Encyclopaedia". Then you can push your POV about "excommunication", "not even a monk", etc.--[[User:AndriyK|AndriyK]] 08:17, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
 
=== Career in science, inception of theory ===
I suggest you not tell me what to do. Excommunication and not a monk are facts and not someone's POV. Please note that I did not add them to this article. I wrote a different article about Filaret, where this belongs, which I assume is also on your "to vandalize" list. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 08:20, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
[[Image:Charles_Darwin_by_G._Richmond.jpg|thumb|left|While still a young man, Charles Darwin joined the scientific élite.]]
{{main|Inception of Darwin's theory}}
 
While Darwin was still on the voyage, [[John Stevens Henslow|Henslow]] carefully fostered his former pupil's reputation by giving selected naturalists access to the fossil specimens and printed copies of Darwin's geological writings. When the Beagle returned on [[October 2]], [[1836]], Darwin was a celebrity in scientific circles. He visited his home in Shrewsbury and his father organised investments so that Darwin could become a self-funded gentleman scientist. After visiting [[Cambridge]] and getting Henslow to agree to work on botanical descriptions of modern plants he had collected, Darwin went round the [[London]] institutions to find the best naturalists available to describe his other collections for timely publication. An eager [[Charles Lyell]] met Darwin on [[29 October]] and introduced him to the up-and-coming anatomist [[Richard Owen]]. After working on Darwin's collection of fossil bones at his [[Royal College of Surgeons]], Owen caused great surprise by revealing that some were from gigantic extinct rodents and sloths. This enhanced Darwin's reputation. With Lyell's enthusiastic backing Darwin read his first paper to the [[Geological Society of London]] on [[January 4]], [[1837]], arguing that the South American landmass was slowly rising. On the same day Darwin presented his mammal and bird specimens to the [[Zoological Society of London|Zoological Society]]. The Mammalia were taken on by [[George Robert Waterhouse|George R. Waterhouse]]. Though the birds seemed almost an afterthought, the ornithologist [[John Gould]] revealed that what Darwin had taken to be wrens, blackbirds and slightly differing finches from the Galápagos were all finches, but each was a separate species. Others on the ''Beagle'' including FitzRoy had also collected these birds and had been more careful with their notes, enabling Darwin to find which island each species had come from.
::This is a POV of Moscow Patriarchy, which is not NPOV.--[[User:AndriyK|AndriyK]] 13:24, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 
In London Charles stayed with his brother [[Erasmus Alvey Darwin|Erasmus]] and met inspiring [[savant]]s at dinner parties. His brother's lady friend Miss [[Harriet Martineau]] was a writer whose stories promoted [[Thomas Malthus|Malthusian]] [[Whig]] [[Poor Law]] reforms. Scientific circles were buzzing with ideas of [[Transmutation of species]] controversially associated with [[Radicalism (historical)|radicalism]]. Darwin preferred the respectability of his friends the Cambridge Dons, even though his ideas were pushing beyond their belief that natural history must justify religion and social order.
No, you wrong. This is the POV of the [[canon law]] as interpreted by the world-wide Eastern Orthodoxy, the only body that has any authority to interpete the canon law. According to this POV, Filaret was a canonical metropolitan until expelled from the church for breaking his monastic vows, improper financial dealings (this is less relevant to religion) and schismatic activities, which from the Orthodoxy POV is the most major issue. EVen his former (or current) connections with KGB and involvement in suppression of non-Muscovite churches (UGCC and UAOC) in the capacity of an ROC metropolitan are also less relevant from the reiligous POV.
 
On [[February]] 17, [[1837]], Lyell used his presidential address at the Geographical Society to present Owen's findings to date on Darwin's fossils, pointing out the inference that extinct species were related to current species in the same locality. At the same meeting Darwin was elected to the Council of the Society. He had already been invited by FitzRoy to contribute a ''Journal'' based on his field notes as the natural history section of the captain's account of the Beagle's voyage. He now plunged into writing a book on South American Geology. At the same time he speculated on transmutation in his ''Red Notebook'' which he had begun on the Beagle. Another project he started was getting the expert reports on his collection published as a multivolume ''Zoology of the Voyage of H.M.S. Beagle'', and Henslow used his contacts to arrange a Treasury grant of £1,000 to sponsor this. Darwin finished writing his ''Journal'' around [[20 June]] when King [[William IV of the United Kingdom|William IV]] died and the [[Victoria of the United Kingdom|Victorian]] era began. In mid-July he began his secret ''"B" notebook'' on transmutation, and developed the [[hypothesis]] that where every island in the Galápagos Archipelago had its own kind of tortoise, these had originated from a single tortoise species and had adapted to life on the different islands in different ways.
In what you are right is that him being a monk or not, excommunicated or not, has no bearing for Ukrainian State as long as the organization that calls itself UOC-KP is properly registered with the State Committee of the Religious Affairs. As far as the state is conserned, it doesn't matter whether it boasts a significant portion of Ukrainian faithful or it is just a 10 person [[sect]]. In Ukraine the religious freedom is in the constitution and any organization non-profit organization may style itself as a religious organization and so is the UOC-KP. In what you are also right is that this debate doesn't belong here on the first place. There is a reasonably detailed Filaret's article, that Sashazlv and I wrote, where this is already covered.
 
Under pressure with organising ''Zoology'' and correcting proofs of his ''Journal'', Darwin's health suffered. On [[September 20]], [[1837]] he suffered "palpitations of the heart" and left for a month of recuperation in the country. He visited [[Maer Hall]] where his invalid aunt was being cared for by her spinster daughter [[Emma Darwin|Emma Wedgwood]], and entertained his relatives with tales of his travels. His uncle [[Josiah Wedgwood II|Jos]] pointed out an area of ground where cinders had disappeared under [[loam]] and suggested that this might have been the work of earthworms. This gave Darwin the inspiration for a talk which he gave to the Geological Society on [[1 November]], on the unusually mundane subject of worm casts. He had avoided taking on official posts which would take valuable time, but by March Whewell had recruited him as Secretary of the Geological Society. Illness prompted Darwin to take a break from the pressure of work and he went "geologising" in Scotland. In glorious weather he visited [[Glen Roy]] to see the phenomenon known as "roads" which he identified as raised beaches.
In what you are wrong is in your view that the fact that a landmark christian building is controlled by an organization whose claim to be an "Orthodox Church" is considered questionable from the POV of the orthodoxy is somehow irrelevant for the article. I have no doubt that this needs mentioned in Cathedral article itself, but I am open to suggestions about forumlation. Your cutting the piece out altogether is not a meaningful suggestion to consider. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 16:19, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 
[[Image:Emma Darwin.jpg|thumb|left|Charles chose to marry his cousin, [[Emma Darwin|Emma Wedgwood]].]]
==autonomy and name==
Fully recuperated, he returned home to Shrewsbury. Pondering his career and prospects he drew up a list with columns headed ''"Marry"'' and ''"Not Marry"''. Having come down in favour, he discussed it with his father then went to visit his cousin Emma on [[July 29]], [[1838]]. He did not get around to proposing, but against his father's advice he told her of his ideas on transmutation. While his thoughts and work continued in London over the autumn he suffered repeated bouts of illness. On [[11 November]] he returned and proposed to Emma, once more telling her his ideas. She accepted, but later wrote beseeching him to read from the Gospel of St. John a section on love and following ''the Way'' which also states that ''"If a man abide not in me...they are burned"''. He sent a warm reply which eased her concern, but she would continue to worry that his lapses of faith could endanger her hope that they would meet in an afterlife.
Dear people, I don't think that "an Ukrainian Orthodox Church autonomous under the Patriarch of Moscow" is a very good name and have changed it to "an Ukrainian Orthodox Church under the Patriarch of Moscow". If somebody doesn't like this change: always ready to discus it.
Best regards. --[[user:N8Sl8er|N8Sl8er]]
 
Darwin considered [[Thomas Malthus|Malthus]]'s argument that human populations breed beyond their means and compete to survive. He related this to the findings about species relating to localities, his enquiries into animal breeding, and ideas of Natural "laws of harmony". Towards the end of November 1838 he compared breeders selecting traits to a Malthusian Nature selecting from variants thrown up by "chance" so that "every part of newly acquired structure is fully practised and perfected", and thought this "the most beautiful part of my theory" of how species originated. He went house-hunting and eventually found "Macaw Cottage" in Gower Street, London, then moved his "museum" in over Christmas. He was showing the stress, and Emma wrote urging him to get some rest, almost prophetically remarking "So don't be ill any more my dear Charley till I can be with you to nurse you". On [[January 24]], [[1839]] he was honoured by being elected as Fellow of the [[Royal Society]] and presented his paper on the Roads of Glen Roy.
Dear Irpen, I've looked on the website of the Church, thank you very much. As a matter of fact, I'm looking on this site right now. It's really an Ukrainian Orthodox Church under the Patriarch of Moscow. Look for yourself on www.orthodox.org.ua.
Best regards. --[[user:N8Sl8er|N8Sl8er]]
 
=== Marriage and children ===
Thank you very much again. But it does not change the fact that the Church is NOT "autonomous under the Patriarch of Moscow", but just "under Patriarch of Moscow". If it not so, you can than very easy find another example of such a name. If you don't, well...
[[Image:Charles and William Darwin.jpg|thumb|185px|Darwin in 1842 with his eldest son, [[Darwin-Wedgwood family|William Erasmus Darwin]].]]
Best reagrds.--[[user:N8Sl8er|N8Sl8er]]
 
On [[January 29]], [[1839]], Darwin married his cousin [[Emma Darwin|Emma Wedgwood]] at Maer in an [[Anglican]] ceremony arranged to also suit the [[Unitarian]]s.
I think there is some confusion here. There are two issues:
After first living in Gower Street, [[London]], the couple moved on [[September 17]], [[1842]] to [[Down House]] in [[Downe]] (which is now open to public visits, south of [[Orpington]]). The Darwins had ten children, three of whom died early. Many of these and their grandchildren would later achieve notability themselves (see [[Darwin -- Wedgwood family|Darwin&ndash;Wedgwood family]])
#the name of the church
#whether it has been formaly granted an [[autonomy]] by the mother church (ROC)
On (1) the answer is clear. The name is just UOC. Now, it is sometimes called UOC-MP and the reasons for that are well-known but the church never self-applies this wording to its ''name'' and always calls itself just the ''UOC''. Yes, it openly admits that it operates under the Moscow Patriarch's [[episcopal see|see]].
 
* William Erasmus Darwin ([[December 27]], [[1839]]&ndash;[[1914]])
On (2), OTOH, the answer is that the church does have a formal [[autonomy]] since 1990. One can argue that it is just a figurehead autonomy and the church is just a front for the Russian KGB and other similary flattering issues. In reality, the issue is complex and I am sure that the church is less self-governing than the [[Japanese Orthodox Church]] that is also autonomous under the MP. However, there is a canonical autonomy and it is wort a mention. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 21:49, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
* [[Anne Darwin|Anne Elizabeth Darwin]] ([[March 2]], [[1841]]&ndash;[[April 22]], [[1851]])
* Mary Eleanor Darwin ([[September 23]], [[1842]]&ndash;[[October 16]], [[1842]])
* Henrietta Emma "Etty" Darwin ([[September 25]], [[1843]]&ndash;[[1929]])
* [[George Darwin|George Howard Darwin]] ([[July 9]], [[1845]]&ndash;[[December 7]], [[1912]])
* [[Elizabeth Darwin|Elizabeth "Bessy" Darwin]] ([[July 8]], [[1847]]&ndash;[[1926]])
* [[Francis Darwin]] ([[August 16]], [[1848]]&ndash;[[September 19]], [[1925]])
* [[Leonard Darwin]] ([[January 15]], [[1850]]&ndash;[[March 26]], [[1943]])
* [[Horace Darwin]] ([[May 13]], [[1851]]&ndash;[[September 29]], [[1928]])
* [[Charles Waring Darwin]] ([[December 6]], [[1856]]&ndash;[[June 28]], [[1858]])
 
Several of their children suffered illness or weaknesses, and Charles Darwin's fear that this might be due to the closeness of his and Emma’s lineage was expressed in his writings on the ill effects of inbreeding and advantages of crossing.
Dear Irpen, you are now confusing the name of the church with something else, like you own interpretation of something. This church doesn't have a name like "the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, autonomous under the Patriarch of Moscow". Try to translate this name back to the original language, it's just not right.
Anyway, this is Wikipedia, it's NOT a private property, it's a public ___domain, everybody has a right to correct a factual error (improve an article). Let me just correct it.
I like you, I like everybody here, but I just like the truth better.
Regards, --[[User:N8Sl8er|N8Sl8er]]
 
===Development of theory ===
:Could you just be more clear on what your point is. Mine is that:
{{main|Development of Darwin's theory}}
#The name of the church is UOC.
[[Image:Charles Darwin.jpg|frame|left|Fearing both scientific and religious criticism, Darwin spent decades developing his theory of evolution largely in secret.]]
#It is also sometimes, but not always, called UOC-MP. The church rejects that it is its name, while admits that it ecclesiastically under the Patriarch of Moscow
#The church has a formal [[autonomy]], and autonomy in [[Eastern Orthodox Church organization]] is a specific term, which denotes a degree of selg-governing one step short of full [[autocephaly]], which is a complete independence (please take a look at those links).
 
Darwin was now an eminent geologist in the scientific élite of clerical naturalists, settled with a private income. He had a vast amount of work to do, writing up his findings and theories, and supervising the preparation of the multivolume ''Zoology'', which would describe his collections. He was convinced by his [[theory of evolution]], but for a long time had been aware that [[transmutation of species]] was associated with the crime of [[blasphemy]] as well as with [[Radicalism (historical)|Radical]] democratic agitators in Britain who were seeking to overthrow society; thus, publication risked ruining his reputation. He embarked on extensive experiments with plants and consultations with [[Animal husbandry|animal husbanders]], including pigeon and pig breeders, trying to find soundly based answers to all the arguments he anticipated when he presented his theory in public.
Please be more specific, what's your objections. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 02:47, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
: Oh, it's just a common rule: don't make the information in "color". Stick to the facts. The fact is: the church listen to one name and you are trying to make up you own name for the same church. Maybe you like "yours" name better, but I don't. I like the facts. The church's name is Українська Православна Церква/ Ukrainian Orthodox Church, I think than I can live with this. But here it comes: In Ukraine exists another Ukrainian Orthodox Church. And another yet. We have to separate them somehow. I think Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Moscow Patriarchat (they are already named this way on Wiki, anyway), Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Kyiv Patriarchat (they also like to call themself just "Ukrainian Orthodox Church") and Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church will do the trick. Why are you not happy? It's already very difficult to understand, believe me. Regards, --[[User:N8Sl8er|N8Sl8er]] 03:40, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
When FitzRoy's account was published in May 1839, Darwin's ''Journal and Remarks'' was a great success. Later that year it was published on its own, becoming the bestseller nowadays known as ''[[The Voyage of the Beagle]]''. In December 1839, as Emma's first pregnancy progressed, Darwin suffered more illness and accomplished little during the following year.
 
Darwin made attempts to explain his theory to close friends, but they were slow to show interest and thought that selection must need a divine selector. In 1842 the family moved to [[Down House]] to escape the pressures of London. Darwin formulated a short "Pencil Sketch" of his theory, and by 1844 had written a 240-page "Essay" that expanded his early ideas on natural selection. Darwin completed his third ''Geological'' book in 1846; assisted by his friend, the young botanist [[Joseph Dalton Hooker]], he embarked on a huge study of [[barnacles]]. In 1847, Hooker read the "Essay" and sent notes that provided Darwin with the calm critical feedback that he needed.
OK, I see now what you mean. Since this discussion is about how to call the UOC-MP in general, I will copy it to the [[talk:Ukrainian Orthodox Church - Moscow Patriarchy]] article and will respond there. Evryone is welcome there too, of course. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 03:54, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
 
To try to deal with his illness, Darwin went to a spa in [[Malvern]] in 1849, and to his surprise found that the two months of water treatment helped. In his work on barnacles he found "[[Homology (biology)|homologies]]" that supported his theory by showing that slightly changed body parts could serve different functions to meet new conditions. Then his treasured daughter Annie fell ill, reawakening his fears that his illness might be hereditary. After a long series of crises, she died and Darwin lost all faith in a beneficent God. He met the young naturalist [[Thomas Huxley]] who was to become a close friend and ally, then completed his work on barnacles (''Cirripedia'') in 1854 and turned his attention to his theory of species.
== Wikipedia is not a "Russian Orthodox Encyclopaedia" ==
 
===Announcement and publication of theory===
Please stop pushing Russian Orthodox POV to the articles. Please pay attention that ''canonicity''
[[Image:Charles Darwin aged 51.jpg|right|thumb|Charles Darwin, now an established geologist, was forced into early publication of his theory of [[natural selection]].]]
*is viewed somewhat differently by Orthodox and Catholic Churches;
{{main|Publication of Darwin's theory}}
*is not recognized by Protestant Churches;
*is not recognized by most of people in the wold that are not Cristian at all.
Please read [[WP:NPOV]] carefully.
::''NPOV policy often means presenting multiple points of view.''
Please pay attention that pushing Orthodox POV is against the WP policies.--[[User:AndriyK|AndriyK]] 14:07, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
 
In the spring of 1856, Lyell read a paper on the ''Introduction'' of species by [[Alfred Russel Wallace]], a naturalist working in [[Borneo]], and urged Darwin to publish his theory to establish precedence. Darwin pressed ahead despite illness, getting specimens and information from naturalists including Wallace and [[Asa Gray]]. In December 1857 as Darwin worked on his ''Natural Selection'' manuscript he received a letter from Wallace asking if it would delve into human origins. Sensitive to Lyell's fears, Darwin responded that "I think I shall avoid the whole subject, as so surrounded with prejudices, though I fully admit that it is the highest & most interesting problem for the naturalist". He encouraged Wallace's theorising, saying "without speculation there is no good & original observation", adding that "I go much further than you". Then on [[June 18]], [[1858]], he received a paper from Wallace describing the evolutionary mechanism, with a request to send it on to Lyell. Darwin did so, shocked that he had been "forestalled" and though Wallace had not asked for publication, offering to send it to any journal that Wallace chose. He put matters in the hands of Lyell and Hooker, who agreed on a joint presentation at the [[Linnean Society of London|Linnean Society]] on [[1 July]] of ''[[On the Tendency of Species to form Varieties; and on the Perpetuation of Varieties and Species by Natural Means of Selection]]''.
:Wikipedia is not an encyclopedia for schysmatic Halychyans, either. POV stands for point of view. The canonicity is not a point of view but something every Orthodox church respects and complies with. The views of Protestants, Catholics, and Buddhists are quite irrelevant here. Every church which aspires to be known as Orthodox, should find its place in the centuries-old hierarchy of orthodox churches. Otherwise, it is not an Orthodox church but a heresy. --[[User:Ghirlandajo|Ghirlandajo]] 14:34, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
 
The initial announcement of the theory gained little immediate attention. It was mentioned briefly in a few small reviews, but to most people it seemed much the same as other varieties of [[evolutionism|evolutionary thought]]. For the next thirteen months Darwin struggled with ill health to produce an abstract of his "big book on species". Receiving constant encouragement from his scientific friends, Darwin finally finished his abstract and Lyell arranged to have it published by [[John Murray (publisher)|John Murray]]. The title was agreed as ''[[The Origin of Species|On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection]]'', and when the book went on sale to the trade on [[November 22]], [[1859]], the stock of 1,250 copies was oversubscribed. At the time "Evolutionism" implied creation without divine intervention, and Darwin avoided using the words "evolution" or "evolve", though the book ends by stating that "endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved". The book only briefly alluded to the idea that man, too, would evolve in the same way as other organisms. Darwin wrote in deliberate understatement that "light will be thrown on the origin of man and his history".
::Your POV-pushing is against [[WP:NPOV]].--[[User:AndriyK|AndriyK]] 14:42, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
----------
'''Canonical status of the Moscow Patriarchate in Ukraine.'''
 
===Reaction===
'''Because of the illegality of the annexation of the local Church in Ukraine in 1686 by the Russian Orthodox Church, the Patriarchate of Ecumenical See of the Constantinople never accepted this action and never acknowledged the local Orthodox Church of Ukraine as a part of Moscow Patriarchate. What is more important, following the 28 th canon of the Forth Ecumenical Council, the Patriarchate of Constantinople still recognizes the local Church of Ukraine as an integral part of it’s canonical jurisdiction. The Ecumenical Patriarchate is continuously identifying herself as a “tender Mother” of all Orthodox Christians of Eastern and central Europe.'''[http://www.risu.org.ua/library/doc/MP_canter.pdf]
[[image:Darwin_ape.jpg|thumb|left|Satirical attacks on Darwin were typified by the later caricature of him as an ape in ''Hornet'' magazine.]]
{{main|Reaction to Darwin's theory}}
 
Darwin's book set off a public controversy which he monitored closely, keeping press cuttings of thousands of reviews, articles, satires, parodies and caricatures. Reviewers were quick to pick out the unstated implications of "men from monkeys", though a [[Unitarian]] review was favourable and ''[[The Times]]'' published a glowing review by Huxley which included swipes at [[Richard Owen]], leader of the scientific establishment Huxley was trying to overthrow. Owen initially appeared neutral, but then wrote a review condemning the book. The [[Church of England]] scientific establishment reacted against the book, and Darwin's old Cambridge tutors [[Adam Sedgwick|Sedgwick]] and [[John Stevens Henslow|Henslow]] expressed their disappointment in him. Then ''[[Essays and Reviews]]'' by seven liberal [[Anglican]] theologians declared that miracles were irrational (and supported the ''Origin''), distracting attention away from Darwin.
'''During the meeting with the president, Archbishop Vsevolod made a statement which, according to the UOC USA public relations office, reflects the position of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople: “The position of the Mother Church, the Patriarchate of Constantinople, is that her daughter, the Moscow Patriarchate, consists of that territory which it encompassed to the year 1686. The subjugation of the Kyivan Metropolitanate to the Moscow Patriarchate was concluded by Patriarch Dionysius without the agreement or ratification of the Holy and Sacred Synod of the Great Church of Christ (the Patriarchate of Constantinople).”''' [http://www.risu.org.ua/eng/news/article;4953/] --[[User:Yakudza|Yakudza]] 00:28, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 
The most famous confrontation took place at a meeting of the [[British Association for the Advancement of Science]] in [[Oxford]]. Professor [[John William Draper]] made a boring speech on Darwin and social progress, then [[Samuel Wilberforce|'Soapy Sam' Wilberforce]], the [[Bishop]] of Oxford, argued against Darwin. In the ensuing debate [[Thomas_Henry_Huxley|Thomas Huxley]] established himself as "Darwin's bulldog" &ndash; the fiercest defender of evolutionary theory on the Victorian stage. On being asked by Wilberforce whether he was descended from monkeys on his grandfather's side or his grandmother's side, Huxley apparently muttered to himself: "The Lord has delivered him into my hands" and replied that he "would rather be descended from an ape than from a cultivated man who used his gifts of culture and eloquence in the service of prejudice and falsehood" (there are several alternative versions of this story, see [http://users.ox.ac.uk/~jrlucas/legend.html Wilberforce and Huxley: A Legendary Encounter]). The story spread around the country: Huxley had said he would rather be an ape than a Bishop.
''Thanks''! Great q uote, this must be included into the article, not the popaganda from UOC-MP itself. Made it bold, so it would not get lost.--[[User:Andrew Alexander|Andrew Alexander]] 01:22, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 
Many people felt that Darwin's view of nature destroyed the important distinction between man and beast. Darwin himself did not personally defend his theories in public, though he read eagerly about the continuing debates. He was frequently very ill, and mustered support through [[Correspondence of Charles Darwin|letters and correspondence]]. A core circle of scientific friends &ndash; Huxley, [[Charles Lyell]], [[Joseph Dalton Hooker]], and [[Asa Gray]] &ndash; actively pushed his work to the fore of the scientific and public stage, defending him against his many critics in this key scientific controversy of the era. Darwin's theory also resonated with various movements at the time and became a key fixture of popular culture. The book was translated into many languages and went through numerous reprints. It became a staple scientific text accessible both to a newly curious middle class and to "working men", hailed as the most controversial and discussed scientific book ever written.
 
=== Later life and death ===
{{main2|Darwin from Orchids to Variation|Darwin from Descent of Man to Emotions|Darwin from Insectivorous plants to Worms}}
 
[[image:Charles Darwin 1880.jpg|frame|A classic image of Darwin in 1880, still researching and producing numerous books.]]
Despite repeated bouts of illness during the last twenty-two years of his life Darwin pressed on with his work. He had published an abstract of his theory, but more controversial aspects of his "big book" were still incomplete; mankind's descent from earlier animals, and the mechanism of [[sexual selection]] which could explain features with no obvious utility other than decorative beauty as well as suggesting possible causes underlying the development of society and of human mental abilities. His experiments, research and writing continued.
 
When Darwin's daughter fell ill he set aside his experiments with seedlings and domestic animals to go with her to a seaside resort where he became interested in wild [[orchid]]s. This developed into an innovative study of how their beautiful flowers served to control insect pollination and ensure cross fertilisation. As with the barnacles, homologous parts served different functions in different species. Back at home he lay on his sickbed in a room filled with experiments on climbing plants. He was visited by a reverent [[Ernst Haeckel]] who had spread the gospel of ''Darwinismus'' in [[Germany]]. Even at Cambridge, students now supported his ideas. Huxley gave "working-men's lectures" to widen the audience, and Wallace remained a supporter but increasingly turned to [[spiritualism]]. ''Variation'' grew to two huge volumes, forcing him to leave out man and sexual selection, but when printed was in huge demand.
 
New fossil evidence proved the antiquity of man, but other writers failed to fully tackle human evolution. Opponents claimed that the beauty of birds demonstrated divine guidance. These two subjects were tackled in ''[[The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex]]'' which he followed up with ''[[The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals]]''. Darwin produced practical explanations for the differences between males and females, and between different races and cultures. He also developed his ideas that the human mind and cultures were developed by natural and sexual selection, an approach which still persists in [[evolutionary psychology]]. His evolution-related experiments and investigations culminated in five books on plants, and then his last book returned to the effect worms have on soil levels.
 
Darwin died in Downe, [[Kent]], England, on [[April 19]], [[1882]]. He had expected to be buried in St. Mary's churchyard at Downe, but at the request of Darwin's colleagues [[William Spottiswoode]], [[President]] of the [[Royal Society]], arranged for Darwin to be given a state funeral and buried in [[Westminster Abbey]].
 
== Religious views ==
{{main|Charles Darwin's views on religion}}
 
[[Image:Annie Darwin.jpg|frame|left|The 1851 death of Darwin's daughter, [[Anne Darwin|Annie]], was the final step in pushing an already doubting Darwin away from the idea of a beneficent God.]]
 
Charles Darwin came from a [[Nonconformist]] background. Though several members of his family were [[Freethought|Freethinkers]], openly lacking conventional religious beliefs, he did not initially doubt the literal truth of the Bible. He attended a [[Church of England]] school, then at Cambridge studied [[Anglican]] theology to become a clergyman and was fully convinced by [[William Paley]]'s [[teleological argument]] that design in nature proved the existence of God. However, his beliefs began to shift during his time on board [[HMS Beagle|HMS ''Beagle'']]. He questioned what he saw&mdash;wondering, for example, at beautiful deep-ocean creatures created where no one could see them, and shuddering at the sight of a wasp paralysing caterpillars as live food for its eggs; he saw the latter as contradicting Paley's vision of beneficent design. While on the ''Beagle'' Darwin was quite [[orthodoxy|orthodox]] and would quote the Bible as an authority on morality, but had come to see the history in the [[Old Testament]] as being false and untrustworthy.
 
Upon his return, he investigated [[transmutation of species]], aware that his clerical naturalist friends thought this a bestial heresy undermining miraculous justifications for the social order, and aware that such revolutionary ideas were especially unwelcome at a time when the Church of England's established position was under attack from [[radicalism|radical]] [[Dissenter]]s and [[atheism|atheists]]. While secretly developing his theory of [[natural selection]], Darwin even wrote of religion as a tribal survival strategy, though he still believed that God was the ultimate lawgiver. His belief continued to dwindle over the time, and with the death of his daughter [[Anne Darwin|Annie]] in 1851, Darwin finally lost all faith in Christianity. He continued to give support to the local church and help with parish work, but on Sundays would go for a walk while his family attended church. In later life, when asked about his religious views, he denied being an atheist, but wrote:
:my judgment often fluctuates...In my most extreme fluctuations I have never been an Atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God. I think that generally (and more and more as I grow older), but not always, that an Agnostic would be the more correct description of my state of mind."
In concluding his biography of his grandfather, [[Erasmus Darwin]], Darwin recounted how after his death in [[1802]], false stories were circulated that he had called for Jesus on his deathbed, writing "Such was the state of Christian feeling in this country at the [time].... We may at least hope that nothing of the kind now prevails." Despite this hope, very similar stories were circulated following Darwin's own death, most prominently the "[[Elizabeth Hope|Lady Hope Story]]", published in [[1915]], claiming his sickbed conversion. Such stories have been heavily propagated by some Christian groups, to the extent of becoming [[urban legend]]s, though the claims were refuted by Darwin's children and have been dismissed as false by historians.
 
== Legacy ==
[[Image:Darwin-Charles-LOC.jpg|thumb|Charles Darwin's theories had an enormous effect on many fields of science.]]
Charles Darwin's theory of evolution based upon [[natural selection]] changed the thinking of countless fields of study from [[biology]] to [[anthropology]]. His work established that "evolution" had occurred: not necessarily that it was by natural or sexual selection (this particular recognition would not become fully standard until the rediscovery of [[Gregor Mendel]]'s work in the early 20th century and the creation of the [[modern synthesis]]).
 
His work was extremely controversial at the time he published it and many during his time did not take it seriously. Darwin's theory of evolution was a significant blow to notions of [[creationism|divine creation]] and [[intelligent design]] prevalent in [[19th-century]] science, specifically overturning the [[Creation biology]] doctrine of "[[Created kind]]s". The idea that there was no line to draw between man and beast would forever make Darwin a symbol of iconoclasm who removed humanity's privileged role in the centre of the universe. To some of his detractors, Darwin would be "the monkey man", often depicted as part ape.
 
===Commemoration ===
During Darwin's lifetime many species and geographical features were given his name, including the [[Darwin Sound]] named by [[Robert FitzRoy]] after Darwin's prompt action saved them from being marooned, and the nearby [[Mount Darwin (Andes)|Mount Darwin]] in the [[Andes]] celebrating Darwin's 25th birthday. In [[Australia]]'s [[Northern Territory]], the capital city (originally Palmerston) was renamed [[Darwin, Northern Territory|Darwin]] to commemorate the Beagle's [[1839]] visit there, and the territory now also boasts [[Charles Darwin University]] and [[Charles Darwin National Park]].
 
The 14 species of [[Finch]]es he researched in the [[Galápagos Islands]] are affectionately named "Darwin's Finches" in honour of his legacy. In [[1964]], [[Darwin College, Cambridge]] was founded, named in honour of the Darwin family, partially because they owned some of the land it was on. In [[1992]], Darwin was ranked #16 on [[Michael H. Hart]]'s [[The 100|list of the most influential figures in history]]. Darwin was given particular recognition in [[2000]] when his image appeared on the [[Bank of England]] [[British banknotes|ten pound note]], replacing [[Charles Dickens]]. His impressive and supposedly hard-to-forge beard was reportedly a contributing factor in this choice. Darwin came fourth in the ''[[100 Greatest Britons]]'' poll sponsored by the [[BBC]] and voted for by the public.
 
As a humorous celebration of the theory of evolution, the annual [[Darwin Awards|Darwin Award]] is bestowed on individuals who ''"aid the process of evolution by demonstrating their unfitness"'' through fatally stupid actions.
::Maybe we should also include into the article information about how other Orthodox churches dismissed this statement in unison (Antioch, Alexandria, Jeruselem, Serbian, Bulgarian...well why not list them all for that fact). Also even though Constantinople might have said something about an event which took place more than 300 years ago (I wonder why wait so long), it still recognises the UOC (MP) as an the only "Legal" church in Ukraine.
 
===Eugenics ===
'''[http://www.pravoslavie.ru/news/010827/01.htm ПРЕДСТАВИТЕЛИ ПОМЕСТНЫХ ЦЕРКВЕЙ ПОДДЕРЖАЛИ УКРАИНСКУЮ ПРАВОСЛАВНУЮ ЦЕРКОВЬ В ЕЕ БОРЬБЕ С РАСКОЛОМ]'''
Following Darwin's publication of the ''Origin'' his cousin [[Francis Galton]] applied the concepts to human society, producing ideas to promote "hereditary improvement" starting in [[1865]] and elaborated at length in [[1869]]. In ''[[The Descent of Man]]'' Darwin agreed that Galton had demonstrated that "talent" and "genius" in humans were probably inherited, but thought that the social changes Galton proposed were too "utopian". Neither Galton nor Darwin supported government intervention and instead believed that, at most, heredity should be taken into consideration by people seeking potential mates. In [[1883]], after Darwin's death, Galton began calling his social philosophy ''[[Eugenics]]''. In the [[twentieth century]], eugenics movements gained popularity in a number of countries and became associated with reproduction control programmes such as [[compulsory sterilization|compulsory sterilisation]] laws, then were stigmatised after their usage in the rhetoric of [[Nazi Germany]] in its goals of genetic "purity".
 
===Social Darwinism ===
'''Архидиакон Иов, преподаватель Свято-Сергиевского богословского института в Париже (Константинопольский Патриархат): "Для православных верующих Франции, для всего академического состава преподавателей и студентов нашего богословского института проблема раскола в Украине является волнующим вопросом. Мы разделяем ту богословскую и догматическую точку зрения, что в Украине единой канонической Церковью является Украинская Православная Церковь, имеющая статус широкой автономии и самоуправляемости.
In [[1944]] the American historian [[Richard Hofstadter]] applied the term "[[Social Darwinism]]" to describe 19th- and 20th-century thinking developed from the ideas of [[Thomas Malthus]] and [[Herbert Spencer]], which applied ideas of evolution and "[[survival of the fittest]]" to societies or nations competing for survival in a hostile world. These ideas became discredited by association with [[racism]] and [[New Imperialism|imperialism]]. Though the term is anachronistic, in Darwin's day the difference between what was later called "Social Darwinism" and simple "Darwinism" was less clear. However, Darwin did not believe that his scientific theory mandated any particular theory of governance or social order.
 
The use of the phrase "Social Darwinism" to describe Malthus's ideas is particularly disingenuous, since Malthus died in [[1834]] before the [[inception of Darwin's theory]] was spurred by his reading the 6th edition of Malthus' famous ''Essay on a Principle of Population'' in [[1838]]. Spencer's evolutionary "progressivism" and his social and political ideas were largely Malthusian, and his books on economics of [[1851]] and on evolution of [[1855]] predated Darwin's publication of the ''Origin'' in [[1859]].
Раскол - это экклезиологическая ересь, потому что его представители думают, что они стоят выше соборного сознания Церкви и что они могут сами разрешить определенные внутрицерковные вопросы. Это абсолютно невозможно с канонической точки зрения. Конечно, мы видим, что в Украине имеется большой потенциал для утверждения Поместной Церкви. Но этот вопрос должен решаться соборно, в консультации с Матерью-Церковью - Русской Православной Церковью.
 
== Works ==
То, что раскольники произносят православный Символ веры недостаточно и ни о чем не говорит. Нужно еще и находиться в этой Церкви, т.е. быть в евхаристическом единении с другими Поместными православными Церквами, что мы продемонстрировали в Киеве. Они же не находятся в таком единении ни с одной Православной Церковью мира.
* Bibliography: [http://pages.britishlibrary.net/charles.darwin3/darwin_biblio.htm#primary Darwin Bibliography] (including alternative editions, contributions to books & periodicals, correspondence & life)
*{{gutenberg author | id=Charles_Darwin | name=Charles Darwin}}
* [http://www.darwin-literature.com Darwin Literature], Chapter-indexed, searchable versions of Darwin's works.
* [http://charles-darwin.classic-literature.co.uk/ Charles Darwin's Books] in an easy to read format.
 
=== Published works ===
Печальным почерком раскольников является их агрессивность, стремление любой ценой утвердиться в лоне какой-то законной Церкви. Они засылают своих делегатов в другие страны, путем обмана пытаются представить себя, как каноническую Церковь. Но в Церковь Христа Спасителя обманным путем не войти".'''
* 1836: ''A LETTER, Containing Remarks on the Moral State of TAHITI, NEW ZEALAND, &c. &ndash; BY CAPT. R. FITZROY AND C. DARWIN, ESQ. OF H.M.S. 'Beagle.''' [http://pages.britishlibrary.net/charles.darwin4/tahiti.html]
* 1839: ''Journal and Remarks'' ([[The Voyage of the Beagle]])
* ''Zoology of the Voyage of H.M.S. Beagle'': published between [[1839]] and [[1843]] in five volumes by various authors, Edited and superintended by Charles Darwin: information on two of the volumes &ndash;
: 1840: ''Part I. Fossil Mammalia'', by [[Richard Owen]] [http://pages.britishlibrary.net/charles.darwin3/zoology.html (Darwin's introduction)]
: 1839: ''Part II. Mammalia'', by [[George Robert Waterhouse|George R. Waterhouse]] [http://pages.britishlibrary.net/charles.darwin3/zoology.html (Darwin on habits and ranges)]
* 1842: ''The Structure and Distribution of Coral Reefs'' [http://digital.library.upenn.edu/webbin/gutbook/lookup?num=2690]
* 1844: ''Geological Observations of Volcanic Islands'' [http://digital.library.upenn.edu/webbin/gutbook/lookup?num=3054], [http://charles-darwin.classic-literature.co.uk/observations-geologiques-sur-les-iles-volcaniques/ (French version)]
* 1846: ''Geological Observations on South America'' [http://digital.library.upenn.edu/webbin/gutbook/lookup?num=3620]
* 1849: ''Geology'' from ''A Manual of scientific enquiry; prepared for the use of Her Majesty's Navy: and adapted for travellers in general.'', John F.W. Herschel ed. [http://pages.britishlibrary.net/charles.darwin3/geology.html]
* 1851: ''A Monograph of the Sub-class Cirripedia, with Figures of all the Species. The Lepadidae; or, Pedunculated Cirripedes.'' [http://pages.britishlibrary.net/charles.darwin4/liv_lepadidae/lepadidae01.html]
* 1851: ''A Monograph on the Fossil Lepadidae; or, Pedunculated Cirripedes of Great Britain'' [http://pages.britishlibrary.net/charles.darwin4/fos_lepadidae/fos.lep.html]
* 1854: ''A Monograph of the Sub-class Cirripedia, with Figures of all the Species. The Balanidae (or Sessile Cirripedes); the Verrucidae, etc.'' [http://pages.britishlibrary.net/charles.darwin4/liv_balanidae/balanidae_fm.html]
* 1854: ''A Monograph on the Fossil Balanidæ and Verrucidæ of Great Britain'' [http://pages.britishlibrary.net/charles.darwin4/fos_balanidae/fos.balanidae.html]
* 1858: ''[[On the Tendency of Species to form Varieties; and on the Perpetuation of Varieties and Species by Natural Means of Selection|On the Perpetuation of Varieties and Species by Natural Means of Selection]]''
* 1859: ''[[The Origin of Species|On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life]]''
* 1862: ''On the various contrivances by which British and foreign orchids are fertilised by insects'' [http://pages.britishlibrary.net/charles.darwin3/orchids/orchids_fm.htm]
* 1868: ''Variation of Plants and Animals Under Domestication'' [http://www.esp.org/books/darwin/variation/facsimile/title3.html (PDF format)], [http://charles-darwin.classic-literature.co.uk/variation-of-animals-and-plants-under-domestication-v1/ Vol. 1], [http://charles-darwin.classic-literature.co.uk/variation-of-animals-and-plants-under-domestication-v2/ Vol. 2]
* 1871: ''[[The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex]]''
* 1872: ''The Expression of Emotions in Man and Animals'' [http://charles-darwin.classic-literature.co.uk/the-expression-of-emotion-in-man-and-animals/]
* 1875: ''Movement and Habits of Climbing Plants'' [http://digital.library.upenn.edu/webbin/gutbook/lookup?num=2485]
* 1875: ''Insectivorous Plants'' [http://charles-darwin.classic-literature.co.uk/insectivorous-plants/]
* 1876: ''The Effects of Cross and Self-Fertilisation in the Vegetable Kingdom'' [http://charles-darwin.classic-literature.co.uk/the-effects-of-cross-and-self-fertilisation/]
* 1877: ''The Different Forms of Flowers on Plants of the Same Species'' [http://charles-darwin.classic-literature.co.uk/the-different-forms-of-flowers-on-plants/]
* 1879: "Preface and 'a preliminary notice'" in Ernst Krause's ''Erasmus Darwin'' [http://pages.britishlibrary.net/charles.darwin3/erasmus.html]
* 1880: ''The Power of Movement in Plants'' [http://charles-darwin.classic-literature.co.uk/the-power-of-movement-in-plants/]
* 1881: ''Formation of vegetable Mould Through the Action of Worms'' [http://digital.library.upenn.edu/webbin/gutbook/lookup?num=2355]
* 1887: ''Autobiography of Charles Darwin'' (Edited by his Son Francis Darwin) [http://digital.library.upenn.edu/webbin/gutbook/lookup?num=2010]
* 1958: ''Autobiography of Charles Darwin'' (Barlow, unexpurgated)
 
=== Letters ===
'''So lets not twist facts. About the naming lets stick to the convention of the Ukranian State. Filaret's church is recognised as UOC-KP, Slobodans as UOC...I suggeest that we clarify UOC as UOC(MP) - [[User:Kuban kazak|Kuban kazak]] 11:59, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
*[[Correspondence of Charles Darwin]]
* 1887: ''Life and Letters of Charles Darwin'', ed. [[Francis Darwin]] [http://charles-darwin.classic-literature.co.uk/the-life-and-letters-of-charles-darwin-volume-i/ Volume I], [http://charles-darwin.classic-literature.co.uk/the-life-and-letters-of-charles-darwin-volume-ii/ Volume II]
* 1903: ''More Letters of Charles Darwin'', ed. [[Francis Darwin]] and A.C. Seward [http://charles-darwin.classic-literature.co.uk/more-letters-of-charles-darwin-volume-i/ Volume I], [http://charles-darwin.classic-literature.co.uk/more-letters-of-charles-darwin-volume-ii/ Volume II]
 
== References ==
{{Wikisource author}}
{{wikibooks}}
{{wikiquote}}
{{Commons|Charles Darwin}}
*Charles Darwin, ''Voyage of the Beagle'', (including Robert FitzRoy's ''Remarks with reference to the Deluge''), (Penguin Books, London [[1989]]) ISBN 0-14-043268-X
*[[E. Janet Browne]], ''Charles Darwin: Voyaging'' and ''The Power of Place'' (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995-2002).
*Adrian Desmond and James Moore, ''Darwin'' (London: Michael Joseph, the Penguin Group, [[1991]]). ISBN 0-7181-3430-3
*[http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hope.html The Darwin Deathbed Conversion Question]
*Richard Keynes, ''Fossils, Finches and Fuegians: Charles Darwin's Adventures and Discoveries on the Beagle, 1832-1836''. ( London: HarperCollins, 2002).
* James Moore and Adrian Desmond, "Introduction", in ''The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex'' (London: Penguin Classics, 2004). (Detailed history of Darwin's views on race, sex, and class)
*Diane B. Paul, "Darwin, social Darwinism and eugenics," in Jonathan Hodge and Gregory Radick, eds., ''The Cambridge Companion to Darwin'' (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 214-239.
*The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin], Ch. VIII, p. 274. New York, D. Appleton & Co., 1905 [http://pages.britishlibrary.net/charles.darwin/texts/letters/letters1_08.html]: quotation in which he describes himself as "agnostic"
 
==External links==
*[http://pages.britishlibrary.net/charles.darwin/ Writings of Charles Darwin on the Web]
*[http://darwin-online.org.uk/ Complete Works of Darwin Online]
*[http://www.nhm.ac.uk/nature-online/science-of-natural-history/biographies/charles-darwin/charles-darwin.html Charles Darwin biography at the Natural History Museum, London]
* [http://www.aboutdarwin.com AboutDarwin.com]
* [http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/darwin/ Darwin] - at the [[American Museum of Natural History]]
* [http://www.gruts.com/darwin/index.php The Friends of Charles Darwin]
* [http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/banknotes/current/darwin.htm Darwin's portrait on the £10 note]
* [http://www.npg.org.uk/live/search/person.asp?search=ss&sText=Charles+Darwin&LinkID=mp01196 Twelve different portraits of Charles Darwin at the National Portrait Gallery, U.K.]
* [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4607037.stm BBC News: "Darwin family repeat flower count"]
* [http://www.oum.ox.ac.uk/onlinedb/darwin/darimage/dardraw.htm Examine Darwin's crustacean collection online]
* A short [http://atheisme.free.fr/Biographies/Darwin_e.htm biography of Darwin]
 
==See also==
* [[Harriet]] - a Galápagos tortoise, the world's oldest living animal
* [[Patrick Matthew]]
 
{{Darwin}}
{{evolution}}
<!-- Categorization and Interwiki links -->
 
[[Category:1809 births|Darwin, Charles]]
[[Category:1882 deaths|Darwin, Charles]]
[[Category:Agnostics|Darwin, Charles]]
[[Category:Anglicans|Darwin, Charles]]
[[Category:Alumni of Christ's College, Cambridge|Darwin, Charles]]
[[Category:British scientists|Darwin, Charles]]
[[Category:Carcinologists|Darwin, Charles]]
[[Category:Charles Darwin|*]]
[[Category:Darwin -- Wedgwood family|Darwin, Charles]]
[[Category:English travel writers|Darwin, Charles]]
[[Category:Evolutionary biologists|Darwin, Charles]]
[[Category:Fellows of the Royal Society|Darwin, Charles]]
[[Category:British geologists|Darwin, Charles]]
[[Category:Natives of Shropshire|Darwin, Charles]]
[[Category:Unitarian Universalists|Darwin, Charles]]
 
{{Link FA|sl}}
 
[[ar:تشارلز داروين]]
 
[[bg:Чарлз Дарвин]]
:This is indeed an interesting article but we have to make sure we don't derive the wrong conclusion from it. The article talks about the "annexation by ROC". It is important to understand that UOC (lead by Met Volodymyr (Sabodan)) is NOT ROC. The [[Ecumenical Patriarch]] never doubted the canonical status of UOC. UOC is not ROC. Neither UOC is a "Moscow Patriarchy" or "Patriarchate". UOC is just UOC and it is called by the media, not always but sometimes, as UOC-MP either for simplicity (to differentiate from UOC-KP) or out of ignorance or to label it as Muscovite in denigrating sense. As per the interview of the church leader [http://www.orthodox.org.ua/page-1690.html]:
[[bn:চার্ল্‌স্‌ ডারউইন]]
:''«Української Православної Церкви Московського Патріархату» не існує. Є «Українська Православна Церква». І з цим статутним ім’ям вона зареєстрована у відповідних державних установах. Додаток «Московський Патріархат» виник значно пізніше з метою розрізнення від «УПЦ-КП», яка, без приставки «КП» існувати не може, оскільки є новою організацією, що запозичила частину назви від Української Православної Церкви.''
[[bs:Charles Darwin]]
:translation: ''UOC-MP does not exist. There is an UOC and under this statutory name it is registered with appropriate state authorities. An addition "MP" emerged much later in order to differentiate from UPC-KP, which without "KP" cannot exist, since this is the new organization, that borrowed its name from the UOC''"
[[ca:Charles Robert Darwin]]
 
[[cs:Charles Darwin]]
We know that this is just Volodymyr's POV regarding borrowing, but we have to take his word regarding what is the name of his own church.
[[cy:Charles Darwin]]
 
[[da:Charles Darwin]]
Now, to the question whether the interview of the particular Bishop Vsevolod reflects. A quote from the same interview:
[[de:Charles Darwin]]
 
[[et:Charles Darwin]]
:''— Відповім словами Патріарха Варфоломія, який однозначно висловився, що такої інституції як «Київський патріархат» у православному світі не існує. Колишньому віце-прем’єр-міністру Миколі Жулинському Патріарх свого часу говорив, що Філарета (главу «КП») ніхто не визнає як архієрея, про що й інформував тодішнього президента Л. Кравчука.
[[es:Charles Darwin]]
 
[[eo:Charles DARWIN]]
:''Щодо згаданої заяви стосовно канонічної території, то Константинополь її не робив. Принаймні, я з цією заявою не знайомий. Якщо йдеться про висловлювання архієпископа Скопелосського Всеволода, то це його особисті слова, що не мають статусу офіційної заяви. Що стосується підтримки Константинополем «Кп», то той самий владика Всеволод, наскільки мені відомо, дотримується, як і ми, того ж канонічного порядку. Він приймає «кліриків» Київського патріархату в лоно Православної Церкви не інакше як через покаяння і звершення над ними встановленої хіротонії. Як Константинополь може підтримувати УПЦ-КП, якщо він взагалі не визнає її за Церкву?
[[eu:Charles Darwin]]
 
[[fr:Charles Darwin]]
This above is too long to translate. If there are parties interested in the topic that can't read Ukrainian, please ask.
[[fy:Charles Darwin]]
 
[[ga:Charles Darwin]]
Again, this is just an opinion of Volodymyr as that was an opinion of Vsevolod. However, even from Vsevolod's opinion it does not follow in any way that he (and even less so Bartolomeo) views UOC uncanonical. He speaks about the territory of ROC and of MP. UOC is not MP. UOC is UOC and its having an ecclesiastic link to MP doesn't make it MP or an ROC any more as the [[Japanese Orthodox Church]] which also operates under the ecclesiastic link to MP.
[[gd:Charles Darwin]]
 
[[gl:Charles Darwin]]
So, in this article we are talking about the dispute between UOC and UOC-KP. There is nothing to question the canonical status of UOC in the eastern orthodoxy. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 01:07, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
[[ko:찰스 다윈]]
 
[[hi:चार्ल्स डार्विन]]
:Irpen, the moment UOC-MP becomes true UOC, with no control from Moscow Patriarchate, it would be a very different argument. Now, unfortunately, it's still called "UOC-MP" in Ukraine, no matter how much wool they would like to pull over everyone's eyes. They can call themselves any name in the world, "Moscow Patriarchy" will come out right behind it. See what they call themselves despite all the lies:
[[hr:Charles Darwin]]
:'''Офіційний сайт Української православної церкви Московського патріархату. www.orthodox.org.ua'''
[[io:Charles Darwin]]
:Sure, Stalin also wanted Ukraine to be called "independent" in the UN, so he can have an extra vote in the Security Council, may he burn in hell.--[[User:Andrew Alexander|Andrew Alexander]] 01:45, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
[[id:Charles Darwin]]
 
[[is:Charles Darwin]]
::FYI, [[Ukrainian SSR]] didn't have a vote in the security counsil which I wrote in its article. If you just write some non-copyvio article too, you might feel better. As for the rest of the "MP", it is already replied to. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 01:50, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
[[it:Charles Darwin]]
 
[[he:צ'ארלס דרווין]]
:::It would never hurt to do some [[Elected_members_of_the_UN_Security_Council|reading]] prior to writing.--[[User:Andrew Alexander|Andrew Alexander]] 02:01, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
[[ku:Charles Darwin]]
:::Probably Irpen had in mind permanent members? [[user:mikkalai|mikka]] [[user talk:mikkalai|(t)]] 02:33, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
[[la:Carolus Darwin]]
 
[[lv:Čārlzs Darvins]]
Yes I did. But thanks for the link of Andrew Alexander. It would be a good idea to add the info to the Ukr SSR article. That would ineed be a useful contribution. I know that to cut out what others wrote and/or change names is more fun. Never mind. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 02:05, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
[[lt:Čarlzas Darvinas]]
 
[[hu:Charles Darwin]]
 
[[mk:Чарлс Дарвин]]
It is completely clear from the above discussion that the NPOV concerning "(un)canonicity" is not easy to be formed. It is definitelly impossible to formulate it in a single sentence. Let's decide whether we add a whole paragraph discussing the "canonicity" to the article on St Volodymyr's Cathedral, or we move this discussion to the UPC-KP article or to the History of Christianity in Ukraine.--[[User:AndriyK|AndriyK]] 08:47, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
[[ms:Charles Darwin]]
 
[[nl:Charles Darwin]]
:Best NPOV is what's based on facts. The lack of canonicity of UOC-KP follows from (or causes) its non-membership in the Eastern Orthodox [[Full communion|Communion]]. See [[Eastern Orthodox Church organization]] for more. The fact that the major cathedral in Kiev is controlled by a church which is considered uncanonical as per above is notable. The churchs attempts to solve the problem by getting [[Bartholomew I]] recognize it. It hasn't succeeded and it is unclear whether it will. When and if it does, we'll say so. There is no issue at all ever raised whether the Met. Volodymyr's UOC is canonical or not. But it is more remote because UOC does not control the church. The details about their rivarly are indeed in other articles. Don't remove brief but relevant info. If you feel it needs balanced and not for the [[WP:Point]] reasons, do so. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 09:04, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
[[ja:チャールズ・ダーウィン]]
 
[[no:Charles Darwin]]
::There are a lot of facts about UOC-KP. Should all they be described in the article on St Volodymyr's Cathedral? You find the canonicity issue "notable", other people may find something other to be "notable". Should all this be included to the article about the Cathedral?--[[User:AndriyK|AndriyK]] 09:21, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
[[pl:Charles Darwin]]
 
[[pt:Charles Darwin]]
Those, who return "(canonical claims of the Moscow Patriarchate on the territory of Ukraine are disputed by [[Patriarch of Constantinople|Ecumenical Patriarch]] [http://www.risu.org.ua/eng/news/article;4953/], [http://www.risu.org.ua/library/doc/MP_canter.pdf])" probably aren't reading talk. Nowhere did the [[Ecumenical Patriarch]] questioned the canonicity of UOC. "MP" is not an organization with any property in Ukraine. All property is either with UOC or UOC-KP. Even if you call UOC as UOC(MP), it is still not a [[Moscow Patriarchy]], which is not the same and has no property on its won in Ukraine. I am not even sure that MP per se is registered in Russia as an organization and even less so in UA. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 19:01, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
[[ro:Charles Darwin]]
 
[[ru:Дарвин, Чарлз]]
==Two most important facts on UOC-KP==
[[sco:Charles Darwin]]
Well, let's see what facts you mean to be equally notable to its non-canonicty. I think there are two most important things about it:
[[scn:Charles Darwin]]
#It is one of two major Ukrainian Orthodox churches
[[simple:Charles Darwin]]
#It is uncanonical
[[sk:Charles Robert Darwin]]
Please list what else you think is equally notable but take a look at [[WP:Point]] guideline to make sure you don't do what it discourages from doing. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 09:25, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
[[sl:Charles Darwin]]
 
[[sr:Чарлс Дарвин]]
::First of all I would add the UPC-KP POV concerning its (un)canonicity (all POVs should be presented).
[[fi:Charles Darwin]]
::Second, I do not consider "canonicity" issue to be important at all. More important is how many people are in the Church, how many church communities it has, what is its relation to the state, wheteher some centers outside the country control (or has influence on) it, what is its historical background, who is (and was) the leader of the Church,... (the list is not exhaustive).
[[sv:Charles Darwin]]
::I am preaty sure all this (and even more) information should be present in the article about UOC-KP, but I do not think that anything of this is indeed related to the Cathedral.--[[User:AndriyK|AndriyK]] 10:05, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
[[tl:Charles Darwin]]
 
[[ta:சார்லஸ் டார்வின்]]
There article says just that it is viewed uncanonical by the Orthodox Communion which is a fact. It does nat just say it is "uncanonical". The KP's view on its' canonicity is a tautology, of course it sees itself canonical. You may add that "KP disagrees to it" note but this would just look funny. The arguments about the canonicity itself and the claim to Mogila's church lineage (which wasn't a Patriarchy BTW) indeed belongs elsewhere and it is already there. Could be expanded. Go ahead with that if you want. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 16:19, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
[[th:ชาลส์ ดาร์วิน]]
 
[[tr:Charles Darwin]]
:Then the article should say that UPC-KP has 2491 parishes, 17 monasteries/nunneries, 2000 prists, 1825 churches and 217 being built, and so on and so forth.
[[uk:Дарвін Чарльз Роберт]]
:You consider "canonicity" important and I consider all other information being '''much more''' important. Should I add it?--[[User:AndriyK|AndriyK]] 16:40, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
[[zh:查尔斯·罗伯特·达尔文]]
 
I think phrasing "Major church in Ukrane although viewed uncanonical..." addresses both points. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 16:43, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 
:I do not think so.--[[User:AndriyK|AndriyK]] 16:53, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 
See above under [[Talk:St_Volodymyr%27s_Cathedral#Two_most_important_facts_on_UOC-KP]]. What else is equally important? --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 17:14, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 
:I do not no what else is ''equaly'' important. In my opinion (un)canonicity is least important.--[[User:AndriyK|AndriyK]] 17:36, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 
Not in view of most of the readers, judging from the edits. And no one among them were recrtuited/hired at outsdie forum to help in politically motivated conflicts. So, perhaps it is just a mainstream view. You may call the mainstream an anti-Ukrainian mafia. Such name caling speaks for itself. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 17:48, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 
:Did "most of the readers" authorized you to speak on their behalfe?--[[User:AndriyK|AndriyK]] 18:02, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 
I simply judged who and how edit the article. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 18:20, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 
:Did somebody authorized you to judge?--[[User:AndriyK|AndriyK]] 18:29, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
Those who mind me deriving their opinions from their editing in this article are free to speak up. I did not include you in the overwhelming majority, so you have no reason to complain. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 19:53, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 
== Ukrainian Addresses ==
 
Dear Wikipedians, please acknowledge the fact, that the Post Office of Ukraine uses "Kyiv" to direct letters from abroad. Please DO NOT erase the correct Ukrainian address of the cathedral, no matter how painful that may be to Russian Pride. Thanks!!! [[user:Andrew Alexander]].
:Address info is for travel guides and not encyclopedias. But you can add it to [[Wikitravel]] where your contributions to Ukraine's coverage will be appreciated. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 20:12, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
::If someone writes Kiev then what are the chances of a letter not being delivered...0. Moreover having recieved numerous mail from Ukraine and sent it there with Russian writing on the envelope, and each and every single one of those letters was delivered. Sorry to dissapoint your postal pride. [[User:Kuban kazak|Kuban kazak]] 20:36, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
 
Which shows that Ukrainian postal workers are not Russpohobic and it reflects the fact that the overwhelming majority of Ukrainians aren't either. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 20:52, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
 
I just hope that Ukrainian related pages are not changed simply for the reason of Russian nationalistic pride. The reason why Kyiv in the address of the cathedral absolutely needs to be changed to Russian Kiev escapes me at the moment. Is it because "Russia is the strongest and will change foreign address if needed"? Why can't a postal address mentioned in the text just be left alone? What harm will it do to anyone to have a precise address there?--[[User:Andrew Alexander|Andrew Alexander]] 01:04, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
:see 3 pragraphs above following the word "Address info is for travel guides...". Please calm down. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 01:09, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
 
Dear all, I explained clearly above why the postal address doesn't belong here. Also, care to read the discussion above about the strange phrase about purported unrecognision of UOC by Constantinople which is a total nonsense. Yakudza added it not because he himslef thought this belongs here but to make a [[WP:Point]]. Please read [[Don't disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point]] official guideline. It is useful to remember anyway. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 03:15, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
 
==Neutrality==
 
Ok some facts:
*1) KP is NOT recongnised by any Orthodox churches, including Constantinople
*2) Constantinople simply challenged the '''VALIDITY''' transfer of Kievan metropolia to Moscow (I wonder why it kept silent for 300 years but that's off topic), it did not discontinue recognising UOC(MP) as the only "Legal" church in Ukraine.
 
Now which one of those facts is more important. Well the first one is a solid '''FACT''', no one can challenge that.
 
The second one is simply a '''STATEMENT''', a statement behind which even the Const Orthodox Church is devided (see my post above or read here '''[http://www.pravoslavie.ru/news/010827/01.htm ПРЕДСТАВИТЕЛИ ПОМЕСТНЫХ ЦЕРКВЕЙ ПОДДЕРЖАЛИ УКРАИНСКУЮ ПРАВОСЛАВНУЮ ЦЕРКОВЬ В ЕЕ БОРЬБЕ С РАСКОЛОМ]'''), and I will repeat that it is a statement made by the Patriarch, a personal opinion if you like, '''NOT''' on behalf of the whole Const OC. All other Orthodox churches have dismissed this statement. Please Andrew Alexander please change your tone when you accuse other people of being nationalists for one country. [[User:Kuban kazak|Kuban kazak]] 00:09, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 
Guys, let's not repeat what's already said. I am asking the editor who added a tag to reread this talk page and only after that add a list of things that make an article POV as 1,2,3... Please do it sooner rather than later. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 05:43, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 
 
 
Here is a list of things for you to read:
 
1. There are more than 10,000 churches in the world, why do you come to the page about a mother cathdral of one of them and start telling us that it's "not canonical". Who cares? How is it important to the cathedral? Do you see catholics writing about eternal damnation of the Anglican Church according to some Popes on every Anglican-related page?
 
:I could not care less about other churches, as they don't claim themselves Orthodox, those that do are either in communion or uncanonical in eyes of the world Orthodox Communion. Happy?[[User:Kuban kazak|Kuban kazak]] 10:54, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
::But many do! And what business is it of yours? To vandalize all the pages of those churches versus making a single page to discuss such issues is not acceptable. To erase the opinion of the traditional leader of Christian Orthodoxy is adding insult to injury.--[[User:Andrew Alexander|Andrew Alexander]] 06:47, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
:::Patriarch of Constantinople is NOT a traditional leader of Orthodoxy, Orthodoxy has no leader, the churches exist in communion with each other. In fact the communion openely challenged the title ecunimical and has numerously demanded that autocephalousy recognition be responsibility of it not Cost OC. Besides as I said before, the Cosnst OC's opinion of this is split, there has been no formal statement on behalf of the whole church, and besides the Const OC did not cease to recognise UOC(MP) as the only legal Orthodox Church in Ukraine, all it did was challenge the 300 year ago event thats all. [[User:Kuban kazak|Kuban kazak]] 12:44, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
 
2. Why do you and your friends keep pushing Russian names of some historical Ukrainian figures. Prince Volodymyr in Old East Slavic is '''identical''' to modern Ukrainian. Why should he be Vladimir?--[[User:Andrew Alexander|Andrew Alexander]] 06:47, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
 
:Because Vladimir is as Russian as a Ukranian figure, moreover just like with Kyiv and Kiev, the latter is used simply to avoid confusing English readers as it is much more accepted. Same with Vladimir.[[User:Kuban kazak|Kuban kazak]] 10:54, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
::But what does YOUR opinion about Volodymyr has to do with his original Old East Slavic name? And why can't Kiev be mentioned along with Kyiv?--[[User:Andrew Alexander|Andrew Alexander]] 06:47, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
:::So you want to go along onto every wikipedia article and add Kyiv with Kiev, why not add Moskva with Moscow, or Varshava with Warsaw, why only Kyiv and why only on this site? (BTW Kyiv is mentioned on Kiev's site)[[User:Kuban kazak|Kuban kazak]] 12:44, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
 
3. Why do you keep erasing the names of Ukrainian cities and replacing them with Russian anochronisms? --[[User:Andrew Alexander|Andrew Alexander]] 06:16, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 
:I don't except Kiev and Odessa whose Russian transliterations are more common in English, remember Wikipedia must be "user freindly".[[User:Kuban kazak|Kuban kazak]] 10:54, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
::User friendly doesn't mean "avoid Ukrainian city names at all costs".--[[User:Andrew Alexander|Andrew Alexander]] 06:47, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
:::Well-known city names should be given in their well-known form, I don't mind less known city names to be given in Ukranian translit, but not Kiev and Odessa. Look at it from the opposite POV, where would you expect to see Lvov apart from the entry on the city itself. Same with Kyiv. [[User:Kuban kazak|Kuban kazak]] 12:44, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
 
:Your (3) is unrelated to this article. So, the reason of POV is just 1 and 2, correct? --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 06:47, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 
==The last stage of edit wars==
 
Ok lets finally agree on common ground, because this article is tortured enough
 
From the start:
#Russian transliteration: why not, was built in Russian Empire; played a key role; Kiev is Russophone
#Comparison: why St Isaacs and not Saviour on the blood, in my opinion late 19th century grand construction go better together
#Why put fresco compleation separate of the interior description, article needs to be consice
#Why put a 20th century (st Barbara's remains) event in the pre-Soviet times paragraph, same reason as above article needs to be consice.
#Cannonicity: Fine scrap the word cannonical, just write that UOC(MP) is autonomus from Moscow, UOC-KP is unrecognised by world Orthodox Communion, bare facts, nothing going too deep, if the reader wants to find out more, this is enough to get him to start thinking.
 
[[User:Kuban kazak|Kuban kazak]] 16:43, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 
:I propose the folowing solution:
:* your points 1-4 - according to your wish.
:* The (un)canonicity metters should be moved to [[History of Christianity in Ukraine]] and/or UPC-KP and UPC-MP articles. There is no need to discuss this point every time when churches are mentioned.
:* The controversy paragraph should be removed, instead the reference to the corresponding article should be added to "See also"
:This way we make an article about the Cathedral, instead of politics. The readers interested in interconfessional relations, politics etc. can follow the links.--[[User:AndriyK|AndriyK]] 17:01, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 
===Relevance of canonicity issue===
I am sorry, but the Politics around the cathedral is too relevant to be in the obscurity of "See also" section. We do not need to take sides in the article, neither we have to describe the events. The controversy and the fact that the Church became the first church property controvesry between two UOC's needs mentioned just with the conclusion who ended up controlling the church.
 
Uncanonicity/canonicty edit conflict consists of two parts:
*Whether to mention that UOC-KP is uncanonical
*Whether to mention that one Bishop of the UOC-USA said in his interview.
Two the latter issue, please note that he is not a Bishop of the [[Orthodox Church of Constantinople]] but just of one of the Churches under its patriarchy, that is [[Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA]] (pls note the red link, any takers btw?). Second, even he didn't question whether UOC(MP) is canonical, he questioned the 300 year old transfer and he did so not on behalf of the [[Ecumenical Patriarch]] on whose behalf he is not entitled to speak anyway. Official statements of the Ecumenical Patriarch are well-known that UOC(MP) is the only canonical Orthodox church in Ukraine. Also, this info was added by Yakudza clearly in order to make a [[WP:Point]] because he didn't like to see the mention of the UOC-KP status (please read [[Don't disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point]] anyway).
 
As for whether to mention that fact that UOC-KP lacks recognition, how can this be unimportant, I wonder. The major church building is the hands of the Church which is not recognized world-wide. It is a fact. Contrary to what Andrew Alexander wrote, it is not the same as to say about Catholic-Anglican problem in every Anglican church building article because Anglican church does not claim that it is Catholic (which would require recognition from Rome) while UOC-KP claims that it is Orthodox. A more close analogy would be the article of the Episcopal church building of which a priest (recently ordained) was openly gay. That generated the controversy in the [[Anglican Communion]] because there is an important issue within that Church whether it is OK to tolerate Homosexuality. We should not take sides in the disputes like that, and should not even elaborate on what belongs to other articles. But a brief mention of lack of recognition by the World Orthodoxy is warranted. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 17:24, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 
::Save this for the other articles, just mention the outline here, more on the ownership conroversy article, this has gone on long enough...[[User:Kuban kazak|Kuban kazak]] 17:32, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 
This is just what the article does. It just mentions the issue in one sentence. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 17:43, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 
In situations let's, as this is accepted in Wikipedia apply for example. Is this [[WP:POINT]] or [[POV]]? As this is done in other encyclopedia, newspaper and other publication. On request[http://www.google.com/search?client=opera&rls=ru&q=%D1%83%D0%BF%D1%86-%D0%BA%D0%BF&sourceid=opera&num=50&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 УПЦ-КП] Google gives 105,000 links; [http://www.google.com/search?client=opera&rls=ru&q=%D1%83%D0%BF%D1%86-%D0%BA%D0%BF+%D0%BD%D0%B5%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%BD%D1%96%D1%87%D0%BD%D0%B0&sourceid=opera&num=50&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 УПЦ-КП неканонічна] - 37 links; [http://www.google.com/search?client=opera&rls=ru&q=%D1%83%D0%BF%D1%86-%D0%BA%D0%BF+%D0%BD%D0%B5%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F&sourceid=opera&num=50&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 same in russian] - 40 links. Practically all article, where is used "uncanonical" have polemical (POV) essence. No (!) solid publishing does not use this word. In article about cathedral "uncanonical" - uniquely POV. --[[User:Yakudza|Yakudza]] 19:26, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 
:I am repeating myself third time round, scrap the word cannonical. Simply add to UOC (MP) - autonomous from Moscow Patriarchy. Likewise with UOC-KP - unrecognised by Orthodox Communion. No less no more[[User:Kuban kazak|Kuban kazak]] 23:23, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 
Unrecognized and uncanonical are almost identical in the religious context and uncanonical is more exact in the general context. Unrecognized may be for various reasons and also the issue may be confused by a legal recognition, which here is not a problem since the Church is properly registered and functions within the law. OTOH, we don't need to mention the lack of recognition for the second time further in the text. I will correct the article as such. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 23:41, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 
== Shell we ask for madiation? ==
 
I propose to resolve the dispute by asking for official mediation. Please find below the summary of what I propose and make your summary as well. Please answer clearly whether you agree to start apply for mediation.--[[User:AndriyK|AndriyK]] 18:04, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
 
===[[User:AndriyK|AndriyK]]:===
Let's think what most of the readers would expect to find in the article about [[St Volodymyr's Cathedral]]. Does he or she look for the information about politics and inter-confessional relations? In my opinion, most of the users would interested about, architecture, mosaics etc. If somebody would interested about political matters, s/he can follow the links to the corresponding articles.
 
1. The (un)canonicity is not related to the Cathedral itself but rather to Church that uses the building. This stuff is clearly belong to the article about Ukrainian Orthodox Church - Kiev Patriarchy (UPC-KP), rather than to the article on the building it uses. Everybody who is interested in detailed information about UPC-KP can follow the link to the corresponding article.
 
If one would like to describe in details in the Cathedral article not only the building but also the Church that owns it, one had to add much more information: how many people are in the Church, how many church communities it has, what is its relation to the state, wheteher some centers outside the country control (or has influence on) it, what is its historical background, who is (and was) the leader of the Church,... (the list is not exhaustive).
 
While some people belonging to (Russian) Orthodox may consider (un)canonicity matter to be important, this is not an universal POV. Presenting only one POV is agains the NPOV policy. The UPC-KP POV concerning its (un)canonicity should be presented, as well as view of other churches should be presented. NPOV concerning "(un)canonicity" is not easy to be formulated. It is definitelly impossible to formulate it in a single sentence.
 
2. Concerning the so called "seizure". I was in Kiev that time. I perfectly remember that nothing extraordinary happend. Pro-Moscovian church leader Sabodan gathered a crowd. They went to the Cathedral, saw the police guiding it and went back. That's all story. This was even not an "even of the week" in Ukrainian media. In my opinion, this event does not desrve even to be mentioned in an encyclopedia. OK, some people have another opinion. They created a separate article on this event. Why should we devote a whole paragraph of in the present article to this minor event. A link in "See also" suffies.
 
3. Besides, I do not consider the transliteration from the Russian name to be relevant to the Cathedral in the center of Kiev. We do not add transliteration from Ukrainian to the articles about Moscower Churches, do we?
 
Other Cathedral may be mentioned in the article if they are somehow related to the [[St Volodymyr's Cathedral]], not just to mention the articles that some editors like.--[[User:AndriyK|AndriyK]] 18:04, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
 
===[[User:Kuban kazak|Kuban kazak]]:===
On the whole I like the article as it is now and agree that when the information about the seizure was expanded it should have been moved to a different article. I have numerously proposed that only skeletal facts be given about UOC(MP) and the UOC-KP one is autonomous from Moscow, the other one is unrecognised.
 
Russian spelling is important as the history and original symbolism for the baptism and unity of Russia as a whole (rember what it was built for, or look for many of Moscow church leaders in the frescoes). Moreover Kiev is Russophone so a common name should exist, and Vladimir himself is equally relevant to Russia and Ukraine, so lets not have one privatize histrory fully to itself. Apart from that nothing happened in front of the cathedral, although the event was important as it became a catalyst for further development in the church despute.
 
Why did I replace St Isaacs with Church of Saviour on the blood, well simply because if are going to compare monumental cathedrals in different cities then lets choose well where there are real similarities. [[User:Kuban kazak|Kuban kazak]] 18:23, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
 
===[[User:Andrew Alexander|Andrew Alexander]]:===
I agree with every point of AndriyK and would like to add that the "seizure" story is a perfect example of propaganda, when a virtual non-event is pictured into something grand. There are barely any references of it. One of them comes from a Russian Orthodox booklet, another from a sentence of a petty Ukrainian provocateur. It's amazing how silly this article sounds to a person who knows anything about Kiev of that time. Also, please note an openly nationalistic stance of the people like Kuban kazak. Simply read his phrase, '''"unity of Russia as a whole"'''. Is Ukraine even on the maps for that person? How can views that biased and unconventional allow to form this article? Kievans already decided what names to use in their city. They have elected a mayor and a local government, who keep all the Kiev names strictly Ukrainian. The 3 million Kievans could survive without the help of Kuban kazaks. As far as the "Orthodox canonicity" argument goes, perhaps, it's an invitation to name calling and religious bickering on ''every'' Wikipedia page dedicated to some temple. Thanks to Kuban kazaks again.
 
===[[User:Irpen|Irpen]]===
The entry above by [[user:Andrew Alexander]] is an unrelated rant and cannot be really commented. I will, however comment on the points made by [[user:AndriyK]]. I numbered his points above and will respond to each of them one by one.
 
1. ''Should the info about canonicity of UOC-KP be mentioned?'' Yes it should but only passingly. The issue is complex and the discussion belongs to other articles. However, the building is used for religious services and it was contested by two organization of which one got a hold of it. The issues about this organization's history are complex but two most important pieces of information about it is (1) it's being one of two major Ukrainian Orthodox Churches, (2) its lack of recognision by any other Orthodox church in the world. The reason why the latter is important is described in my entry above at [[Talk:St_Volodymyr%27s_Cathedral#Relevance_of_canonicity_issue]]. However, if the lack of recognision (canonicity) is mentioned we need to say that this is still a mojor Church in UA. Otherwise, a reader might think that it is just some unrecognized sect which it isn't. The article does just that. It says ''"one of two major Ukrainian Orthodox Churches, viewed, however, uncanonical by Eastern Orthodox Communion."''. "Uncanonical" may be replaced by "unrecognized" but the latter term is less exact as I said in the same section above, please see again [[Talk:St_Volodymyr%27s_Cathedral#Relevance_of_canonicity_issue]].
 
2. Currently the article nowhere uses the word seizure and to say it devotes a "paragraph" to the controversy is, being literally correct, still an exaggeration. The article devotes two short sentences plainly saying that there was an ownership controversy between two organizations and one of them won it. The dispute over who controls the building is significant enough to be mentioned. Details belong to a separate article specifically devoted to the ownership controversy. They are not in this article at all.
 
3. The name "Vladimirsky" along with "Volodymyrsky" is important enough because the cathedral was originally founded under the former name under which it was known for most of its existence. We should use a modern name for an article title but the very common name of the cathedral should be mentioned (see for instance this google test results for whatever they are worth [http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&rls=GGLC%2CGGLC%3A1969-53%2CGGLC%3Aen&q=%22Vladimirsky+cathedral%22+Kiev+OR+Kyiv], [http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Volodymyrsky+cathedral%22+Kiev+OR+Kyiv&hl=en&lr=&rls=GGLC%2CGGLC%3A1969-53%2CGGLC%3Aen] that show the Vladimirsky name is used for about 20 times more frequently)
 
--[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 06:41, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 
:Well, my recent edit was already explained many times. [[User:AlexPU|AlexPU]] 21:47, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
 
== Common sense vs. POV extasy and excessive tolerance to Russian propagandism ==
 
Simple logic test for my (un)respected Wiki(fellows?)
 
[[User:Alex Bakharev]] wrote:
 
''NPOVing is not equvalent to blanking of the relevant information'',
 
meaning that:
 
*the [[1990s]] inter-nomination quarrels are relevant to the article on '''material''' brick-layed '''structure''' that was built long before two quarreling sides actually appeared.
 
*the propagandist ('''non-legal,non-formal''') declarations of a religious organization regarding another religious organization are relevant to the architectural landmark occasionally used (not even owned!) by the latter organization. In the country where church is separated from the state.
 
Question: '''''what a I-think-perverted sense of logic that Bakharev has (or pretends to have)?''''' Is there any sense to discuss something with this I-think-shameless propagandist? [[User:AlexPU|AlexPU]] 22:48, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
 
P.S. As you can see, I'm a POV pusher. I'm pushing the POV that we should prevent POV-pushing where irrelevant. And this POV of mine, although adopted as Wikiethics, is, unfortunately, still not shared by many users of Wikipedia.[[User:AlexPU|AlexPU]] 22:48, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
 
==Another I-think-irrelevant note :(==
Regardless of what I was saying about distinguishing between brick structures and nominations, Mr Kuban kazak would like to state that:
 
:With reference to the above post, I shall say that it makes sense that the ROC owned the building for the vast majority of its lifetime. Thus why not return it directly to the Patriarchy of Moscow, bypassing Slobodan altogether? No of course the modern Moscow Patriarchy is "infested" with KGB (or so the people here like to say, even though KGB does not exist any more). Well here is a compormise Russian Orthodox Church Abroad, who recentely ended the 85 year schism, they certainly have all the rights to succesors of the original pre-1917 Russian Orthodox Church, which certainly owened the cathedral unquestionably.[[User:Kuban kazak|Kuban kazak]] 23:42, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
 
:Well UOC(MP) appeared in 1990 when the Ukranian Exarchate became fully autonomous from ROC, UOC-KP first appeared in 1992 when it was merged with the UAOC, but this union did not last long and a schism within a schism...(well seems to be a trademark of schismatics, after all they got to take credit for being called that ;). [[User:Kuban kazak|Kuban kazak]] 23:42, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
 
:Bottom line, lighten up people, I am in a good mood today, my wife is expecting a child in...8 months time, and he (or she) will certaintly not be baptised by the schismatics.[[User:Kuban kazak|Kuban kazak]] 23:42, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
 
Dear Kazak, I hope you would tolerate my decision to move and comment your comments. It's only because I just couldn't find any sense in associating your posts with mine above. I should regretfully say that you lack your logic too... However, I find your manner of starting with talk page (instead of reverting articles like other Russian editors) very nice. Thank you for that. Although you openly declared yourself a biased user: ''schismatic'' is definitely an insulting POV-pushing term. Best wishes, [[User:AlexPU|AlexPU]] 00:18, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 
:Well actually if you look at the history the edit war was started by AndriyK and his tezka, so no need to launch accusations. I never said I did not have a POV, but then note that that POV is not in the article, it is here in the talk page, but again I am in too much a good mood today to argue, so do change the bracket.[[User:Kuban kazak|Kuban kazak]] 00:53, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 
AlexPU, I certainly have seen enough of you jumping the gun and turning rude on the opponents, announcing what you "demand", "tolerate", "won't tolerate" and "instist" both before and after your wikibreak. Let's try to solve this in a collegiate way, whenever possible, by sticking to the issues and keeping our attitudes to ourselves while possible. The issue here is a narrow one. Whether the fact who owns the the building is related to the building article (it is IMO) and whether the fact that the major orthodox cathedral in Kiev is operated by the organization whose belonging to the Orthodoxy is not universally agreed is notable do be passingly mentioned. We certainly don't have to present the long debate of Filaret's KP canonicity in this article but just to say a word about the status issue is worthy. Similarly, we are not talking about the "seizure" or whatever it is called and we don't take sides. We say that there was a controversy related to the building and link a reader who wants more to a more detailed article. More details on these issues is available above. Please make sure, you read what was already said. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 01:33, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 
== Recent Edit war ==
 
It looks like we have three points of differences:
#Inclusion of the canonical status of UOC-KP. I think it is relevant (for the reasons outlined by Irpen) but does not belong to the first paragraph of the article. I have put it to the second last paragraph, next to the controversy of the ownership, I think it is reasonably balanced
#Link to [[Ukrainian opera]] instead of [[opera]]. I think if the article Ukrainian opera existed, it would be much more informative to link to it, but since it is a red link now, then I used the AlexPU variant of a simple opera link. The red link may be an inspiration for somebody to write the long overdue article (that is '''important''', taking into account all these ''Padu li ja dryuchkom propertiy il' mimo proletit dryuchok''-kinds of jokes), so my edit is disputable
#AlexPU finds the end of the article to be POV ''by the magnificent singing of one of the best church chorals. The choral is often joined by opera singers, providing an unforgettable listening and spiritual experience to St Volodymyr's visitors''. We could put hedging here: ''by the signing described by many as magnificent'', ''reported as providing an unforgettable listening and spiritual experience''. So far nobody wend ahead and told us, "the singing is cacophonous, the experience is dull, etc..", why do we need to balance the article with POV that does not exist? [[User:Alex Bakharev|abakharev]] 07:55, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 
The last but not least, the talk page is to discuss editing of the article on the Cathedral. It is not intended to discuss [[User:Alex Bakharev]], [[User:AlexPU]], [[User:Irpen]], etc. Please discuss the users somewhere in the Userspaces, not here [[User:Alex Bakharev|abakharev]] 07:55, 22 November 2005 (UTC)