Talk:Olha Kobylianska

LGBT speculations

Regarding the LGBT speculations: It looks like the original hint at Kobylianska's and Ukrainka's sexual relationship came from a short analysis or Ukrainka's letters to Kobylianska in Solomiya Pavlychko's dissertation. The letters indeed show that the two were very close friends who loved each other (not necessarily in romantic form). But neither of the writers ever explicitly admitted that their relationships had sexual form, so it's not correct to definitively include the authors to category "LGBT people".

I'll try to find sources that dispute this claim. --Amakuha (talk) 09:29, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Please go ahead. Until then the material stays. Contaldo80 (talk) 12:54, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Meanwhile, I edited the text closer to your source. --Amakuha (talk) 14:44, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Regarding the quote "as illness and circumstances prevented them from living together" from the book Who's who in gay and lesbian history, it looks rather as a logical mistake, because no other source claims they ever wanted to live together. (It's like saying that modern technology prevented H. G. Wells from living on Mars. – It looks plausible, but we don't really know if he wanted to live on Mars.) --Amakuha (talk) 04:15, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

As per [[1]] it advises "Citations to non-English reliable sources are allowed on the English Wikipedia. However, because this project is in English, English-language sources are preferred over non-English ones when available and of equal quality and relevance." Please respect this and in the first instance seek English sources to verify the claims made, which at the moment remain speculation. I suggest handling the material sensibly via talk in order to avoid descent into edit warring.Contaldo80 (talk) 10:54, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Again, "Citations to non-English reliable sources are allowed on the English Wikipedia". So what's the problem? The meaning of that rule is simply that you can replace the Ukrainian-language sources with English-language sources. --Amakuha (talk) 10:57, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

No - it's that the effort is made to find them in English. Otherwise the same guidance suggests I have the right to ask for a translation of all the material to check what it says. So the onus on you now is to provide that translation - otherwise the material will be removed. You are perilously close to edit warring to push a particular agenda. Contaldo80 (talk) 11:58, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Oh, I thought you were the one that pushes your agenda.

Anyway, I added the quotes and translations for you. --Amakuha (talk) 04:15, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Amakuha - I advise you to be prudent in making personal attacks. This is the second time that you've accused me of pushing an agenda. Unless you can specify here and now what that "agenda" is - and back it up with supporting material then I'd advise you to take a step back or risk going down a route that may see you blocked from editing. Asssume good faith unless you can demonstrate otherwise. Contaldo80 (talk) 09:10, 9 August 2017 (UTC)