| Revision as of 06:28, 30 April 2004 editSzopen (talk | contribs)3,757 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 06:51, 30 April 2004 edit undoJerzy (talk | contribs)57,486 edits In what sense was not war against Russia?Next edit → | ||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| ::Russo is not apriopriate, since it was not war against Russia, i believe ;) ] 06:28, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC) | ::Russo is not apriopriate, since it was not war against Russia, i believe ;) ] 06:28, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC) | ||
| Are you saying that | |||
| * Russia was not involved, or | |||
| * Russia was involved, but it was not "against" Russia, e.g. because Poland did not intiate it and just defended itself? | |||
| IMO, the term just implies a war involving two countries, like the ], where no one seriously believes Spain was the aggressor.--]] 06:51, 2004 Apr 30 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 06:51, 30 April 2004
Shouldn't this article be at Polish-bolshevik war instead? The war ended some two years prior to creation of the Soviet Union and the term, although quite frequently used (even in Polish sources), is simply misleading. I'm thinking of moving it. Any objections?Halibutt 20:28, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- IMO needs change to something else; Russo-Polish also seems appropriate. How about Google-testing the two names. (IMO Bolshevik needs capital B, if you go that route.) --Jerzy(t) 06:00, 2004 Apr 30 (UTC)
- Russo is not apriopriate, since it was not war against Russia, i believe ;) Szopen 06:28, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Are you saying that
- Russia was not involved, or
- Russia was involved, but it was not "against" Russia, e.g. because Poland did not intiate it and just defended itself?
IMO, the term just implies a war involving two countries, like the Spanish-American War, where no one seriously believes Spain was the aggressor.--Jerzy(t) 06:51, 2004 Apr 30 (UTC)