Talk:Radziwiłł family

Lead description

Itzhak Rosenberg - Whilst the description "Polonized Lithuanian family" is absolutely correct in the historical sense (as sourced), it is too indirect and sophisticated for the very first sentence of this article. Very few people know what "Polonized" means, which make it more of a trivial fact. Polish-Lithuanian or Lithuanian-Polish are both neutral, correct, and appropriate as it relates to the name of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Merangs (talk) 15:44, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Merangs The sentence should be left as it was prior. It immediately specifies where the family was from - Lithuania (where else could Lithuanians be from?). As for sophistication, you can add more information to the lede, but that does not mean distorting source-based facts.

Plus, Polonization is not trivial, because it has sufficient notability for a Wikipedia article to exist about it and have thousands of articles written about it (https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=%22Polonization%22&btnG=). Sounds far from trivial.

Moreover, calling "Polish-Lithuanian" a better alternative is also masquerade, because "Polish-Lithuanian identity" has a mere few dozen results (https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=%22Polish-lithuanian+identity%22&btnG=). Sure, it has the notability to have its own article, but Polonization is far better known than the other one.

Furthermore, Polish-Lithuanian, Lithuanian-Polish or any variant thereof is not as you claim "correct", as the Radvila family was purely connected to Lithuania for centuries until 1569 and to say that this fits under "Polish-Lithuanian" is a straight-up lie. Yes, Radvila were very important in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, but that should be mentioned in a sentence like "The Radziwiłł family had immense control over the affairs of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth" or something similar, and not change it into "The Radziwiłł were Polish-Lithuanian". "Polish-Lithuanian" is actually worse for clarity, because it can refer to multiple things, e.g. Pole in Lithuania, Lithuanian in Poland, a person from Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and perhaps even the Polonized Lithuanian...

As it stands now, the sentence should be "Polonized Lithuanian family", because that is what the source says. To twist it into "Polish-Lithuanian" with personal insight is WP:OR, because instead of using sources, you conjecture, which is not what Wikipedia is about. --Itzhak Rosenberg (talk) 16:10, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

The term "Polish-Lithuanian" clearly identifies two countries to which they owed allegiance or resided in. Their origin is mentioned in the second paragraph and infobox. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section states "The first paragraph should define or identify the topic with a neutral point of view, but without being too specific". What you are presenting is a POV interpretation (and that's not what Wikipedia is about), with as many sources as possible in an attempt to 'Lithuanianize' whatever is or was connected to Lithuania. Daniel Z. Stone (Source 1) outlined that from 17th century onwards the family was Polish and they have kept the Polish spelling of their name until this day. By stating 'Polonized Lithuanian', we emphasize their Lithuanian identity which today merely applies. You say that prior to 1569 the Radziwiłłs were "purely connected to Lithuania" - Mikołaj "the Black" Radziwiłł died before the union and did not speak Lithuanian (Source 2). The stages of Polonization took effect much earlier than you presume.

One can throw sources from both sides, which only really strengthens the "Polish-Lithuanian magnate family" description. It is neutral. An alternative could be "a Polish-Lithuanian family which originated in Kernavė". I am not saying one allegiance (or nationality) is more important than the other because the family reached the apex of its prominence during the times of the Commonwealth. However, you are evidently trying to deprive the Radziwills of a certain aspect of their identity. I suggest you do Wikipedia:Requests for comment. Merangs (talk) 16:51, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

 Comment: Radzwill family is an ethnic Lithuanian family which was later Polonized, therefore the lead description provided by Itzhak Rosenberg is absolutely accurate (their family tree starts in Kernavė/Trakai). Even Polish source supports such statements, so removal of such line as "Polonized Lithuanian magnate family" is simply an inappropriate action (1). Quote with a reference from the official website of the Biržai Region Museum: "In actuality, the Radziwiłł family is descended from the Astikai noble family, who originates from lands close to Kernavė and have later expanded to Užpaliai and Anykščiai. The Kernavė nobleman Kristinas Astikas (died ca. 1444) took part in drawing up the historically important treaties of Salynas, Torunė, Horodlė and Melno. In 1419, he became the Castellan of Vilnius. At the signing of the Union of Horodło in 1413, when 47 Polish nobles gave their coats of arms to Lithuanian families, he received the Coat of Arms of Trąby."(reference link). Kristinas Astikas is son of Radvila Astikas. Reference which supports statement that the Lithuanian nobility was Polonized: NATIONAL SELF-PERCEPTION AMONG THE LITHUANIAN NOBILITY: EVIDENCE FROM THE RADZIWIŁŁ FAMILY. -- Pofka (talk) 15:11, 21 July 2021 (UTC)