Talk:Battle of the Vorskla River

Lithuania C‑class Mid‑importance

	Lithuania portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lithuania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lithuania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LithuaniaWikipedia:WikiProject LithuaniaTemplate:WikiProject LithuaniaLithuania articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Belarus Low‑importance

	Belarus portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belarus, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belarus on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BelarusWikipedia:WikiProject BelarusTemplate:WikiProject BelarusBelarus articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Military history: Baltic states / European / Polish / Medieval B‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

B

This article has been rated as B-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Baltic states military history task force
	European military history task force
	Polish military history task force
	Medieval warfare task force (c. 500 – c. 1500)

Mongols B‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mongols, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mongol culture, history, language, and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MongolsWikipedia:WikiProject MongolsTemplate:WikiProject MongolsMongols articles
B	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Middle Ages Low‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A very confusing military campaign not supported by sources

Various Internet resources and Wilkipedia pages in other languages suggest that the allied army was made not only of Lithuanians, Poles and Russo-Lithuanian princes, but also by Teutonic Knights, Moldovans and renegade Tatars. I would expect to find some sources easily, especially about participating of Teutonic Knights who later faced their former allies in the battle of 1410.

misleading statement

Vytautas' defeat at the Vorskla effectively blocked Lithuanian expansion to Southern Ruthenia. His enormous state also lost hard-won access to the Black Sea.

The saying that state “also lost” could be misleading because the “lost” of lands was short lived and Mongols did not materialized their victory, because soon afterwards Grand Duchy of Lithuania driven back Mongols and the lands were reclaimed (Vytautas not dead yet). The same thing points maps:

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d101/no_name_2/ldk15.jpg (15c. Vyt still a live) http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d101/no_name_2/imageXV.gif (same) http://s34.photobucket.com/albums/d101/no_name_2/?action=view&current=TornTr.jpg (Vyt dead but somehow I still sea link to Black sea)

my suggestion is to change “also lost” to temprory lost or to leave “also lost” and explain a situation, because now it looks like Grand Duchy of Lithuania lost forever these lands….

This article is about the battle and its immediate consequences. No need to retell the whole history of Eastern Europe here. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 16:41, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And this is not whole history of Eastern Europe - this is a direct and immediate consequence. same as was writen in other parts of wiki - A large victory in 1399, for instance, only briefly delayed Lithuanian control spreading all the way to the Black Sea. and the immediate consequences was a temp. lost. Besides one word is not the whole history, but if you so frighten of the words, maybe it is more simply just write - mongols/tatars smashed vytautas army....without any explan. ? M.K 17:29, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

just wondering what your silence could mean... M.K 11:01, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Something wrong?

So, what is wrong this time? I hope you will give decent explan. this time M.K. 16:45, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you think that Poles and Lithuanians existed in 1399 and the Russians did not? Are you a racist? --Ghirla ^-трёп- 16:54, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

:D It is the first time in my life somebody is asking me am I a racist. My answer: I am not :P You see from the context of this event it more likely that people were from Ruthenia lands, but with Russians +- , let Russians be in such case if you so insist so, but I am strongly refusing to believe that Byelorussians were in XIVc. ! And even participated in war!

There did you gone? You have a bad characteristic - you do not speak much on talk... M.K. 11:10, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When did Tokhtamysh die?

This article claims that Tokhtamysh was killed during the Battle of Vorskla in 1399, yet another Wilkipedia page (linked to this one) suggests that he was killed in 1406 or even 1407 by assassins sent by Edigu. Also there was an incorrect statement that Tokhtamysh united Blue and White Hordes, to form the Golden Horde. At the time of Tokhtamysh the ruler of the White Horde was his former ally and later sworn enemy Timur (Timur Lenk) who eventually defeated Tokhtamysh and destroyed the Golden Horde. All history articles on the Wilkipedia history pages have a lot of these inconsistencies and need cleaning. Vitoldus44 18:35, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Factually incorrect

The statment "As the Tatar power was on the wane, Dmitriy soundly defeated the Horde Battle of Kulikovo (1380), only to be besieged in Moscow and defeated in 1382 by the new Khan Tokhtamysh." is incorrect, since Tokhtamysh was not a khan of the Blue Horde, but of the White Horde. The leader of the Blue Horde, Mamai, who was defeated on the Kulikovo field, was an enemy to Tokhtamysh. With respect, Ko Soi IX 10:30, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This numbers of 200 thousands Tatars and 75 thousands Allies are simply fantastic. In Battle of Grunwald was maybe 10 thousands Lithuanian soldiers, and it was almost whole army of Grand Duchy. The Tatars, especially after being defeated by Timur not so long time ago, also couldn't have more than maybe 30 thousand soldiers.--Krzychu (talk) 10:49, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

oooo, look at this: Vytautas was forced to abandon his plans to break the Union of Lublin and to ally himself once again with his cousin and King of Poland Jogaila. if you clik on link to Union of Lublin, you will see, that it was made some 200 hundred years later after battle of worskla river. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.254.133.52 (talk) 18:23, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thank you for spotting. Union's name was incorrect. Renata (talk) 18:44, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]