Jump to content

Talk:Drudkh

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sanskrit?

[edit]

Based on my limited knowledge of Sanskrit, "Drudkh" certainly does not sound like a Sanskrit word (but it does sound very Ukrainian). Where does this come from? I've heard it elsewhere but it doesn't seem right. -Egendomligt 11:09, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually the sanskrit word for wood and/or wooden objects is "dru". I have no idea where from did the band members get their version, maybe from an old or inaccurate dictionary? The fact is, that we can't say for sure that this is a flaw or misspelling. 88.156.24.124 19:38, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Although I have no knowledge of Sanskrit, the word drudkh can be found in Wikitionary's Indo-Iranian Swadesh list. Other resources, such as Drudkh's Encyclopedia Metallum page, say that "Drudkh" means "wood" in Sanskrit, one of the earliest attested members of the Indo-European language family." If the point of the word drudkh is historical, and variations of it appear in several languages, it may be that there's nothing wrong per se with the article, only that the claim is difficult to verify.

Some more examples [1]:

  • Sanskrit: druma
  • Greek: drus (oak), drumos (forest)
  • Old English: drom (thicket, forest)
  • Slavic: drevo

Based on those old Indo-European words and the similarity between the Ukrainian word derevo and drudkh, I think there's definitely some connection between drudkh and a meaning of "wood" or "tree." Gavotte Grim 08:31, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Drudkh's Encyclopedia Metallum page now says "Drudkh" means "tree" in Sanskrit, but how much we can rely on EM's info is discutable, of course. Boooooooomblastandruin 15:29, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Within the Sanskrit grammatical tradition, dictionary forms of words are the stems, and not a random choice of their inflicted forms such as most western European languages do (Latin does first person singular indicative present for verbs, nominative singular for nouns et cetera), Drudkh might be just the stem and if it is the stem it will never appear in that form because it ends a syllable on not only two stops, but also the first voiced and the second voiceless and the last aspirated also, that's not really pronounceable. The word for 'wood' might be some-thing like 'drudkham' or 'drud' or some-thing like that. Rajakhr (talk) 14:12, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


The word ‘Drukht’ is the Farsi/Parsi/Persian word for ‘tree’, which does (of course) have an Indo–Aryan root. As pointed out above, the word in Sanskrit is ‘dru’. Kodanshi (talk) 07:11, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://spokensanskrit.de also states that "dru" or "druma" is a Sanskrit word for "tree". Drudkh could well be derived from it. JJohannes (talk) 06:59, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not entirely sure why this discussion is still going on. I am removing the tag. Myrkkyhammas (talk) 23:53, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Swan Road?

[edit]

I'll delete it, or put it somewhere else in the article, actually Autumn Aurora is the most famous record. I putted a band box and uploaded the logo instead of just the swan road cover, which is poor quality. Darksteel 18:57, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from Ukraine ;)

[edit]

Drudkh isn't Ukrainian word. Egendomligt, you may trust me because I'm Ukrainian ;) This word sounds very similar to russian and ukrainian "drug" without "kh" (transcription - [drug], in english - friend).— Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.138.73.26 (talk) 11:40, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Drudkh.jpg

[edit]

Image:Drudkh.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:36, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

npov

[edit]

that's not neutral:

Roman Saenko, the leading member of Hate Forest, and one of the most fruitful composers and lyric writers in the metal scene;

-- 141.3.74.35 (talk) 21:07, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New album?

[edit]

Who got the idea that they already recorded a new album? I can't find anything on it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.96.150.25 (talk) 21:29, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Drudkh. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:40, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Drudkh. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:02, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

NSBM

[edit]

Ukrainian nationalism is not National Socialism. Drudkh are not NSBM. Even their connections to NSBM are tenuous. (A connection with Hate Forest, whose NSBM status is also debatable. One of the "sources" in that article is an amateur music review by a guy who admits he doesn't know a word of the lyrics!)

there's not a lot of good sources for bands like these, and the few sources there are are riddled with errors.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:6000:8745:6400:85f5:e783:20bf:900c (talk) 13:04, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sources are pretty clear that it's an NSBM band.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:32, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Whether or not Drudkh qualifies as an NSBM band, I was originally not going to touch with a 30-foot pole. But thinking about it, and seeing the edit warring taking place on the page, I realized that I could do something. So I did.
I created a new Controversy section, detailing Drudkh's relationship with NSBM. Instead of using the previous hard-line verbiage of, "The band are considered NSBM", I have used the more diplomatic but still fully factual and verifiable, "Drudkh have been accused of being... NSBM." I also added some more relevant citations regarding their Blood in Our Wells album being dedicated to Stepan Bandera.
Food for thought: Can a band write a song with the title "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" and still be considered a-political? Mungo Kitsch (talk) 01:09, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I was starting to feel overwhelmed and was having trouble figuring out what to do.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 04:13, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why a 30-foot pole? You had to clarify how uncomfortable these topics make you? Facts or get lost, Mungo Kitsch.

The accusation is essentially that Drudkh promotes a form of nationalism called primordialism. Stepan Bandera was temporarily considered a national hero. The Ukrainian Insurgent Army is only mentioned in the title of a single song, yet your controversy section claims it's referenced repeatedly. Wikipedia references the Holocaust, so Wikipedia must be maintained by national socialists...? Merely mentioning your own country's history makes you a nationalist? (This is an ongoing debate; there are 3 kinds of nationalism, primordialism being the most harmful strain.) "...accused of being NSBM." will sadly have to stay because it is NOW factual, thanks to this noble and utterly righterous witch hunter, Mungo Kitsch. Accusing Blink 182 of being NSBM would, likewise, warrant a "Controversy" section on their page as well, am I right? All in favor? Alecjkeene (talk) 12:58, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I left out some of the best points: Drudkh doesn't write their own lyrics, which is what's in question here, not "music", as claimed in Controversy. Music can't be translated to to Ukrainian or English. Some of the lyrics are adapted from classical Ukrainian poetry written in a time when speaking and writing in Ukrainian were banned by, iirc, first Nazi rule and then Soviet. And lastly, the uncomfortable stuff, Ukrainians have and continue to fall victim today to ethnic cleansing and other atrocities, while also being coerced and/or inspired to commit those very atrocities in the past. It's almost as if they're cursed to never attain sovereignty. Alecjkeene (talk) 13:24, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Alecjkeene: I'm a witch hunter? That is the first time anyone has said that about me, on or off Wikipedia, hence my bafflement at such a sentiment from you. I guess you found out that I have been a Matthew Hopkins this whole time! As the old saying goes, "I've been called worse".
Nonetheless, one thing I will say is that they are de facto not NSBM, and I personally believe the label is not a fit for the band literally speaking. They do not present that way, and do not intend themselves to be passed as such. However, there is discourse abounded online about whether or not they are NSBM. It is my hope that this article does not take a formal stance on such a thing, instead parlaying the information neutrally and without libel. But giving no acknowledgement to such a thing is, in my opinion, not a proper approach, unless if the article will not go beyond a three-sentence-or-so stub, which is not the case here. Acknowledging that allegations and accusations exist is not the same thing as believing them or passing them as fact. And passing the verified existences of the allegation(s) as fact is not the same as passing the allegations themselves as fact, and I want to appreciate that in any academic and/or Wikipedian context.
If you do discern my comments above from 2020, you will see that I made a literal attempt to be diplomatic between the prose of "they are considered NSBM" and "they are certainly not". I tried to make a bridge, a compromise, between the two sentiments in a way that is academically sound and maintainable. Depending on the viewpoint, Drudkh's denials of white supremacy can be taken at face value, or can be compared to others who may or may not deny personal racism but are instead "pro-white" or "pro-European", a la Matthew Heimbach, Steve King (not the horror author), Virginia Abernethy, etc.
I would also like for you to read the page of Michael J. Moynihan, musician of Blood Axis and journalist, who has also received serious pushback against his perceived politics. Even Morrissey has his own heat for similar political reasons, and is a more well-known musician with a similar discourse regarding political rumor. I will clarify that, as of this post, I have not edited either the Moynihan or the Morrisey pages, and only have three edits to the Blood Axis page over a decade ago; but that is subject to change in the future. Even Lemmy and Jeff Hanneman have received criticism for their collections of WWII and Nazi memorabilia, even though such did not overtly translate toward racist and Nazi beliefs.
One of the reasons why Blink-182 has not received this type of controversy is because they are a) not outwardly political, or at the very least do not make repeated attempts to tie their own politics to their public identities and/or image; b) they have not historically and/or publicly associated themselves with extremism or those who have flirted with the ideas or iconography of such, and do not do so themselves; c) they have not earned a type of reputation, in a verifiable or noteworthy fashion, that harbors debate over whether or not to classify or accuse them as Neo-Nazis, far-righters, and/or fascists; and d) they are a pop punk band who have never played black metal, so it would be impossible for them to be categorized as NSBM regardless of any possible personal ideologies. If any of them were renege from this, then that will change assuming there is enough coverage to justify such. Nobody in their right minds would have thought of Kyrie Irving within the context of anti-Semitism a few weeks ago, until he broadcast that film espousing Black Hebrew Israelite talking points to 4.5 million of his social media followers.
You are absolutely right about nationalism, and an invested emotional interest in the history of one's own nation or local, not being racist by itself. Being proud of one's own nation is not synonymous with being racist. There is a relationship between nationalism and xenophobia, yes; just look at open border debates throughout the world, namely US-Mexico. But my post here is already getting pretty long, and I am positive you know of this relationship in your own way anyways. Bear in mind that I did not write this entire article, as it is a collaborative effort; I have only participated in such collaboration and have never been on Wikipedia for political and/or activism purposes.
In light of your comments, I have ameliorated the section, and it is now a "Politics" section instead of a "Controversy" section. Perhaps that is less sensational? I have also added sourced comments from a member of the Ukrainian black metal scene who has played in past bands with Saenko and the like. If it has any interest to you, I wrote an essay about extremism in metal music over two years ago, which you can find here.
Last thing: the "30-foot pole" comment is just a figure of speech, and is not meant to have that much weight put into it. "Uncomfortable topics" are a fundamental part of history, so swimming through them is a part of historical and encyclopedic interpretation. Because of the "uncomfortable" and "controversial" aspects, this Drudkh article is one of the most highly debate-prone articles with hot-topic qualities that I have ever contributed substantially to.
Thank you for expressing your concerns, and be well. Mungo Kitsch (talk) 03:27, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Attribute fascism to Stepan Bandera and Ukrainian Insurgent Army is nonsense

[edit]

Stepan Bandera was a prisoner in a Nazi concentration camp, and the Ukrainian Insurgent Army was actively fighting the Nazis.

«Ethnic Cleansing» refers in general to the army of Savur; Bandera at that time was sitting in a concentration camp and could not give any orders. Bandera's Ukrainian Insurgent Army did not control the lands of the places of clashes with the Poles and Polish Armia Krajowa at all.

Moreover, it was Bandera who was opposed to an alliance with the Germans, when Melnik, for example, saw an alliance with Germany as the only chance to defeat the Communists. Bandera's Ukrainian Insurgent Army actively fought Melnyk's Ukrainian Insurgent Army. And there was the Ukrainian Insurgent Army of Borovets. Attributing the actions of one army to another is the level of the yellow press, not Wikipedia.

For Ukrainians, the Ukrainian Insurgent Army is an army that fought against communist and Nazi invaders.

Russian politicians, who annexed Crimea and eastern Ukraine, attribute fascism to the Ukrainian war of liberation, thus justifying the killing of Ukrainians. --Synyća Vusata (talk) 08:50, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Crazy claims and irrelevant Kremlin propaganda in the 'Controversy' section

[edit]

The content in the 'Controversy' section is so outright crazy, false and biased - that one can only wonder how it could have found its place in a Wiki article. The topic is supposed to be about a music band - and the content in the article goes on to present readers with the Kremlin war propaganda instead. The only solution is to delete it entirely - there is no sense in discussing crazy stuff irrelevant to the article, thus promoting the agenda. I've tried to do just that - but the moderator proved to be a supporter of Kremlin propaganda (for who knows what reasons) User_talk:Tuodagloriam I don't have time to waste on proving the evident things to biased and arrogant moderators like the first one I've met here. It's just a shame... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tuodagloriam (talk • contribs) 10:53, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Drudkh&oldid=1207040250"