Talk:White Russian

I'm not sure the term "obsolete" is even the right one to qualify these definitions.

The country has changed it's English name which is fair enough, but when talking about the past, during the time of the USSR, or other times when the Russians were in control, the old terms are surely within their context and hence fine to use - right?

Or is this the difference between "obsolete" and "archaic"? Does the latter mean "nobody uses this anymore" as compared to the former which could mean "more up-to-date terms exist, but people still use this old one"? &mdash; Hippietrail 12:01, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * The difference is more like obsolete is a word people wouldn't readily know any more, like achatour, while archaic is a word people wouldn't readily use anymore, because it sounds old-fashioned, like thou or velocipede. "White Russian" is archaic, although perhaps a better term still would be deprecated.  —Muke Tever 17:31, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Perhaps a better phrase would be "not official". RSvK 16:21, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)

The entry talks about two groups of people in the political context. That is the Russians who took the side of the Tsar in the Russian Civil War and then another group of Russians who left the country after the Reds won. Are these really two different meanings of the expression "White Russian"? Also did a person have to fight or to emigrate to be a White Russian? Redddogg 16:15, 2 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Different but related meanings. There was a White Movement that included the White Army, made up of White soldiers, and White politicians and White supporters and sympathizers. It was like a political party, and you were a White if you fought in the White Army or if you were a White supporter/sympathizer. After the civil war, Whites who were without means tried to blend in and convert, while those with the means emigrated. After the White Movement was finished and the White Army gone, there were White emigrés. —Stephen 16:44, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
 * It sounds like the expression "White Russian" embraces both groups. Should the meanings be combined then? Redddogg 04:46, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

RFV discussion: March–April 2019
Rfv-sense "A strain of marijuana containing very high THC levels - in excess of 22%." Are strains of marijuana WT:BRANDs? I guess some are developed commercially and trademarked, but presumably some are not? - TheDaveRoss  12:37, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

RFV-failed Kiwima (talk) 19:56, 28 April 2019 (UTC)