Talk:Mukachevo

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


Mukachevo or Mukacheve[edit]

The Yiddish name of Mukacheve may be transcribed in English as Minkatsh, Minkatch, or Minkach.

The proper Ukrainian name for this city is Мукачево, which is transliterated as Mukachevo. "Mukacheve" is incorrect. For example, the official websites of the city and the region both use Mukachevo. This seems to be a common spelling mistake that native Ukrainian speakers can make. So if no one objects for a while, I will move everything to Mukachevo and change all the spellings.

No, Mukacheve is the Ukrainian form, Mukachevo is the Russian(used in formed Soviet Union), Slovak and Czech form. It would be a very big surprise to a lot of Ukraine-experts in several wikipedias, if you could prove that it's -evo in Ukrainian too. Juro 02:14, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

MukachevO is proper. Mukacheve is a proper mistake. Mukachevo (or Munkachevo) was used by natives since 16 century. The Russians were not there at that time. Sakura-org 18:32, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
For reference, my grandmother still speaks Hungarian, and was born in this city before our family came to the United States in 1950. She pronounces it Muncach or Muncacheva, the first of which I typed in here and got redirected to his page. Thegreatdr 22:15, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone have any information on the remaining German population in Mukacheva? Did they arrive more or less during the Austro-Hungarian period? JRubeus 7:56, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

There are still some German speaking people in Mukachevo area. We call them SCHVABS. There were more of them, but the majority emigrated to Germany in the 1990s.
It does not matter, as the name in the past was! The main thing is, as the name is now officially written, not as it has been written in the 16th century. In the standard Ukrainian language (not dialect), is the name as written with E Mukacheve and not Mukachevo this is dialect.

Coat of arms[edit]

Presumably that's Martin of Tours there on the coat of arms. What's the connection? Could an explanation/link be put in the article? –Hajor 17:55, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 2007[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.


Mukacheve→ Mukachevo– Mukachevo is the official name of the city. (posted at WP:RM by User:Sakura-org 15:46, 11 April 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Survey[edit]

Add "# Support" or "# Oppose" on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~. Please remember that this survey is not a vote, and please provide an explanation for your recommendation.

I wait 1 more day. If nobody will protest then I will move the article to Mukachevo. Also, I want to ask for help from administrators...I cannot move Mukacheve to Mukachevo, because Mukachevo redirects to Mukacheve. Waht should I do? Sakura-org 18:16, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Survey - in support of the move[edit]

  1. Support Sakura-org 19:37, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support Faustian 19:57, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Survey - in opposition to the move[edit]

Other[edit]

  1. Oppose. Neutral. Mukacheve is used by Verkhovna Rada. Mukacheve is Ukrainian, Mukachevo — Russian —dima/talk/ 21:18, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Mukachiv is more Ukrainian than Mukacheve then. Actually, it is more common than even Mukacheve, but all Zakkarpattians and Mukachevans use Mukachevo...Sakura-org 15:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Not really. The very same page gives "м.Мукачево, вул.Пушкіна, 2" as the administration address. Both are used and both are correct. What is more common is the issue then. --Irpen 21:28, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I didn't knotice "м.Мукачево, вул.Пушкіна, 2" on the page.. And Google gives about 20,000 thousand more hits for Mukachevo than Mukacheve and if its more commonly seen, than Mukachevo would be better.. So I'll change my vote to neutral. —dima/talk/ 23:20, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

This article has been renamed from Mukacheve to Mukachevo as the result of a move request. --Stemonitis 07:41, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rusyns[edit]

OK, Rusyn changes the Demographics part from Ukrainians to Rusyns and Ukrainians. I think we need to discuss it. The Rusyns are not officially a nation now (the Verkhovna Rada did not approve it). I do not think we should exclude Rusyns rom Ukrainians. Sakura-org 01:29, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sakura-org, as you probably know, before 1946, there were only few ukrainians in Carpatho-Ruthenia. People used to call themselves rusyny (rusyns). After the annexation of Carpatho-Ruthenia by Ussr, all rusyns were made ukrainians, it became illegal to say that you are a rusyn. Of course, the majority of carpatho-rusyns forgot about their origin, and, because of propaganda, started calling themselves ukrainians. In 2001, there was a census in Ukraine. People who said that they were Carpatho-Rusyns were countabilised as Ukrainians. Officialy, it was said that only 10100 people said, they were Rusyns. But this numbers are surely falsificated (according to some rusyn leaders, there are more people in Rusyn organisations in Ukraine than there are Rusyns in the census!!!). When people said that they are Rusyns, they were often registred as Ukrainians etc... Ukraine is the only country in the world that still refuses recognising Carpatho-Rusyns... But this isn't an argument to say that Rusyns are Ukrainians... I think that writing Rusyns and Ukrainians is more neutral than just writing Ukrainians. That way, it also counts people who still consider themselves as Rusyn, live in the Rusyn homeland, but were not registred as Rusyns, because of Ukrainian policy...--Rusyn 09:47, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An excellent academic article on the topic:
From the article:
On the eve of the 2001 Ukrainian census, Ukrainian academics refused to acknowledge that Rusyns are a nationality distinct from Ukrainians... Ukrainian officials agreed to a

compromise whereby Rusyns would be included within the census as a branch of Ukrainians alongside of Hutsuls, Bojkos, Lemkos, and others. This proposal enjoyed cross-party support from the Communists through the pro-presidential centre to the National Democratic right. Magocsi concedes that Rusyns are not a “nationality” as yet. Nevertheless, he believes that they could be evolving in this direction. The official census result found only 10,200 Rusyns, 672 Lemkos, and 131 Boykos. The 10,200 Rusyns are somewhat close to the 6,004 and 22-28,000 Rusyns found in two parallel censuses conducted by Rusyn organizations. These two parallel unofficial censuses also showed small numbers of Rusyns in Trans-Carpathia. The Sejm (Diet) of Trans-Carpathian Rusyns found only 6,004 eastern Slavs in Trans-Carpathia who declared themselves to be Rusyns out of a total population of 1,258,300, 80.5 percent of whom declared themselves to be Ukrainian. From the nature of the two organizations conducting these two parallel censuses one might have expected them to find larger numbers of Rusyns. Instead, they found only between 0.67 and 3.11 percent of eastern Slavs in Trans-Carpathia who defined themselves as Rusyns. This is a far cry from the exaggerated claims that all, or most, eastern Slavs in Trans-Carpathia are Rusyns.

It suggests that what happened to Galicia in the late nineteenth century occurred in Transcarpathia in the latter 20th century: Rusyns turned into Ukrainians. Rusyn organization can claim whatever they want, but the only objective data, from surveys as well as from the census, consistently tell us that less than 5% of Transcarpathia's eastern Slavs consider themselves to be Rusyns and over 80% consider themselves Ukrainian.
Essentially, the decendents of the Rusyns who emigrated long ago and who adhere to a Rusyn national orientation no longer have the same "nationality" as the people who actually populate the homeland.Faustian 19:13, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am a Transcarpathian Hungarian by myself and I also agree about the annexation of Transcarpathia. I don't want to start an argument about this issue (you know that there are different opinions about Rusyns in our society), and I understand your point. I say let's put "Ukrainians (including Rusyns) - 77%". What do you think about that? --Sakura-org 18:14, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think, that putting Ukrainians (including Rusyns) is neutral enough. If we write it like that, it might be understood that all Rusyns are Ukrainians... As more people say that they are Ukrainians than Rusyns, it might be better to put Ukrainians and Rusyns. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.167.74.85 (talk) 15:13, 10 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Forgot to sign--Rusyn 15:14, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

O.K. then, but the text of the article says "According to the 2001 census...". Did this census counted RUSYNS? If not, then we cannot put "Rusyns" under this statement. Then I propose to add a few sentences after the results of the 2001 census about the Rusyn population. --Seregelly talk 16:44, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should write that the Rusyns weren't countabilised as a separate nationality near the link to the census. Rusyn 18:34, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, the number of Rusyns was studied in the census.
Всього по області назвали себе русином - 10,1 тис.осіб .
Even if all of them would live in Mukacheve, they could not be a majority in the city having 81,6 thouthand inhabitants.--AndriyK 13:34, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, my wife is from the Mukachevo district and she was born in Mukachevo. If she speaks about her nationality, she routinely calls herself a Ukrainian. But the problem is that her mother language, which she calls "zakarpaťski" (transcarpathian) or even "ryapiďski" (referring to unofficial but by locals commonly used name "Ryapiď" of her village Bystrytsya) and which is generally used in the region of Mukachevo, is completely different from Ukrainian (which I heard there only from the TV, when I watched the news). To describe it as a dialect of Ukrainian is similar nonsens like to say that the Ukrainian is a dialect of Russian or Polish. In fact, I would say, that this "transcarpathian" language is much closer to the Russian than the Ukrainian, though it is clearly different from the Russian as well. On the other hand, it is quite similar to the language used by "Rusnaks" (or Rusyns) living in Eastern Slovakia, though as far as I can say there are some differences between them too. From this angle it is evident that most of these "Ukrainians" from Mukachevo and the Transcarpathian region are Rusyns by their language and ethnic origin, no matter how they identify themselves in Ukrainian census (after decades of systematic supression of any notion of Rusyn identity).147.231.52.62 (talk) 13:55, 19 October 2011 (UTC)Honza73[reply]

Ukrainian name of the city[edit]

The Ukrainian name ofthe city is Мукачеве. See the dictionary of Ukr linguistic fund [1].--AndriyK 13:24, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but look at the Verkhovna Rada site, which at the top of the "infobox page" м Мукачеве Закарпатська область, yet at the bottom of the page where the adress is: 89600, м.Мукачево, вул.Пушкіна, 2. —dima/talk/ 16:55, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The clerks of Verkhovna Rada are not professional linguist (at list not all of them). Therefore, the site of VR may contain mistakes.
In contrast, the Ukrainian lingustics and information fund is a professional institution, it belongs to National academy of science. According to the WP article, Ukrainian language is "regulated by National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine". So, if you whould like to check, what is present-day standard Ukrainian, look into the ULIF dictionary. I do not see any alternative.--AndriyK 17:59, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hold on a second the article was just moved to Mukachevo, if the reasoning was wrong, why don't we move it back? --Kuban Cossack 20:11, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it may be reasonable to revote and move it back.
But whatever English name of the article is, the correct Ukrainian name is Мукачеве. This is the only correct spelling in standard Ukrainian. There is no alternative Ukrainian spellings. It's your OR. Please reread WP:NOR.--AndriyK 21:08, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
From the reasons to the vote above both versions are in use. Instead of reverting build a case to move it back, and I will actually support you if its convincing, no OR here, just a simple case of consistency. --Kuban Cossack 22:15, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Facts are not verified by votes, but ruther by citing reliable sources. I gave the reference to the most reliable dictionary. What do you need more to stop reverting?--AndriyK 22:21, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am not reverting, just file a WP:RM and present your sources, because right now we have a clear dis-consistency.--Kuban Cossack 22:40, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I presented the sources. Please read the talk before you revert.
Concerning WP:RM, you can do it as well. Or I'll return to it when I have time.--AndriyK 22:42, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Locals use the name "Мукачево" and it is used elsewhere (on the signboards, in buses, on postcards etc.), at least in Transcarpathian region.147.231.52.62 (talk) 14:21, 19 October 2011 (UTC)Honza73[reply]

Note[edit]

This article contains information uploaded by the USHMM. See OTRS ticket 2007071910012533 for details.--USHMMwestheim 20:58, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kingdom of Hungary ?[edit]

how could this city belong to hungary between 1000 - 1918 when hungary didn't existed as a state between 1541 and 1867 ??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.6.200.40 (talk) 22:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some parts of Hungary were indeed free and the capital was moved to Bratislava. K r i s t o f talk 15:10, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus to support move. JPG-GR (talk) 15:06, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mukachevo → Mukacheve — Since this is the English language encyclopedia, the most widely used name in respectable sources for this city is Mukacheve, not Mukachevo. I would also respectfully ask the closing admin to evaluate the validity of the arguments and the presented sources rather than the simple mathematical quantity of votes for or against. Thanks. —Hillock65 (talk) 02:22, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Survey[edit]

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
  • Support The current name is contrary to the official name of the city. The correct spelling of the city name is reflected in the Verkhovna Rada register and it presents only one version of the city name - Mukacheve. The dictionary of the Ukrainian language, which is the only official one, gives the name only as Mukacheve too. Aslo per WP:NC several respected English language sources give the city's name in Eglish as Mukacheve. Among these sources are the following:
  1. Encyclopedia Brittanica
  2. The Columbia Encyclopedia --Hillock65 (talk) 02:32, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Support because of the English language sources, specifically Britannica. Ostap 03:18, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. The city should naturally be named by its Ukrainian name.Ans-mo (talk) 05:52, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. But other versions in wide use should be included somewhere in the article.--Riurik(discuss) 23:15, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. In English, the name is more established in the form of Mukachevo. Proof: there are 22 books using "Mukacheve" vs. 194 books using "Mukachevo". Current name should stay with Mukacheve added as an alternative by which the city is known.--Riurik(discuss) 23:22, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It seems this is one of those classic cases where there is no uniform spelling established in Ukrainian. Similar was the case with Rivne/Rovno when the latter was official. Other examples include Konotop/Konotip, Luhansk/Luhanske and so on. Right now it is a case that both spellings are used. But Google gives 636,000 for Мукачево, and 93,800 for Мукачеве. There is a further case that in the Ukrainian government there is no universal approach here. As the -o dominates title should be kept but both versions should be used much like Holland is used along with the Netherlands. --Kuban Cossack 12:39, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not true. There is a uniform spelling established. It is in the Verkhovna Rada register. Check for yourself. It does not even supply an alternative variant. As far as the highest legislative body of the country this is the only official spelling of the city name. Period. As far as the official name the case is crystal clear - it is Mukacheve. The local use of Mukachevo is a different matter. While not official, due to multiethnic background of the area it is being used as well. It is true. As well, I am a bit skeptical about books being cited as the final proof. In my mind such prime credible sources for information as Encyclopedia Brittanica should take precedence over books written by all kinds of uninformed authors. --Hillock65 (talk) 13:15, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Why does the official city council website use Mukachevo [2]? I mean 3,870,000 hits for -O versus 99,600 hits for -e. I think there is a little bit of a dominance of the o version irrespective what the Register says. Either way it is clear that -o is more popular by long shot and hence fully suitable as the name of the article. --Kuban Cossack 19:22, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I don't see any evidence that there is a universally established form, or that this is particularly controversial. I'll vote for what the locals seem to have chosen, and against renaming without a clear justification (Google search prefers "Mukachevo" by 3 to 1, so that doesn't support the move). —Michael Z. 2008-05-09 21:02 z

Discussion[edit]

Any additional comments:

I strongle oppose the move because the name "Mukacheve" is not used even in the city itself. It is used only on maps, while "Mukachevo" is used practically. Even if we move the article, we have to note that the name "Mukachevo" is more wide-spread. --K r i s t o f talk 13:00, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is built around secondary sources and not around what is said and what is heard. Besides, this is the English language encyclopedia, the name Mukacheve is used in respectable English language sources. Please see other Wikipedia articles with similar arguments in Kyiv-Kiev Kharkiv-Kharkov. The English language use of the city name is the decisive factor, not what people use in the city itself. --Hillock65 (talk) 13:26, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You are probably more experienced so I won't argue with you. But I am convinced that we should take into account the other version and note it in the article. And then I think that the Kyiv-Kiev and Kharkiv-Kharkov issues are much different because these versions are from different languages (Russian and Ukrainian) while both Mukachevo and Mukacheve are Ukrainian.--K r i s t o f talk 16:27, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Credible sources to support that would help. --Hillock65 (talk) 16:32, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You may find this interesting. http://forum.slovnyk.net/index.php?showtopic=466 --K r i s t o f talk 16:41, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Kristof the problem here is a lag from the old Ukrainian orthography that has since changed. A similar case existed in Belarus, but much more amplified, when the changes of 1930s and subsequent orthographic reforms were very noticeable it affected the way whole cities were spelled. Example Minsk and Mensk. In fact that is the reason why there are two versions of Belarusian edition wikipedia, one uses the old and the other the official adopted version. In Ukrainian language a similar happened but to lesser extent, and only some cities were affected e.g. Rivne became Rovno, Luhanske became Luhansk, Konotip became Konotop and so on. With our city as far as I am aware it too became Мукачево. During the 1990s some of those changes were reversed, and it really falls to because in Ukrainian there are sufficient differences between dialects, in fact if you compare western and central Ukrainian the differences would be more vivid than that of British and American English. So for some cases like Rivne, it was much up to the locals, because Volhynian dialect pronounces the city like its spelled, whilst somewhere in Poltava they will say it as Rovno. It seems that with Mukhachevo it is a case that the version used by locals is not entirely adopted nationwide. But then again there are some silly people in the government who use spellings such as Sevatopil but that is outright stupid, because even in classic orthography that version would never be used. The -pil originates from the connotation of field like Ternopil. The -pol comes from the Greek root for city, like Sevastopol. All the more reasons why we should stick to Mukachevo and help to leave the archaic spelling where it belongs in history. --Kuban Cossack 12:55, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A couple more data points if anyone is interested, but I don't think they are extremely significant: Encyclopedia of Ukraine uses "Mukachiv or Mukachevo",[3], Subtelny 1998 "Mukachiv", Magocsi 1996 "Mukachevo". —Michael Z. 2008-05-09 21:00 z

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Panorama Mukachevo large.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Panorama Mukachevo large.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests March 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Panorama Mukachevo large.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 18:42, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Official name Mukachevo[edit]

Since today in standard Ukrainian language (not dialect), the name is written as Mukachevo (Мукачево). Ukrainian parliament decided that today. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 20:51, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Should we now move the article to Mukachevo? Jd2718 (talk) 22:50, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mukachevo. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 04:12, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mukachevo. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 16:32, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mukachevo. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 22:17, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mukachevo&oldid=1204114470"