All you editors who worked on the "Ukrainians" article, I've just completed the requested copy edit of the article made to the Guild of Copy Editors. I'll be happy to engage in discussion about what I did and why. Occasionally, I went a little beyond basic copy editing and did a little actual editing for clarity or flow.
1. One important thing I would strongly suggest should be the next major area you address is — as I explained in the clarification-needed template I placed on the last sentence of the Kievan Rus' subsection of the History section about Galicia-Volhynia — that more discussion is needed for the "singleton" statement about this state being the second important state, in contrast to Kievan Rus' and the Cossack Hetmanate, both of which have their own subheadings. If this state is so important as to be listed among three called out for reader attention, then it merits its own subheading with elaboration. Otherwise, the construction of the History section is lopsided. Augnablik (talk) 09:50, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
2. I would also suggest trying to merge the Historiography and History sections, or else give more information under Historiography.
,_early_1900s,_Central_Africa,_Democratic_Republic_of_the_Congo,_Pende_people,_wood,_fiber_-_Cleveland_Museum_of_Art_-_DSC08700.JPG){kind=small}
