Talk:History of Vilnius

message: You're right about "Taryba". "Council of Lithuania" is probably the best. However I'm not sure if this relates to History of Vilnius at all, rather to History of Lithuania, so I would delete Cntence there. What do you think ? Lysy 21:39, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Good. Take a look at the beginning of the section and see if I have not made a mess in the paragraph about the Council in 1918 there. It might need some correction after my last edit. Lysy 06:26, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Taryba

message: Hi. The idea to write History of Vilnius was excellent. Now, this page is better-balanced than earlier section of Vilnius article.
 
But let me list some faults of the contents.
===National communities===
“Rapidly developing, the city was open to migrants from both East and West. Communities of Poles, Lithuanians, Belarusians, Jews, Russians, Germans, Karaims, Ruthenians and others established themselves in the city.” Let's look at possible association here of the word migrants and the later list of  communities. Lithuanians and Poles can't be call migrants here, and Belarussians, when our state had been common for long time should rather be called local people than “migrants”. Very interesting fact, that historical Vilnius had streets, named after national communities. There was Jewish street, Russian street, Tatar street (Tatars still aren't mentioned in the list), but there wasn't Lithuanian or Polish street. And distribution of national communities was also different than it's put here. What concerns Lithuanian community, i think, any local Lithuanian community didn't exist  separately from Polish one till the middle 19th century. But there are clear data about Samogitian community in then Vilnius, and there was respective street under the name of Samogitians. So, Samogitian community was seen as extraneous, “migrant”.─   The same with Russian communities: There weren't three different ones (Belarusian, Russian and Ruthenian), but one orthodox community, or two during certain periods with division into Russian orthodoxes and Uniats. So, this sentence needs to be specified. But i doubt how to do it. The one way is simply to add the note “which subsequently were known as Poles, Lithuanians etc”, meaning, that then names can differ from the listed ones. Or perhaps we should use names of communities real for 16 – 18 centuries? (Local Lithuanians and Poles, Samogitian Lithuanians, Russians (Ruthenians) Orthodoxes and Uniats, Jews, Tatars, Karaims etc.) so we should discuss it here. 
:I've made some changes, but I'm not happy with them. I think this paragraph should be rewritten. Or maybe add aditional subparagraph about religious groups ? Certainly these are important pieces of information for understanding the city's history. Lysy 06:23, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, I've introduced some minor changes here, but this is difficult and I believe that further suggestions/discussion would be helpful. Lysy 06:47, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  General notes 

message: “Rapidly developing, the city was open to migrants from both East and West. Communities of Poles, Lithuanians, Belarusians, Jews, Russians, Germans, Karaims, Ruthenians and others established themselves in the city.” Let's look at possible association here of the word migrants and the later list of  communities. Lithuanians and Poles can't be call migrants here, and Belarussians, when our state had been common for long time should rather be called local people than “migrants”. Very interesting fact, that historical Vilnius had streets, named after national communities. There was Jewish street, Russian street, Tatar street (Tatars still aren't mentioned in the list), but there wasn't Lithuanian or Polish street. And distribution of national communities was also different than it's put here. What concerns Lithuanian community, i think, any local Lithuanian community didn't exist  separately from Polish one till the middle 19th century. But there are clear data about Samogitian community in then Vilnius, and there was respective street under the name of Samogitians. So, Samogitian community was seen as extraneous, “migrant”.─   The same with Russian communities: There weren't three different ones (Belarusian, Russian and Ruthenian), but one orthodox community, or two during certain periods with division into Russian orthodoxes and Uniats. So, this sentence needs to be specified. But i doubt how to do it. The one way is simply to add the note “which subsequently were known as Poles, Lithuanians etc”, meaning, that then names can differ from the listed ones. Or perhaps we should use names of communities real for 16 – 18 centuries? (Local Lithuanians and Poles, Samogitian Lithuanians, Russians (Ruthenians) Orthodoxes and Uniats, Jews, Tatars, Karaims etc.) so we should discuss it here. 
:I've made some changes, but I'm not happy with them. I think this paragraph should be rewritten. Or maybe add aditional subparagraph about religious groups ? Certainly these are important pieces of information for understanding the city's history. Lysy 06:23, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: National communities

message: The second thing is this: “The city was initially planned as the capital of Belarussian SSR, but then it was decided that Vilnius might be used as a way to get significant influence on Lithuania.” It isn't true. Or, perhaps it may be understood as true , for the passive voice with no agent used to describe the situation. It's true that leaders of Communists in Vilnius and leaders of Belarusian SSR tended to incorporate the Vilnius region into Belarus without dividing the region. It's very doubtful, if they planned to make Vilnius capital of the Belarus, but it's impossible to deny or confirm it.  All these discussions were informal and you could understand, what did it mean in the then Soviet Union. But the official position of the USSR (with understanding that no declared position was untouchable for bolsheviks) was, that Vilnius was the capital of Lithuania. 
This position was also expressed in the initial secret protocols of the Ribbentrop-Molotov pact. The protocols contained a sentence, that said, that the both sides (i. e. Germany and the USSR) will respect interests of Lithuania in Vilnius question (the translation is approximate). In the later treatments Lithuania was “re-given” to the USSR's sphere, but this thing wasn't changed. It's appropriate to add here, that Nazis' government also tried to “foster” Lithuania and proposed Lithuanian government to take part in “Vilnius company” with support of German military forces (differently from the USSR, Germany didn't have borders with Vilnius region). Lithuanian government categorically refused to participate in aggression against Poland. After this Soviets seized the city and Lithuania was donated to Soviets. Logic of events is clear here. And – Soviets never negotiated Vilnius in exchange of military presence. Their requirement to allow presence of Soviet military bases in Lithuania wasn't connected with any compensation. Lithuanian government wasn't allowed to refuse Vilnius in exchange of not interfering by Soviets in Lithuanian life (despite, that Lithuanian delegation had such instructions). 
 Linas lituanus 09:56, 2005 Apr 22 (UTC)
:Again, I've introduced some minor changes here, but this is difficult and I believe that further suggestions/discussion would be helpful. Lysy 06:47, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Capital of Belarus ?

message: I took the liberty to make a copyedit of the part on Polish-Lithuanian conflict for Vilna. Also, I explained some things that were not clear, hope I improved the article a tad. Above all I wanted to separate what is clear to both sides from what is stated by Poles or Lithuanians only. Hence the explanation of Brussels talks (read more in the article on Central Lithuania) or the elections. 
At the same time, I decided to cut the following part and move it to talk for further discussion. First of all, I'm not sure such a detailed analisis belongs here. But if it does, feel free to expand the part I replaced it with. 
::'The Poles were the major ethnic group of the territory and the only significant group of which clear majority of voters participated in the elections. The area itself was multi-ethnic, and out of Belarusians less than 50% voted, less than 20% Jews and less than 10% of Lithuanians; this was due to the fact that some viewed Polish-administered elections as not legal, because Vilnius and the region de jure were a part of Lithuania. However, in face of clear Polish majority, the boycott had little effect on the result of the elections. Since Jews were usually considered as more pro-Lithuanian, most of the potential pro-Lithuanian voters boycotted the elections. The election area wasn't fully corresponding to the area of Vilnius region, as Lithuanian government define it. Some areas where the election was done actually were outside Vilnius region, and other, much larger, areas, including e.g. major city of Gardinas/Hrodna, were a part of Vilnius region, but despite of that elections were not conducted there. It did not fully corresponded to area of Central Lithuania either leaving both many Lithuanians and Poles outside the election area.''
As to specific concerns I have with this part (the reason I replaced it with a para directly copy-pasted from the article on Central Lithuania):
# some viewed Polish-administered elections as not legal, because Vilnius and the region de jure were a part of Lithuania - well, the problem is that others view the situation as if the area was de iure a part of Poland, Russia, Germany, Belarus... it all depends on the point of view and I guess that all positions could be easily defended here. 
# out of Belarusians less than 50% voted, less than 20% Jews and less than 10% of Lithuanians - I replaced that with exact percentage. The guys at the Central Lithuanian authorities did a good job by joining the elections with a micro-census :)
# Since Jews were usually considered as more pro-Lithuanian, most of the potential pro-Lithuanian voters boycotted the elections - this would need a source; As to my own views and books I've read, the local Jews were mostly seen as either indifferent or pro-Russian. After all, apart from the local Jews of Polish-Lithuanian ancestry (I mean the ones Central European descent), the majority of Jews of the area were so-called Litvaks, that is the Russian-speaking Jews forcibly resettled to the Pale of Settlement. Their support for either side in this conflict was very problematic.
# It did not fully corresponded to area of Central Lithuania either leaving both many Lithuanians and Poles outside the election area. - again, this would need a source. I'm really curious which areas were left out? 
Anyway, I hope that the constructive copyedit was a move in good direction. Was it? Halibutt 19:54, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Never heard of Jewish boycott of the elections. In fact only a slight minority of local Jews did vote, but the Jewish parties did take part in the elections (most notably the Jewish socialists in the ranks of the Socialist Party. In fact even the head of the provisional government was a Jew (and one of the strongest proponents of authonomy of Central Lithuania, BTW). Halibutt 18:12, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyedit of the chapter on PL-LT conflict 

message: As far as I know the Lithuanian policy was to expell educated Poles and lithuanize the other Slavs, not to expell all. It didn't work, the Slavs accepted rather Russian language or kept the Polish one. Later Polish schools, "Czerwony Sztandar" newspaper, Polish language chair were created.
What happened to Polish inscriptions in Vilnius? I have a big book with pictures, where no Polish word can be seen. 
As far as I know (some?) Polish citizens of Vilnius are discriminated, they cannot regain their homes and farms. 
Polish newspapers are printed in Vilnius, there is a Polish radio there.
Xx236 14:39, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Post-war deportation of Poles 

message: Whad does "krivis" mean here ? (krivis Lizdeika) --Lysytalk 07:34, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Um... Sort of Pagan priest. Supposedly Krivis Krivaitis was the main priest. If you can read German: :de:kirwis - it says it's Prussian. Renata 13:11, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Krivis 

message: Lysy, I know the legend, and the interpretation of the intial reason it was created (by H. Łowmiański, if I'm not mistaken), just somehow I managed to miss a part, where Lizdeika was named Radziwill, especially the linguistic research part of the legend. Are you sure those references do state exactly what it is said in this part, especially about Belarus and Polish language? (that part I was asking to reference, not the part about legend of iron wolf) I cannot check them right now, so just curiuos, whether Tomas Venclova did know something about that "radzicz" part.
Ah one more thing - why do not create an article about Henryk Łowmiański. I think he's not so loved by Polish editors, because he was amongst the first Poles to research history of Grand Duchy and even managed to find Lithuanians there. By this I do suggest an opportunity to work together. Lokyz 20:47, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, of course I've checked the references before posting them. They do not mention about Polish or Belarusian language, this I thing is an extra explanation for an English reader, as for the Poles it would be too obvious. Here is the exact citation (please forgive me for citing in Polish): "Lizdejce za wytłumaczenie snu wieszczego wielki książę rozkazał zwać się Radziwiłłem". I think I'll have to go offline for now. --Lysytalk 21:44, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For sure you've cited Venclova:) Another simple question - do they state source of that legend? And last one whether amove of citations before linguistic interpretation would be a deadly sin by me?--Lokyz 21:55, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lizdeika named Radziwill ref 

message: Please note that that info (referenced) is available at Historical demographics of Poland.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  00:30, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In the article I can't find the demographics of Vilnus between 1920 and 1939. If you have the data of the census about Vilnus or any source of the same, please present here. Thank you.--125.2.75.196 (talk) 07:51, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Population of Wilno/Vilnius throghout its history

message: I do have sources, stating that repatriation (or evvacuations, as it is called sometimes) was organized by Polish side, and that person responsible for this was arrested and eventually executed. It was quite different than what was happening in Ukraine. --Lokyz 09:15, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to share those sources with us. If they are not online, please include citations (in English) so we may all benefit from them. Oh, and would you have any sources about deportations and repressions of Polish population of the city that begun in 1939?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  15:20, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Repatriation 

message: Another interesting quote, this time from Timothy Snyder, Yale University Press, 2003, , The Reconstruction of Nations: Poland, Ukraine, Lithuania, Belarus, 1569-1999, Google Print, p.82: "Demographic realities were harder to deny. When Lithuanian troops marched into Vilnius on 28 October 1939, they were shocked to find instead of the princess of their fairy tales, the streets of alien Wilno, unknown, speaking foreign language." -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  23:57, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  From Snyder 

message: We could use some feedback on "Wilno"-related issues at Talk:Krak%C3%B3w#Wilno but not Krakau. --Irpen 03:54, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Feedback needed: "Yes to Wilno but no Krakau"

message: Which name was used?Xx236 12:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The city was first mentioned in written sources in 1323. 

message: Can anyone clarify the changes in control from 1918 to 1922?
My information is that:
Vilnius (Polish: Vilna) was taken in turn by the Germans from autumn 1915, Lithuanians in December 1918, Russians in January 1919, Poles in April 1919, Lithuanians in December 1919, Russians (for three months), Poles, and Russians again in June 1920, who handed it over to Lithuania in July, before it was seized by irregular Polish forces under General Lucjan Zeligowski on 9 October 1920, and formally annexed to Poland in 1922 following a plebiscite.
Can anyone verify these and add more dates for 1920?
Noel Ellis (talk) 04:22, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Interwar

message: But what was the name of the city? When was the name "Vilnius" first mentioned? Xx236 (talk) 12:35, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The city was first mentioned in written sources in 1323  

message: ... the Grande Armée retreated to the area where 80,000 of French soldiers died and were buried in the trenches they had built months earlier. Some mention should be made of the discovery of these soldiers' remains just a few years ago.  Sca (talk) 13:36, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Napoleon

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 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.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 20:40, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Vilnius Great Synagogue 1945.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: To which ethnicity did the local population that was transferred out of Vilnius belong to? I would assume they were all Poles, but I am not sure. More importantly, were they transferred, repatriated (if we look at the demographics it does look like a whole bunch of Poles moved to Vilnius between 1890 and 1930), or maybe deported? It would be interesting to know. Kind regards, --Mondschein English (talk) 23:57, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It was a bit of everything. But Vilnius was majority Polish even before 1890 - most of these people's ancestors had been there for centuries, they got Polonized back in the 1500's or 1600's or earlier. As far as the deportation/repatriation/transfer etc - a very small proportion of them were "repatriated" in the sense that they were not originally from the area. Like I said, most had roots going back several centuries. Some did leave voluntarily figuring Poland, although dominated by SU, was still a better deal than Lithuania as part of SU. Or they got a sense of the anti-Polish policies that were about to be implemented by the new hybrid nationalist-communist Lithuanian authorities. Others were forced to leave. And still others were forced to stay. Very roughly speaking, those with higher education were forced to leave, more or less to get rid of as much of Polish culture as possible. Those with low education were not allowed to leave even if they wanted to because they were judged suitable for "re-education", both in terms of accepting the Soviet ideology, and the Lithuanian nationalism.Volunteer Marek (talk) 00:38, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: There was no  Vilnius before 1890, but Wilno.Xx236 (talk) 13:19, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Soviet Occupation Section 

message: Bad Poles persecuted Lithuanians 1920-1939, two sources are in Lithuanian only, no explanation what the Lithuanians did. Xx236 (talk) 11:53, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bad Poles 1920-1939 

message: Either the history of Vilnius, today the capital and largest city of Lithuania. or  the history of Wilno/Wilna/Vilnius, the capital and largest city of Grand Duchy and modern Lithuania.Xx236 (talk) 11:58, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:   the history of Vilnius, the capital and largest city of Lithuania. 

message: As if there existed any West-Belarus invided by bad Poles. Ethnically mixed lands were saved in 1920 from Soviet genocidal occupation.Xx236 (talk) 12:06, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poland-occupied West Belarus 

message: What was the name of the place at that time? Xx236 (talk) 12:08, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Legend of the Founding of Vilnius 

message: Any important fact belongs here including Communist terrorism - After shooting a witness during a trial in Wilno on January 27, 1936, Prytytski was arrested and sentenced to death..Xx236 (talk) 09:08, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wilno was a center of activities of the [[Communist Party of Western Belarus]] 

message: Vilna was multiethnic, as far as I remeber there existed Lithuanian, Polish, Ruthenian Orthodox and Jewish parts. The city was situated in Lithuanian etnic area but very close to Ruthenia, so it attracted Eastern Slavs.Xx236 (talk) 08:18, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Multiethnic city 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on History of Vilnius. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927002131/http://demoscope.ru/weekly/ssp/rus_lan_97.php?reg=32 to http://demoscope.ru/weekly/ssp/rus_lan_97.php?reg=32
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:03, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on History of Vilnius. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071211074200/http://www.vilnius.lt/new/en/gidas.php?open=122&root=1&sub_cat1=127 to http://www.vilnius.lt/new/en/gidas.php?open=122&root=1&sub_cat1=127
*Added archive https://archive.is/20120904222203/www.istrodina.com/rodina_articul.php3?id=1998&n=102 to http://www.istrodina.com/rodina_articul.php3?id=1998&n=102
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927205013/http://www.istorija.lt/lim/stravinskiene2004en2.html to http://www.istorija.lt/lim/stravinskiene2004en2.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:20, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:39, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:08, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:13, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: :The article has a multiple issues main page maintenance tag that includes "More citations needed" (June 2011) and POV (neutrality disputed, February 2016) and that is just to start. 
:There are inline "citation needed" tags, one from February 2007, two from September 2007, two from January 2009, one dated March 2010, two dated August 2015, one from September 2015, two dated February 2016, one from June 2019, one from November 2019, and one from September 2021. There is an "inaccurate or nonfactual" tag dated August 2015. There are also "clarification needed", "specify" and "quantify" tags dated June 2019.
:The B-class criteria (#1) states,  and  (#4). 
:I am sure there will not be any argument the article fails the criteria. Reassess article to C-class.  --  Otr500 (talk) 13:28, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Article issues and classification

message: We need far more, far less biased and overall and far better source to include such controversial information in the article, that Poland pursued a policy of "ethnocide" against Lithuanians. Pinging @Pofka as author Marcelus (talk) 08:53, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ethocide of Lithunians is a fringe theory