Talk:Lviv/Archive 1

message: this is definitely insufficient information on Lvov. Without some more history, esp. that of the atrocities of my fellow countrymen during the Second World War,  it practically comes to nothing and could just as well be erased, I´m sorry. No, I´m not.
To User: 24.105.197.133 
I have no reason to introduce any nationalist fuss to this subject. My family derives from the former Red Ruthenia and amongst my ancestrors were Poles and Ukrainians. I consider myself neutral in quarrels about Polish-Ukrainian history.
1. Majority of historians agree that Lviv area was part of the are mentioned by Nestor for 981.
2. Lviv was never conquered by Poland. The rights to this city were inherited by Piast dynasty. The war about Lviv was between Poland and Lithuania - so the term conquest is very inadequate.
3. Lviv was never taken by Chmielnicki. 
4. On 3rd of November the Polish population of the city raised against against Western Ukrainian Republic. There were no regular Polish forces at that time.
5. Poles weren't foreigners in Lviv. This city was part of Poland by centuries. In the same way Polish nationalists could say that Germans were foreigers in Wroclaw in 1918. It is ridiculous, is not it? Less natioanlism, more facts, please. User:Yeti
Yeti:  I have no reason to introduce any nationalist fuss to this subject.
Yet I say:  good, so why does it seem to me that you did introduce the nationalistic perspective?
Yeti:  My family derives from the former Red Ruthenia and amongst my ancestrors were Poles and Ukrainians. I consider myself neutral in quarrels about Polish-Ukrainian history.
Yet I say:  I don't care where your family comes from; I also don't care where my family comes from.  Your consideration of yourself just might be generous.
Yeti: 1. Majority of historians agree that Lviv area was part of the are mentioned by Nestor for 981.
Yet I say:  that it seems to me, the spot that would LATER become the city/capital L'viv probably was part of the "Cherven-Red" acquistion by "Rus'" (Ruthenia) in 981.  But what does that mean?  The campaign included some battles with the nascent Polish state by the nascent Rus' state.  When did Poland (the Polanie) get there?  Some say 960.  Did they rule there as conquerors or settle there?  Or find their own people already there?  The local people show evidence of the Greek religion from the time of their incorporation in Great Moravia before 960 from what I've been taught.  Was Rus' there pre-960?  Some believe so.
Yeti:  2. Lviv was never conquered by Poland. The rights to this city were inheirited by Piast dynasty. The war about Lviv was between Poland and Lithuania - so the term conquest is very inadequate.
Yet I say:  L'viv was invaded by Poland's armies from 1340-49, leading to continued rule.  Poland also invaded the area in 1018-31.  Before the invasion of the 1340's L'viv's castle had already been destroyed by Polish invaders at least once.  That the Piast dynasty inheirited L'viv, this might be one way of looking at it, but not the only one.  How could a mere cousin claim inheritance, especially when his predecessor was not accepted but poisoned?  The civil war which resulted seems to suggest that your view was not so unanaimous at the time.  I didn't know there was a war "about" L'viv, tell me more!
Yeti:  3. Lviv was never taken by Chmielnicki.
Yet I say:  you should tell that to the people who inscribed a memorial to his capture of the local castle with the helpofL'viv's residents in the fall of 1649, a memorial which still stands!
Yeti:  4. On 3rd of November the Polish population of the city raised against against Western Ukrainian Republic. There were no regular Polish forces at that time.
Yet I say:  I think they did about then as you say. They were the majority then in the city, so that makes sense.  When have I disputed that?
Yeti:  5. Poles weren't foreigners in Lviv. This city was part of Poland by centuries.  In the same way Polish nationalists could say that Germans were foreigers in Wroclaw in 1918.
Yet I say:  a) Let's look at 'foreigners' objectively.  When one invades another country, one is a foreigner, at least until one successfully turns the country or area into one's own (for example through permanent dominance, or majority status)!  Thus, Poles were foreigners in L'viv at the time of it's founding.  Thus Poles are foreigners in L'viv today, beyond any doubt and for most of the past century.  The question is more grey between 1918 and 1939, when the area was "in" Poland, but supposed, by international agreement, to be enjoying autonomy (self-rule) which Poland did not provide.  And from 1772 to 1918, what were Poles (or Ukrainians for that matter) under the foreign rule of Austria?  And from 1349 to 1772, what were Poles to the area around L'viv but foreign conquerors?  settlers? colonists?  And when the Poles came to form a majority in the administrative center of L'viv, weren't they foreign to the majority of the surrounding countryside and it's people?  Weren't they surrounded by a sea that was foreign to them?  The Poles almost succeeded in making the area a stable and irreversible addition to Poland.  But they did not succeed in the end.
b)  L'viv was part of Poland for centuries, not for most of Lviv's history, though.  And the Poles came as foreign invaders, and later as colonists. and they contributed greatly.
c) Sometimes we do what we don't wish to do.  You have again introduced your nationalistic perspective (perhaps chauvinism is a better word) to the question by bringing up your favorite topic, Poland, this time on it's Western border.  This is not about Poland's agenda.  It's about L'viv, which from the beginning was not Polish and is not today.  The role that L'viv played in Polish history was important to Poland and needs to be told.  For L'viv's history, it's a minority topic, but a substantial one.  Let's describe it in true proportionate terms.
LISTEN, MINORITY TOPIC??? LOOK at the list of people who make a history of Lwow. Architects, writers, philosophers, politicians.... etc. - 90% is polish.
Lwow is a typical polish style city, (Krakow, Zamosc, Lublin ) and the role of polish people for Lwow are ESSENTIAL. Without Poles Lwow wouldn't be one of the most Facinating cities of Europe. (It's like London without english people)
According to your point of view the English are foreigners in London (they overtook it in 6th cenbtrury), Germans in Berlin (12th century) and Americans in Washington. As well as Poles in Warsaw. And also Poles and Ukrainians in Lwow. Always someone other was before. But the city was build by Polish.  
(Maybe the Ukrainians have choosen the place, but this is the same situation like with London - the people who lived there before English have founed a place end the english built the city.)
Almost all of historic buidings was made by polish architects and constructors: Opera, Theatre, most of churches and of course cemeteries: Łyczakow, Orleta Lwowskie. It's polish city inhabitet by Ukrainians. 
I respect you nation and your rights but not to this City - Semper Fidelis.
User:24.105.197.133
----
To make the thing funny a few weeks ago I was called to be an Ukrainian nationalist. As both sides call me nationalist it makes me sure that in fact I am neutral. 
I belive that Wikipedia should give as strict information as possible, without removing inconvenient facts.
Belive me or not but I did not include Polish nationalist mitology in my entries. If you read Polish nationalist wersion of the history of the city you could be shocked. I would like to to ask you to avoid introducing Ukrainian nationalist myths. It has no point. 
2. It is problem of interpreation. i belive that we are able to work out the neutral version.
3. It is what I mean. Chmielnicki took the castle only and withdrew after he received the ransom. Think: The city was inhabited mainly by Poles, Jews and Armenians. It was full of people who escaped from death from Cossack hands (I mean Ruthenian nobles as well). If the city was taken majority of them would be killed (the same way like in the other cities). It is why they decided to pay huge ransom than to let the Cossacks in. Your comment is a typical example of national mithology.
4. According to your point of view the English are foreigners in London (they overtook it in 6th cenbtrury), Germans in Berlin (12th century) and Americans in Washington. As well as Poles in Warsaw. And Ukrainians in Lviv. Always someone other was before. 
Lviv area was Ruthenian/Ukrainian: 981- 1018, 1034-1077, 1080-1349, 1945/1991 - 2004. Total: 407/351 years.
Polish: about 960-981, 1018-1034, 1077-1080, 1349-1372, 1386-1772, 1918-1939.
Total: 468 years.
If we consider the history of the city only (from 1256), the accounts are even more favourable for Poland. I do not intend to suggest that Lviv is Polish, but to make you remember that that heritage of the city is multiethnic. It is beautiful about history of this city. And talking about the Poles as foreigners have nothing to do with history as a science. History is not ideology.
Regards, 
User:Yeti
The choice of dates is very interesting.  On the one hand it tries to look at the city of L'viv through the narrow lens of a competition between two ethnic groups. History tries to describe L'viv on its own terms:  A Ukrainian city in Ukraine founded by Ukrainians (at that time called Ruthenians).  Like the rest of Ukraine, living under foreign rule for most of it's history. Multi-ethnic in its middle years and taken over by a neighbor who settled there to build a majority and for whom it served (formerly, that is) as a major city and cultural center.
Setting up L'viv as a competition field for Ukrainians vs. Poles is like comparing apples to potatoes in a contest over which has the best leaves.
You confuse 'nation' meaning people with a 'state', meaning political unit.  L'viv was in a Ukrainian state for the years you mention.   L'viv was in a Polish political state for the years you mention.  That's poitical history.
 
But L'viv was part of the Ukrainian nation/people since Lviv's founding.  This nation/people stretched one hundred kilometers to the west of L'viv past Peremysl' (Przemyshl) to Sianik/Syanok).  When the Ukrainian people/nation of the L'viv region changed from the Ukrainian to the Polish state/nation, they came under foreign rule. The foreigness of this rule was perceived by the Polish rulers, who called the area "Ruthenian Voyedvodship."  At the risk of stating the obvious, they didn't do this to part of the Polish nation!!!  Later, the popular consciousness of the Polish people/nation called the area of L'viv kresy, borderland. This Polish point of view was accurate and an example of accurate historical memory. (That's not what the Ukrainians who lived there for so long called it. For themit was their land, not their 'borderland'!) 
Like many rulers of this time, ruling was not enough. The effort was to totally take and change and absorb--to make Galicia proper Polish.  And they came so close!  They ruled the city, ruled from the city, disfavoured Ukrainian continued residency in the city, achieved a settlement, then a majority and cultural dominance, then a spotty patchwork majority in surrounding areas.   Poland was on the verge of overwhelming majority, of changing the area from formerly Ukrainian to presently mixed to soon to be Polish with some rapidly declining and assimilating minorites.  But it was not to be, and efforts and massive transformation of a 600 year process suffered an overwhelming reversal. 
To describe L'viv as Polish or even as a Polish/Ukrainian competition is to leave history and live in a shattered dream that almost came true.
To describe L'viv as a Ukrainian city is to summarily state a fact, is to state a foundational fact.  And this fact in the end endured. . .and endures today.
Foreign perspectives add to this history, but to change this foundational enduring history is to damage history itself, and make history to serve a foreign point of view and take a walk down the path to fiction.
Regards,
204.105.197.133, Feb 22, 2004
----
Sorry, but your answer is typical national myth. It has nothing to do with facts. 
A few days ago I was talking with one Pole, who was born in Lviv. According to his interpretation of the history of the city Ukrainians have no historical rights to the city. According to him many historians and ethnographers call that Ruthenians collonized this area just a century before it was subdued to Poland, when the Mongols attacked Ruthenia. According to this interpretation Lviv never was an Ukrainian city but short period 1240-1340. Utill that time this area was pinhabited mainly by Polish speaking population. All were Polish speakers. 
Is this interpretation worse than yours? I do not thing so. Of course it is myth as well. But this is not a place for myths.
Regards,
User:Yeti
:As to the Polish/Ukrainian city: as usually, both sides are correct and none is correct. From Ukrainian POV the city of L'viv has always been an Ukrainian city since it shared much of the history of the rest of Ukraine and has always been a Ukrainian city regardless of the ethnicity of its' population or the rulers that had sovereignity over it. That's why in Kyiv Book Museum (in Pecherska Lavra) all the books published in L'viv since the middle ages until 1945 are named Ukrainian books published in foreign languages, even if they were Polish translation of the Bible. 
:On the other hand Polish POV underlines that Lvov has always shared the Polish fate and before it became a multiethnic/Polish city it was but a tiny settlement with a small castle on the hill above it. One can't deny that what the city is now is an effect of hard work of many Poles, and that before WWII the city population was mostly Polish. Of course it was the Ukrainians that started the settlement there, but nobody will say that Berlin is a Polish city just because the Slavs started it. 
:And finally, the NPOV policy is to mix all of the above and underline all aspects of the city's identity and history. That's why the article doesn't say that it's a Ukrainian or Polish city, but tries to explain its' history. I must say that I'm perfectly satisfied with it, although there is a lot of work still to be done. Halibutt 10:40, 7 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Earlier discussion 

message: please list some historical references of Polish activity in the area pre-1300, for the increase of knowledge on this topic.
Looking forward to it.
204.105.197.133 Feb 23, 2004
----
I do not do that, because I am not going to play the game who was the frist and to whom the city belongs more. It just stupid. P.S. Some my text missed what changed my intentions. The last sentence is out of context. Sorry
User:Yeti
-----
The recent additon, "many Jews were killed," is not very informative. I'm not arguing with the fact (I don't know history that well), but if Jews were killed, than the question is, were the Jews in particular targeted and if so, by whom? Were other civilians (Poles, Ukrainians) killed as well? Who did the killing? What are the sources of this information? You can't just add a sentence lile this without explanation. And, by the way, could you, 213.189.178.202, pick a nickname and log on to the Wikipedia?
Bartosz 00:00, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Post some facts on this-that would be helpful! 

message: I think the picture labelled as the "L'viv Theatre" is really the L'viv Opera House.  Can someome confirm that and make the correction?
Genyo 19:54, 5 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  L'viv Opera House 

message: I'm currently preparing a completely new version of this article. I'll post a link to the project as soon as the first version is ready. Halibutt 13:42, 9 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: No comments? No opposition? No remarks? Halibutt 12:58, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks fine, but the name between 1867 and 1918 should be Lwow, because Polish was the official language and Lemberg looks weird.Yeti 20:59, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, AAMoF there were three official languages in "the city" at the time: Latin, Polish and German. Obviously Polish was spoken the most, so I will change that. Any other suggestions? Or perhaps I'll replace the current version with my project and we'll see. Halibutt 22:38, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Work in progress 

message: Ok, I replaced the article with a new version. I hope it's acceptable to all. I'm sorry if I forgot about anything, feel free to correct me. However, since many people are somehow fragile when it comes to L'viv/Lwów/Lvov/Lemberg, please try to be delicate. Let's be civilized and not start edit wars, ok?
As to the most important parts still needing attention: I collected lots of info, some of it is available through the web. The links are as follows (Note: it's unsorted and partially in Polish):
Sources needed to finish this article:
*Lvov 1941 map
*Galicia 1875 map
*Lvov 1944 map
*wiem
*History
*Murder of Lvov proffesors
*Interesting facts from Lvov during the 2nd WW: Production of prof. Weigl's Typhus Vaccine 
*History
*suputynyk
*Wroclaw University of Technology
*lwow.com.pl
*lwow.home.pl
*lwow.host.sk
*
*transport in L'viv
*University at Wiem
*1920 map
*Lviv oblast facts (industry)
*industry and commerce
*Housing and environment stats
The parts still needing attention are:
===Interbellum===
===20th century===
===Independent Ukraine and Contemporary L'viv===
should both of them be merged?
Independent Ukraine
Today Lviv is still considered to be one of the main centres of Ukrainian culture and much of the political class in Kyiv originates from Lviv.
This is in the article.  Is there anything to back this up? Are any of the important politicans from Kyiv or in the Verkhovna Rada from Lviv? I'm not aware of many high-profile ones. Even Yushchenko is from Ternopil, isn't he? I think it's Medvedchuk's brother or brother-in-law is the head of the tax agency in Lviv. That's at least one powerful person. Matthias5 22:40, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Version 

message: should both of them be merged?
Independent Ukraine
Today Lviv is still considered to be one of the main centres of Ukrainian culture and much of the political class in Kyiv originates from Lviv.
This is in the article.  Is there anything to back this up? Are any of the important politicans from Kyiv or in the Verkhovna Rada from Lviv? I'm not aware of many high-profile ones. Even Yushchenko is from Ternopil, isn't he? I think it's Medvedchuk's brother or brother-in-law is the head of the tax agency in Lviv. That's at least one powerful person. Matthias5 22:40, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Independent Ukraine and Contemporary L'viv

message: I know that there was a bus factory during the soviet period. I think it was operational until a few years ago. Its name was something like L'vivavtobus. I think that recently the contract to build buses was awarded to a firm in Dnipropetrovsk. Of course some people see this as favoratism towards the Kuchma's cronies. As for the rest of industry in Lviv, I'm not aware of much. Matthias5 22:36, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Business and Industry

message: There's an extensive marshrutka system now. Plus there are 9 trams. I could probably dig up a map of the routes of each tramline. Matthias5 22:36, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Transport

message: The municipal site is not very informative on the topic. Anyone?
Please post your suggestions. Halibutt 23:26, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Government

message: Lviv is by far more used in English than L'viv. Drbug 10:05, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't believe no one fought this change.  I vehemently protest the name of Lviv, we should not propogate mistakes, Lviv is a misnomer.  Lviv is used more often then L'viv because people are using an erroneuos name.  The name of the city is L'viv, not Lviv, just as St. Petersburg is not Leningrad.  Lviv certainly has less of a "right" to be the name of the city then Lvov, Lwow or Lemberg.  It's not even Russian, where does Lviv come from???  To back this up I'll cite sources:
*UNESCO calls it L'viv
*The American Heritage Dictionary calls it L'viv
*The official gov't portal of the Ukraine calls it L'viv  
*NY Times, Merriam Webster Atlas call it L'viv 
*Merriam Webster dictionary calls it L'viv
*MSN Encarta calls it L'viv
*Britannica is inconsistent, but in other (newer) articles such as this article about Przemysl, it properly calls the city L'viv.
Just to be completely honest I have no idea why Ukrainian place names often have apostrophes, I would just as soon get rid of them, but it's not my call since they do have them.--Milicz 00:21, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: L'viv -> Lviv

message: When I lived in Lviv, I heard the following from multiple sources.  Some sources think that L'viv derives from the genitive case of Lev. Accordingly, the city should be translated to English as [city] of Lev or Lev's.  
What do you think? Matthias5 22:36, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, actually officially it was named as Lvov as the genetive case of Lev, but due to the Soviet censorship the Academy of Science of the Ukrainian SSR decided to call the city Lviv as the translated version of the Russian. The name should be Lvov not because that is how it's being called in Poland and Russia, but because it is its actual historic name. I also have no idea why some people prefer to write the city's name as L'viv. That makes much difficult to read it in English as the apostrophe only is being in case of the genetive. By the way, the city of Lev is also officially the unofficial version of the name. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 20:42, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: derivation of L'viv

message: I do not mean to touch any raw nerves but does an article about the city of the scale of Lviv need such a section? Such section is appropriate for smaller and relatively obscure cities whose famous people may help "put it on the map" of the world or of the region at least. Lviv already is very well on the map and it is obvious that a city of this scale and with this history had to produce lots of famous people. While a separate Famous Leopolitans article may be useful with a link to it from Lviv at "see also" section, this section in Lviv harms the article by diluting it. I simply would like to hear opinions of those involved with an article. Thanks! Irpen 03:26, May 18, 2005 (UTC)
:In my oppinion, such sections are necessary. They work not only for small towns, but for big cities as well. In addition, most university articles (even on the most famous ones) mention the notable alumni, eventhough it would be fair to assume that the number of famous people of Oxford, Cambridge or Sorbonne would be quite high and those do not need more advertisment. Halibutt 20:14, May 19, 2005 (UTC)
::Having this section in some of the other big cities articles by itself is no proof that it's a good idea. Certainly not a majority of big cities have this section. The analogy with Universities does not strictly apply. The University is an institution whose main purpose is to prepare people with what's necessary to achieve in life and become notable. So, the information about the success of alumni of the university is encyclopedic. 
::However, if there is any need for the list of all notable people who happen to be born or lived in a city of the scale of Lviv, why wouldn't such a need be served by a separate article Famous Leopolitans with the link in Lviv article? This list for Lviv, if properly assembled, would end up in hundreds or thousands. It is already comparable in length with the rest of the article. Additionally it serves as a battleground for the editors who are tempted to use it to advance their point about the city being more part of one preferable heritage.
::I say, let's make a separate article Famous Leopolitans which would make Lviv article more concentrated and reader friendly. BTW, similar section was removed from Kiev article recently with the consensus of the concerned editors. I hope my position did not offend anyone. Irpen 21:22, May 19, 2005 (UTC)
:::Well, that was simply my point of view. Many such cities have a separate list of notable people and I find such lists really nice and useful. Your argument about future students who would like to know something on notable alumni can be used for cities as well, especially that the artists or politicians' tell much more about the past of such cities than the mere historical note. On the other hand the article is already quite long. Fortunately your assumption that the list might be a grain of salt that could spark disputes between nationalists is wrong so far. At least I didn't see any such problems here, which makes me think that the list is fine (and I must say that I'm quite happy with it). 
:::Perhaps if the article exceeded the 32kB deadline we could move the list to a separate article and live a few names here? I don't know, such a solution would be equally good to me. Perhaps we should wait and let the others express their views. Halibutt
::::Regarding similar lists for other cities in the form of separate articles, such lists are sometimes nice to look at just out of sheer curiosity. I see a familiar name in the list and think something like: "Wow, and him too. Cool! Wow and this one! Cool! etc." So, having such lists as separate articles are just "nice" but having good city articles is really important. So, we should decide whether to keep the section or not based on whether it's helpful or not for the article about the city. The most significant figures in city history should be mentioned within the text flow. Some people, like Prince Danylo, Prince Lev, King Casimir, Fyodorov (book printing promoter), Boguslawski, Ossolinski and others are already in the text or will be there with future enhancements of the article (I will write about Fyodorov, if no one else does it before me). As for the people who are notable and so happen to be born or lived in Lvov, but their notability has to do with other things than their role in the city history, I have my doubts their list helps the Lviv article rather than hurts it. In similar list in Kiev article, before it was deleted, there was. for example, Milla Jovovich (born there), no doubt a notable person. But why should she be in the Kiev article I simply don't know. Born there, so what?  I can't judge for most of the famous Leopolitans currently in the list because I haven't heard of most of them (which of course doesn't mean much). If we create an article with a list of them, with more and more added, this article would satisfy those who would be curious to see such list of people notable in totally different areas but united by being related to Lviv/Lvov/Lwow/Lemberg.  
::::It is a completely different thing for a list of famous alumni in the University article not because it is helpful for prospective students but because providing people with resources that will make them notable is the main mission of the university. The city has no similar mission of producing people as well as any other particular mission per se. The city is just the city. The list of notable Leopolitans is bound to be incomplete and, except of the small fraction of them, their notability has more to do with other things than their just being Leopolitans. Of course the situation is different for small and relatively obscure towns and villages, but not for Lviv.
::::OK, let's wait and see what other editors have to say. This topic is too new to draw any conclusions. Irpen
 
:::In the meantime, we could do a general cleanup of the article, move the not-yet-existent sections to talk page, add more pics, sort the sections and perhaps request peer review? What do you think? I'll start the work on it right away. What do you say? Halibutt
::::I would be glad to help with what I can, but I can't really do much because I know much less about Lviv than what's already there. I will try to make some edits on what I know, but to contribute significantly, I would need to research the topic. Hopefully, the research of other editors, who know more about Lviv to begin with, will be more productive than mine. Irpen 01:26, May 20, 2005 (UTC)
Other editors, please comment on the discussion above to which I would like only to add that currently the list is already almost 25% of the article length and with some effort could be doubled or trippled with names no less notable than those already there. If compiled rigorously, I am sure there would be thousands of names. I say, let's move it to a separate Famous Leopolitans article but no one but user:Halibutt responded so far. Or am I the only one who thinks the list is out of place? Then simply respond that you object. Or is this a minor issue and I am just wasting everyone's time? Than I am sorry. -Irpen 02:25, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)
: I would support mentioning perhaps a half-dozen most prominent names in a short paragraph, and referring to the whole list in a separate article.  I agree that long lists can take a bit of the wind out of an article.  —Michael Z. 2005-10-11 05:55 Z
Rather than purging the natinonalities, clearly relevant, why not spin them all off (with the nationalities) to a separate list article and add a see also link here? --Irpen 08:26, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As for the list, I support Michael's proposal, to keep only a short list in the article, and the more extensive one in a spearate page. However this might lead to confusion as to who is prominent enough to be shortlisted and who is not. As to the nationalities, I'm for purging them, since its main use would be to feed nationalisms of any kind, anyway. Nationalities of indiviuals are often disputed, and whether a person spoke one or another language does not seem important, as Lviv was historically a multinational town. We do not need to prove that it was "more" Polish, or Jewish, or Ukrainian etc. Do we ? --Lysytalk 11:46, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Do I gather that you are saying that we should not mention people's nationalities because it offends your particular politics? Sorry, but (in general) I disagree. I'm not going to fight it here, but in parts of the world where nationalities figure this prominently, I think they should be given. - Jmabel | Talk 18:13, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Famous Leopolitans section. Is it necessary?

message: Here is some info in Urainian .--AndriyK 16:55, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Link about Andrei Sheptyts'kyi  in english --Yakudza 21:50, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

text: The nobel position taken by Metropolitan Sheptytsky as well as some other people is not under any doubt. The issue is whether OUN or part of it was complicit in pogroms. My most recent edit does not link "Ukraianian collaborators. Instead, it says "Ukrainian collaborators (see also OUN". The connection is there, but this does not imply that collaboratos and nationalist is one and the same in every respect. --Irpen 17:11, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Righteous Among the Nations in Lviv

message: I might ask that a similar Gdansk/Danzig vote might help to resolve the despute for the lands in question. My proposal if we adopt the following standard: 
#1939-USSR intruded (not invaded) into Poland, waliking across undefended borders to share its spoils of the German invasion of Poland
#As this was clearely recognised by several powers (like Chamberlain's statement) we consider those lands Soviet from then on
#1941-44 All Soviet lands, including those in part 2; were invaded by Nazi Germany and they occupied them during that time. 
#1943-44 Red Army liberates all Soviet territory (inc. #2) from the Nazi Germany.
#1944 onwards, wether Soviet Union liberates or occupies other countries in Poland or Bulgaria or whatever I could not really care, but to be consistent the phrase (subject to modifications) In 1944-45 Red Army liberated N-city however the Communist authorities and the NKVD who followed in the footstepts did this and that, which caused the some of the people to see it as this and that...etc.  can be used by some of the more nationally-conscious wikipedians. Although really this does not fit into the disputed territory
#1945 Upon the Soviet-Polish treaty the recognised at Yalta border is demacrated and Poland recieves conscessions in form of Belostok and Peremyshl. Those lands prior to that were Soviet. 
So in fact this is the picture:
*pre-1939 - Polish 
*post-1939 - Soviet
*1941-1944 - Soviet, but occupied by Nazi Germany
*1944 Soviet, liberated from Nazi Germany
*post 1944 Soviet (- Belostok and Peremyshl)
--Kuban Cossack 11:42, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: August 1945, Soviet-Polish treaty which recognised the eastern bordrs on their de facto state; Yalta and Potsdam agreements. --Kuban Cossack 11:59, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Treaty was worded that Poland accepted the defacto state of the border with minor adjustments (Belostok, Peremyshl). There was not even a mention about the 1921 border. In 1941-44 there was no Poland. --Kuban Cossack 13:26, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Halibutt 14:44, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Maybe a vote

message: We have 7-digit tel nombers in Lviv now. So area code got shorter. Now +38032 --ZAVR 20:19, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Area code

message: User:Harrisonmarks posted a reference to the "War of L'Viv" under the location section. As the title (and similar terms with other spellings of Lviv ... Lviv, L'vov, etc.) show not a single hit, I've pulled it until someone can come up with some evidence backing up what was stated. --DMG413 01:53, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Location

message: If a prisoner is moved from jail A to jail B, would it be correct to say that the prisoner was liberated from jail A? I don't think so.
Why should we term the replacement of the Nazi dictatorship by the communist one as "liberation"? If one follows Irpen's logic, then Nazi occupation of Lviv should be called "liberation from communist dictatorship". Ridiculous, isn't it?--AndriyK 08:47, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not really as Nazism has been confirmed as a dictatorship by the Nurenberg tribunual, which also confirmed Lvov as a Soviet city. It is you who is being rediculous. Lvov was liberated by the Red Army, who liberated its own city. --Kuban Cossack  11:59, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the ownership of Lvov was not confirmed by Nuremberg trials. It was confirmed by Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact and then by the Yalta agreement, but not the Nuremburg trials. //Halibutt 12:18, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It was confirmed by the Polish-Soviet border treaty in August, 1945 which amogst other points agreed to cede Bialystok and Pzemyshl to Poland. Those were the terms of the treaty. Thereby by that point the Polish government must have fully recognised the 1939 line as its eastern frontier. --Kuban Cossack  20:06, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

text: What? Soviet soldiers not free? What? My freind, first of all learn English to clearely give your thoughts and then begin trolling on talk pages. --Kuban Cossack  10:25, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Imprevu don't bother feeding this person who goes great lengths to combine the most random facts together, the English is bad enough to read. As for victory day, then I concur, particulary people like Kovpak, Kuznetsov and Medvedev. --Kuban Cossack  18:53, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

text: What does the famine of 1932-33 have to do with Red Army soldiers, yes random facts and IRRELEVANT!--Kuban Cossack  12:45, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "liberation from the Nazi" 

message: The first steps of the Liberators were - mass arrestations and expulsions. 
Xx236 07:25, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Makes me think that you were there to witness it all happening. --Kuban Cossack  12:44, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lvov was liberated by the Red Army, who liberated its own city 

message: The article is biased, it doesn't mention Soviet repressions against Ukrainian nationalists.
Xx236 13:28, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Everything is biased to you as long as it does not match your POV. The point of wiki is NPOV, stop trolling on talk pages of the articles. --Kuban Cossack  13:32, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Post-war repressions 

message: * Brweaking of surrender condition, the murder of the POWs ("Katyn").
* Polish Underground under the Soviets
* Polish Underground under the Nazis
The mass deportations 1940-1941 and the murder of the prisoners in Summer 1941 are common knowledge. "Citation needed" is ideological manifestation (you liars insult Stalin and NKVD) rather than editor work.
Xx236 07:07, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lacking subjects 

message: If words are disputed, it's better to use  right next to the offending word than use . Telex 15:16, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's exactly why I removed Halibutt's tag yet again. If this is all about "liberation", he is welcome to take a look at talk:Battle of the Lower Dnieper (and archives) and even say a word or two there rather than spread this discussion to the multitutde of talk pages. If it is about some other words, he is welcome to mark them. If the article is globally tarnished, the common sense demands a clear and concise explanation of the tag added to a talk page by an unsatisfied editor. --Irpen 17:26, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There are a number of issues. One of them is presenting the expulsion of Poles from their land as liberation, but as can be seen above this article is far from perfect and this is not the only issue that should be solved. It's not a problem of a single word, it's a wider thing. //Halibutt 05:50, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please tag the word as "Disputed". As for the rest, care to elaborate. I started a section for you below. Until then, I am removing the tag. --Irpen 05:58, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Oh, and calling editors who contribute content to Wikipedia as "Vandlals" in the edit summaries does not add credibility, to your action. --Irpen 05:58, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I consider removing a proper tag, in part added due to your POV pushing, a vandalism. I'm sorry if that offends you and I'm sorry if you don't see that. //Halibutt 06:06, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

text: So what the heck am I doing here? //Halibutt 06:20, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re disputed words 

message: Stalin let millions people starve before the war, probably more than the number of Holocaust victims was, so generally Stalin's regime wasn't "certainly" much softer.
If we discuss 1944 in Lviv, it was softer for certain groups, the same for certain ones, and harsher for other ones. It wasn't "liberation" for all. 
In Western Ukraine Red Army was welcome in 1939, Wehrmacht in 1941 and Red Army in 1944. Any of those dates started also a new period of underground activities. 
Xx236 07:57, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The title is controversial and is not on subject. The fact is that none of the regimes contributed to development of the Ukrainian city. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 22:18, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stalin's regime was certainly much softer than the Hitler's one 

message: "remained" is here radical Soviet point of view. The Polish/Soviet(Ukrainian) border was defined in Soviet-Communist Polish treaty. Why should be defined something existing before.
Xx236 08:02, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Because otherwise it couldn't have been "liberated" by the Red Army? //Halibutt 07:14, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  the area remained as part of the [[Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic]]. 

message: I believe it was 2-5 thousands. Is it "many"?
Xx236 11:04, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Many thousands were killed[citation needed]. 

message: http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lw%C3%B3w see panorama of Lwów. Add this foto?
:Upload it to commons. --Kuban Cossack  19:46, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: * bad one. I'll gather in commons good set of lviv's foto soon. --ZAVR 14:40, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Polish version 

message: Lviv's history sections were moved from Lviv to History of Lviv.  When making the new History section for Lviv, I essentially cut out the main sentences from each history section.  Please edit it mercilessly as my primary concern was to create the History of Lviv (was there a specific reason why this article did not exist previously?).  --Riurik (discuss) 23:14, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I thoroughly support your action. The History section was rich enough to warrant the article on its own. Now, please note, that the History section of this article will be edited from now on independently from the History of Lviv article, especially as new editors come by. Someone should take it upon herslef to monitor that they remain in agreement with each other. I am trying to do that with Kiev/History of Kiev and Ukraine/History of Ukraine pairs. --Irpen 23:38, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good call, I hope however that the history section for Lviv will not expand beyond two moderate size paragraphs (if that much).--Riurik (discuss) 02:38, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of Lviv article 

message: This is a important city for Austrian, Polish and Jewish history too and formed part of the relevant countries territory. To banish the relevant names into "See other names" where they are thrown in among the English, Serbian and Spanish names is very odd and contrary to established Wikipedia policy. Refdoc 09:24, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: Riurik,
I read your comment below:
"Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did in Lviv. It is considered spamming, and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising. Thanks. --Riurik"
Please explain your recent deletion of my link on the Lviv article while leaving there the link to the "Tourist Information and Travel Guide" which offiers an even wider spectrum of commercial services compared to my website link which you have persistently deleted. 
I ask for consistency and applying the same standards to all the users, in line with the general concept of the Internet community.
I would appreciate your comments very much.
Vladyslav
:Wikipedia is not Wikitravel, it is not a place for giving links that bear little relevance to the city, but focus on all of the travel details. No offence, but there is a "relevancy" measure that we apply. --Kuban Cossack  12:36, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My is not opinion, there is an official wiki policy on which External links are useful and which are not. I mean wrt to relevance of Moscow which link would be more useful:  or . In the end people read encyclopedias not as travel guides (at least I do so). Which is why there are no lonely planet links on any of the cities in wiki. I do understand that some of the links of Lvov are irrelevant, I might just get round to cleaning up the mess... ()--Kuban Cossack  18:35, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Vladyslav, I am sorry for what could have appeared as inconsistent application of standards.  That was not my intention.  At this time, I removed the above mentioned link and a couple of others.  In doing so, I relied on guidelines as outlined here.  I hope that you will continue editing on wikipedia.  Also consider registering, which will allow you to track your contributions.  Finally, if you have not visited it so far, you may be interested in Ukraine related portal.  --Riurik (discuss) 20:13, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Applying the same standards to all contributors of Wikipedia 

message: not weighing in on the travel links...yet i do think many people look up a place they wish to travel to on wikipedia or may later decide to go there after reading about it on wikipedia...with lviv people using wikipedia in english likely have almost no clue about this city...and to find a book about it??? good luck with that in an english speaking country outside the most massive cities...so some things relevant to someone travelling there are important to include and some pictures so people have some basic sense as to what its like there...when one looks up lviv on the net...its wikipedia that shows first...people may get their first ideas and feelings about a place from wikipedia...when i had decided to travel to lviv to inquire as to the med school...i had a very hard time finding info...wikipedia and lonely planet ukraine were my main two sources...and even in them the info was very sparse on lviv...my few color photos of the area were from wikipedia...yet as to links to travel companies...im not so sure about that...thats for the net in general it seems Benjiwolf 19:35, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't tell from the above whether you are aware of it, but there is, indeed, a separate project called Wikitravel, and it allows far more subjective writing than Wikipedia. - Jmabel | Talk 18:56, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: wikitravel?

message: i dont know poeple...i can just create a web page with my travel observations that says things like "there are large puddles in the streets that cars must plunge thru during rains" and then cite it and refer to it...these are basic facts of the city some of these...many babushkas do indeed sit on the street corners selling nuts and seeds...thats a fact...and its highly notable when one visits this city...there is clearly a high work ethic as of this and one seeing older women out on the streets selling things...do i just need to put it on another web page to get some basic factual info about lviv into the article?...there is a serious issue over hot water in lviv...many long term residents told me of it...i experienced it myself...it is a fact...ho hum...Benjiwolf 17:45, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  on personal observations in foreign countries 

message: I agree with Angryxpeh action.  The historical images of Lviv are nice, but the site is commercial in nature and the purpose is clearly to use wikipedia in order to advertise itself.  Per wikipedia policies, wp:el and wp:spam and in order to be consistent with past actions, this link has to be removed.  Also note, how the anon user pushed its website elsewhere on wikipedia. --Riurik (discuss) 04:48, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You need to come up with the reliable source that states that the Ukrainian Census (2001) has been falsified in order to remove its data. Until then, it stays. --Irpen 00:11, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links: spam 

message: I deleted the last sentence in the paragraph, stating that only 1% of the population of Lwow is Polish. That information came from Ukranian propoganda and is not true. There was a show in TVP showing like 5000 Polish kids from Lwow visiting Poland. Are you telling me that like 80% of Polish people in Lwow are underaged?
There needs to be a more valid, unbiased citation.
Chatnin
:You need to come up with the reliable source that states that the Ukrainian Census (2001) has been falsified in order to remove its data. Until then, it stays. --Irpen 00:11, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Statistics

message: there was a newspaper article i read addressing this issue concerning pavement vrs cobblestones and the controversial paving of areas previously cobblestone just before the anniversery celebration...and as well i heard residents mention that this is an issue...Benjiwolf 12:23, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I know, and I think that you are probably very correct in this, but think how bad that sounds:  the encyclopedia says "X" because 1) some article said so AND 2) hearsay.  Working within the guidelines of wp:v ensures that some form of information reliability is maintained.  --Riurik (discuss) 01:22, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  there is currently a dilemma 

message: well it seems u are displeased with the airport service...if u can find a news article concerning the airport then u could add info about the airport...yet even then the way u phrased it just wasnt fit for encylopedia material...yet as far as a complaint form goes...i must admit i had a laugh on ur last line that no airplane crew has ever stepped out of the plane...yet come on...thats speculation and not quite encyclopedia material...ive never been to the lviv airport...im sure its not yet up to the standards in more well off areas of the world...yet it seemed u exaggerated things a touch as u had an especially bad day there...anyways i could, yes, say to the western traveller...dont expect everything like it is in the west unless u at least pay something...yet itll generally be still far less than what it costs in the west for the same thing...and if u dont like waiting in the lviv airport...head to a restaurant next door to cool off for a few, or grab a beer and come back...Benjiwolf 14:23, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  to the anonymous airport editor 

message: In my opinion the voice in file says "L'vil" instead of "L'viv". I'm a native speaker of Ukrainian, so I'm sure what I'm talking about.
How I can to change this audio file to another? What are the rules? --Yarko 16:59, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right.  The recording is flawed.  I looked up the info on changing the file from wiki help page.  Here it is.  I think as long as you make the new .ogg file you can replace it without any further deliberation.  --Riurik(discuss) 20:26, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lviv.ogg 

message: As I understand it, Lviv / Lvov was a majortity-Polish city for hundreds of years until shortly after WW2 the Soviets ethnically cleansed the area and deported most Poles to former German areas. The article should probably mention this somewhere, it's a matter of considerable historical importance.
Eleland 15:41, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: nobody can erase hundreds of years of Lwow's history - very true; nobody is trying to do this nor is it very likely to do on wikipedia due to the multi-vectoral scrutiny.  Keep in mind the scope of the entry.  The material you mention is very likely already addressed under History of Lviv.--Riurik(discuss) 23:14, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: you are right, I checked theHistory of Lviv, it is there Greetings Tymek 03:46, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What happened to the Poles? 

message: There has been a back and forth between two wordings:
#"The Jewish population declined during the calamities of the 20th century."
#"The Jews were murdered by Nazis and Ukrainians collaborating with them during World War II."
The former had been in the article for some time. The latter recently replaced it. I reverted once, but I'm not going to get into an edit war. I'm simply going to state my case here and let others sort it out. (And by the way, in case anyone thinks I'm some kind of Holocaust denier: not at all. I'm a Jew whose family lost its entire European branch in the Holocaust.)
* The Holocaust itself was not the only cause of decline of the Jewish population in Ukraine, though it was probably the largest. There was also the exodus after the Kishinev pogrom (and a steady trickle before that and after until the Russian Revolution) and there were Holocaust survivors (and their descendants) who made aliyah to Israel. Some Jews doubtless retreated with the Red Army and did not end up back in Lviv.
* "Murder" is a tricky word here, because it is a legal term. I'd certainly use it in more casual writing, but in an encyclopedia I think it is very problematic. Even if we are going to say effectively this, "killed" is a much less problematic word.
* Not all of the people in the Nazi German killing machine were, themselves, individually, Nazis. Some of these Germans were simply collaborators. "Nazis" may be acceptable shorthand here, but it is shorthand.
* "The Jews… were murdered…": while most of the city's Jews were, indeed, killed in the Holocaust, quite a few survived. The wording here suggests that none did.
Besides these specifics: all of these matters are well discussed elsewhere. This is a small section about a the demography of a city. I'm not necessarily saying that the previous wording is how we should handle this—it is a bit too tame—but, as I've just described, I think the latter wording is very problematic. Perhaps we need to provide some links here to the various relevant articles? If we are going to try to handle this in this article we need to remember to take an encyclopedic approach, not to write something pithy but oversimplified. - Jmabel | Talk 18:31, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just came across this talk entry.  Thanks for the perspective on the issue.  I can see how that was too tame, or as another user put it, politically-correct, and I am willing to work towards a better alternative.--Riurik(discuss) 20:04, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Murder" 

message: This edit gives a higher population and calls it an "estimate" but gives no citation. I'm not at all expert on the topic and I haven't been tracking the article history, but this looks dubious to me. - Jmabel | Talk 00:10, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It too looks dubious to me; I checked the statistics from the Featured Russian Wikipedia article about Lviv, and it gave 910,000.. Unfortunatly, I have found no citations for this "estimate" nor any recent city population statistics of the city. —dima/talk/ 00:34, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Would there be any objections to citing the official census figures of 733,000? I've also asked the Russians where they got their numbers, someone will come up with a reference sooner or later. Regards, Bogdan що? 01:18, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's probably due to differences of what constitutes "Lviv".  Unless we get the 910 ref, it's better to go with the official # of 733.--Riurik(discuss) 06:15, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Population 

message: Does anyone have a better image of marshrutka in Lviv or anywhere else in Ukraine?  The current one we have (:Image:Marshroutky.jpg) does the city no justice.--Riurik(discuss) 06:40, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New image of marshrutka? 

message: I have just edited (as a native speaker) the previously evident non-native English (note this is now in British English, because this is what I write most naturally and therefore best, not because of any intentional rejection of US English). I have also deleted what seemed to me an excessive number of Wikilinks for dates and made a couple of minor insertions and deletions. I'm not happy about the use of "Lviv" for periods or dates when it was known as Lemberg or Lwów, but this is another issue, which I see has arisen before, and I am not able to proceed any further with this today (or for several more days).CWO (talk) 21:46, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copy-editing 

message: The first railway in modern Ukraina (Borderland) was built by the Austrians. It was named k.k.priv.Galizische Carl Ludwig-Bahn usually lettered in international railway history as CLB.
The line Przemysl - Lemberg was opened on 15.11.1861. The capital of Austrian Galizia was Lemberg until Austria asked for terms according to Woodrow Wilson´s 14 pacts in October 1918.
The Imperial Russian army captured Lemberg in August 1914 (all church bell ringing in Holy Russian Land) and it was occupied by the Russians until the combined German and Austrian attack
which started in May near Gorlice drowe the Russians away. During the Russian occupation they started to call Austrian Galizia "Red Russia". 
No word of Ukrainean nationalist Petlura who made Lemberg as his headquarter until being ousted by the Poles in April 1919. From that point Lemberg become Polish Lwow and remained so until the Germans and Russians captured Lwow on September 23, 1939. General Januszszzeitic (Commander of the Lwow) held talk to his officers and let them freely decide if they continue the battle and try to breakthrough the German and Soviet lines to reach Kolomyja, or take their civilian clothes, or surrender weither to the German Army or Red Army units. The defending Polish Army units surrendered to the Germans and Soviets. About 80 per cent choose German captivity, about 10 per cent managed in civilian clothes reach Roumanian border. The last 10 per cent surrendered to the Soviets. They were transported to Katyn where they were shot by NKVD in April 1940. In Eastern Poland ie. area east of new demarcation line, as agreed in Moscow on 28.09.1939, between Ribbentrop and Molotov the line followed Narew, Veiksel and San Rivers.
Now Soviet Union demanded Germans to withdraw their troops immediately which had crossed this new Demarcation Line. At this moment German Army had occupied old German settlement Winniki east of Lwow at Weinberg. The Soviets renamed Lwow to Lvov in cyrillic. This situation lasted until the Germans captured Lvov in July 1941. Lvov become Lemberg again and remained so until 22.07.1944. Then renamed again to Russian Lvov. However, the Soviets deported in 1945 nearly all of Lwow´s Polish population to Breslau in Silesia. Only few managed for marriage reasons to stay in Soviet Lvov. The town has similar historical importance to the Poles as Wilno and to Finns Viipuri in their national history. Despite the area was ceded to Soviets, the place names were not, and Lvov / Lviv is still offically in Polish language Lwow. The Austrians and Germans still (in 2008) use Lemberg for the town as the Finns and Estonians still use Viipuri for Soviet / Russian Vyborg. Such are the facts, and nobody cannot change the course of history despite desperate attempts to create new one, especially by some Russians and American Jews.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.114.194.42 (talk) 17:07, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Some Comments

message: Horse tramway built by Societa Trestina Tramway was built in 1879 - 1880. It was built to 1000 mm (metre) gauge. First horse tram operated on 05.05.1880. The company was municipaliced in 1906 and electrified in 1908.
The 1000 mm gauge Lemberger Strassenbahn, built and operated at first by German Siemens & Halske was opened on 31.05.1894. This company was municipalised in 1896. At first left-hand traffic was introduced. The change to right hand traffic was made during Polish adminstration on 01.10.1922. The first tram depot was opened in 1908 and the second one in 1929.
The German map dated 04.02.1944 shows the Lemberg tramway lines at that time. All the streets had German names such as Wienerstrasse, Bahnhofstrasse, Weststrasse to Kleparow, Kasimirstrasse, Krakauerstrasse, Solkiewerstrasse to Podzamcze. Oststrasse to Lyczakow,Sophienstrasse and Paninskastrasse to Persenkowka, Fürstenstrasse, Kopernikusstrasse,
Wehrmachtstrasse, Fichtenstrasse, Herbetstrasse, and Saufenstrasse used by the Lemberger trams. In 2002 the total route lenght was 67 km. Eight tramway lines were in operation. Numberered 1 to 7 and 9 with total 185 tramway cars. All tramway cars were built by CKD (Tatra T-4 and Tatra KT-4) located at Praha, Tatra - Smichov Works in 1973 - 1976 and 1981 - 1988. All this information is available in several sources of which the work of Aare Olander, Tallinn, Estonia is the best one for all ex Soviet Union Tramway systems for detailed study.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.114.194.42 (talk) 19:56, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Lemberg / Lwow / Lvov / Lviv Tramway History

message: "20°C (65 °F) in June": I have no idea which is accurate, but the Celsius & Fahrenheit don't quite match. 20°C is 68 °F. - Jmabel | Talk 04:59, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Temperature conversion