Talk:Latvian War of Independence

message: The inclusion of the UK as a belligerent keeps being reverted by user Xil despite the fact that they are mentioned as a combatant. The Latvian article has no problem in here. Shire Lord  (talk) 20:22, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: This was a land conflict over future status of Latvia. Allies were actually involved in Russian civil war, therefore it is hard to tell which of them were involved in this and what they did here was trying to get land forces of other nations to fight Bolsheviks for them, because they didn't have their own land forces, their involvement in combat was limited to supportive fire from navy in battles close to water. Listing allied powers in supportive role is the best way to reflect both why they were here, what they did and to avoid accidently not listing any of them. Meanwhile I don't see what exactly overemphasizing British involvement in particular would achieve, besides having pretty flag in the infobox. ~~Xil (talk) 06:37, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The Russian Civil war is a different article altogether and we should thus focus on this one. The infobox belligerents should be listed as relevance to who is mentioned in the article. Other allied powers are not mentioned as such but they did support the Latvians so that is fine as it is. The UK Royal Navy were not just supporting the Latvian's they were actually in combat with them against the Bolsheviks.  The Latvian article says that artillery fire from the British ships was a major factor during the recapture of Riga during the battle there between November 3 - 11. In addition British troops under General  Hubert Gough arrived in the Baltic with the task of clearing the Germans from the region and organizing native armies for the Baltic States. The Baltische Landeswehr was placed under British authority - Harold Alexander to ensure its return to Latvian control. Shire Lord  (talk) 13:46, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

text: Latvian Wikipedia says that British navy provided support during capture of Riga. The question isn't that they took part, the question is why you want to emphesize their participation over other allies and list them seperatly with main participants of the conflict that acctualy had land armies. Furthermore I wasn't talking about the article on Russian civil war I was talking about the Russian civil war - Allies were primarily involved in that, not this, they were trying to get armies involved in this war to fight Bolsheviks in order to achieve their  goals in another conflict. What is and is not mentioned in a stub article or another Wikipedia is not relevant, there could be bits left out and there are no hard set rules as to what infobox should include (or in this case apparently exclude), it should give summary of the conflict at a glance and listing Britain seperatly doesn't do that - it creates impresion that they weren't part of Allied intervention in the Russian civil war, but rather had seperate goals in this particular conflict ~~Xil (talk) 18:17, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: That is exactly what I said - the navy (which was more than supporting) was involved & that is why the use of brackets was put for 'naval' which I think on balance is fair. Poland is an example they had separate goals in this yet they are mentioned in this conflict too. Yes British were part of the allied intervention in Russia they were in Archangel and Vladivostock too but British Naval command ordered that the Baltic States to be defended at all costs and wholeheartedly supported Latvian and Estonian independence - the reason why the Navy were sent there. The emphasis on them is that they are mentioned in the article while others are not and as far as I know no other other allied power was involved in relevance to this article. If you find others that were involved then please feel free to add them within the article. If that is the case then I will be happy to then revert to original infobox stance as just allied powers. I hope that is agreeable?  Shire Lord  (talk) 21:54, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

text: Well, even Latvian Wikipedia you refered to multiple times says it... I came up with a different solution, however, namely instead of listing Britain in belligerent section, their (and I guess also French) ships could be listed in the strenght section, that way it would both show which nations had forces involved and avoid suggesting that they were acting alone. ~~Xil (talk) 01:18, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I would be satisfied with this & sorts out the solution of a more cluttered Infobox. I will do more research on how many ships there were & add them accordingly. Shire Lord  (talk) 07:28, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Infobox issue

message: Just 5,600-6,300 must be mistake! About 20,000 were in February 1919 and additionally 25,000 were conscipted until April. Maybe 56,000-63,000? Dukurs (talk) 17:35, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Red army numbers 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Latvian War of Independence. 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/20110713185842/http://www.latvietislatvija.com/Militarais_stavoklis.htm to http://www.latvietislatvija.com/Militarais_stavoklis.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100822143207/http://www.ksk.edu.ee/file.php?ID=1207 to http://www.ksk.edu.ee/file.php?ID=1207
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) 01:01, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* Monumento a la Libertad, Riga, Letonia, 2012-08-07, DD 09.JPG
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:40, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion