Talk:Kaliningrad Oblast/Archive 2

message: "Historically, the area was part of East Prussia until its partition between Poland (Warminsko-Mazurskie Voivodship), Lithuania (Memelland), and Russia (Kaliningrad Oblast) following the WWII."
 - seems to me not very accurate. I would like to add some dates here:
*part of East Prussia since?
*partition - Memelland was splited from East Prussia following WWI (1919) then briefly was reincorporated (1939-1945) into East Prussia during WWII. This area (Memelland) has not much to do with Kaliningrad Oblast, so I doubt if Lithuania should be mentioned in this sentence at all.
Proposal: "Historically, the area was part of East Prussia since 15th century until its partition between Poland (Warminsko-Mazurskie Voivodship), Lithuania (Memelland), and Russia (Kaliningrad Oblast) following the WWII."
Dirgela 19:20, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  History - first sentence 

message: I will revert back the past revert, as it was done without explaination and some of things reverted are ridiculous (such as reverting added comma, which was correction of a grammatical mistake and had nothing to do with supposed POV). And seriously, I cannot see how sentence "as a just retribution for unprecedented massacre of Russian civilians during the WWII." is NPOV - encyclopedia cannot decide what is just and what is not, it is up to reader to decide; even for really injust or just things encyclopedia cannot state it; encyclopedia must remain as neutral as possible. Also, I corrected the mistake where it said that whole northern East Prussia was ceded to Russian SFSR, as the northernmost part of it (Klaipėda region/Memelland) was added to Lithuanian SSR. Also, it is truth what I wrote in my correction that most Lithuanians does not know about the plans to add the area to Lithuanian SSR after WW2; the documents were not public for long. Therefore the "Lithuanians believe" is wrong, as most of them don't even know or care about this. This will be my last edit here for now unless POV will be added. DeirYassin 14:59, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding the revert 

message: I apopogize for criticism without adding something useful, but unfortunately I have little knowledge in the area. Nevertheless...
Division of the history of any "historical era" by century boundaries (which are arbitrary in the time flow) is non-scientific. Normally it is done by changes of ownership or other notable dates. The corresponding subsections that describe clearly defined periods such as East Prussia must be summaries with references to "main article" with details only immediately related to the territory in question. Otherwise we will have duplication with maintenance problems. mikka (t) 15:20, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Mikkalai - it's ok to criticise or point at what seems to be doubtful for you of course. The information about the refusal is based on one of Lietuvos Ryto Televizija historical documentic shows, the one which was about the establishment of Kaliningrad Oblast. As far as I remember, allegedly from what is possible to reconstruct from existing documents, Antanas Sniečkus, leader of Lithuanian SSR, feared to directly refuse Stalin, therefore he did that through some other person, who was closer to Stalin. the outcome might have been different, but one of the reasons why the oblast was planned to be part of Lithuanian SSR disappeared: the US politician who promised in his electoral program to attempt to question the belonging of the area to Soviet Union was not elected; therefore there was no more any need to create a propaganda based on history of Lietuvininks that the region historically belonged to one of nations of the union. The only reason which remained then for adding area to Lithuanian SSR was the geographical one, but it was not strong enough. Too bad I seen this few years ago and don't remember exact dates, names and documents, but it was an interesting research. If you will insist though, it can be removed; although it is true information. I don't want to continue edit wars and revertings however, so I hope some agreement will be reached quickly. As for the division, previously it was done by me according to main nationalities of the area (Prussians, Germans/Lithuanians, Russians), later this was modified by another user who also added more info about East Prussia as a whole instead. I don't want to get into a real revert war over that issue, but I agree with you Mikkalai. DeirYassin 16:18, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be very nice for you to research the issue further, since my knowledge of Lithuanian barely allows me to translate the " Lithuanian Morning TV" :-). I will try to look for something in Polish/Russian/English. Indeed, this exclave does look strange. Also,  while the history of prussians we can dig, the real void is what/when all happened since 1945. How/when Slavs were moved on? Who/how many were the residual population after the expulsion of Germans? Militarization of the area? Industry? There is still much to write without delving down the centuries, in the direct relevance to the title. mikka (t) 00:43, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I hope you will find something interesting; you know Russian and Polish so proably it might be easier for you to seek for sources; as I know just Lithuanian and English. If I'll find out something of interest, I would add. And yes, this is an interesting issue - Wikipedia is a collaborative project so maybe once some Kaliningradian interested in the history of area will come and put more information also. DeirYassin 16:16, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: History

message: :These uprisings ultimately failed, resulting in the eventual destruction of the original Prussian culture, as the nation became thoroughly germanised. The Prussian language is known to have survived into the late medieval and renaissance periods as many of the Bibles from these periods were written in the Prussian language for those that did not speak German
* Is the late medieval true? Usually the fires would be lit under Catholics who did this. Eg Wyclif's Bible
* Was the language sill popular enought in the renaissance period to have its own Bible and why did the German speaking authorites allow it? Philip Baird Shearer 20:12, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Bibles