Talk:History of Lithuania

message: "However, Mindaugas was later murdered by his nephew, subsequently resulting in great unrest and a relapse into paganism."
There /must/ be a better way to describe the return to paganism than as a "relapse", which generally implies a return to a state of illness or a regression after an improvement.
:Do we really have doubts that christianity meant progress for Lithuania ? I believe "relapse" is right here. Lysy 19:20, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Paganism

message: Do we have any firm sources to support the 120000 figure ? On top of that we would have another 100K people imprisoned and sent to gulags o killed. And then the "repatriation" of Poles would add probably another 100K ? Lysy 17:45, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Soviet deportations

message: Very poor article - has to be rewritten or at least reviewed by someone with more knowledge on subject. Many important facts (i.e., rule of Grand Duke Vytautas (Vitold), battle of Grünwald) are ommitted and some dubious statements are presented as facts (i.e. I couldn't find anywhere that Gediminas was "slain").
:Please go ahead and improve it. Specifically what "cleanup" do you think it needs ? Lysy 18:00, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The article is not poor! OK, it needs rewriting and review, and contains big holes. However: what's written, is written in a NPOV and a factual pretty encyclopedic style. Those who wrote something deserve praise, please go on and repeat their success, harvest glory and honor! Rursus declamavi;  16:02, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article quality 

message: User:DeirYassin replaced significant parts of text recently calling the former version "Soviet propaganda". Among the most notable changes are deletion of mention of Ponary and other crimes of the Lithuanian collaborators. IMO if we mention the Armia Krajowa reply to the Lithuanian and German terror, then we should mention also its cause. Also, the very fact that there were Lithuanian collaborators taking part in the initial massacre of Jews and Poles is not disputed by historians (at least not that I heard of). 
I'm thinking of reverting to the previous version by Lysy, though perhaps I'm wrong and DeirYassin could explain his edits. Halibutt 19:31, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
:Returned the mention of Paneriai and as well wrote a whole new chapter about Lithuanian involvement with nazis. Basically I did the change to clean off some Russian propaganda, like that many Lithuanians seen Germans as liberators, which wasn't true, only in German-dominated Klaipėda it was so. But (some) Russians even these days believes that propaganda, they also believes obviously untrue things like that there was SS unit in Lithuania or that in Vilnius there is a statue built for SS soldiers lol (I was discussing with a bunch of them on these topics). So I tried to beshed such misconceptions, however it might be that I went too far, therefore now I did and if needed I will readd information which was deleted without reason.DeirYassin 20:40, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Still, many people living in SU when Germans invaded viewed them as liberators - it is a fact, and nothing to be ashamed of - at that moment, when Germans appeared, little was known about their ideas or crimes. We definetly need a section on how Soviet rule affected Lithuanians before IIWW, how did Germans conducted themselves during their occupation, what factions were there among Lithuanians - pro-German, pro-Soviet, pro-independent, etc. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 11:35, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: People in Lithuania knew a lot about Nazi ideas as Lithuanian authorities were fighting with Nazi parties in Klaipeda district since 1933 and the Nazi ideas were pretty well presented in its press. As in 1939 Germany occupied Klaipeda nobody forgot it in 1941 and were not particularly happy about Germans. A part of population still thought that it is better than Sovjets and were hoping to get at least a puppet state status. About collaborators - I would not be so happy about Lithuanian collaborators as there were Poles collaborating with Germans either, so to try to find out about every collaborators nationality is a wrong path I guess. Dirgela 19:35, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ethnic "disturbances" 

message: Why WW2 is defined here by the period 1940-1945 and not 1939-1945. Is it on purpose ? Lysy 05:48, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: WW2 in Lithuanian would be a much less confusing title then redefining WWII dates. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 11:35, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: Err, the fact that Lithuania benefited from the 1939 part of the WWII could be mentioned there as well, don't you think? If so, why not stick to the commonly accepted dates? Besides, this article often messes up Lithuania as a political and geographical term. If so, then part of (Polish) Lithuania took part in the war as early as 1939. //Halibutt 08:31, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  World War II (1940-1945) 

message: "In 1316, Gediminas, with the aid of colonists from Germany, began the restoration of the land." That is a strange statement indeed. Why there was restoration needed? According to some sources Gediminas invited Germans to settle in the country, but I wonder if any of them came as I never heard of any sources telling about successful german colonisation in Lithuania. Dirgela 19:28, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  german colonists 

message: "Poniatovskis" looks very funny in the English article ;) And btw. who has spoiled the whole article into this wood of empty headings? Dirgela 16:21, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  poniatovskis 

message: I reverted these edits. It seemed like strong POV language without any discussion here. --Bookandcoffee(Leave msg.) 17:45, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Revert

message: Why do you think that I'm trying to 'hide' this information?  Didn't I say in my last post that the only reason I deleted it was because I didn't think that including the exact number was important?  Of course 10 or 1000 or 100,000 are very different numbers and should be differentiated, but was there anyone who was going to mistakenly assume that 1000 or 100,000 were killed over a riot in a television station?  Like I said above, if you want it included that's fine with me but it has to be included in a context that recognizes that the Soviet government and soldiers were the recognized de facto civil authority and that by occupying a TV station those people killed were knowingly breaking the laws of the de facto recognized civil authority.  Setting them up like martyrs (I've even visited the Hill of Crosses) ignores the point of view of many stakeholders active in the SSR at the time.
:Come on, you don't shoot civilians, even if they occupy a TV station, do you ? As for setting up the victims as martyrs, this is exactly how they are seen in Lithuania (the Hill of Crosses doesn't seem to have anything to do with it, I'm afraid you're confusing something). Anyway, I see no harm by giving the number of the murdered. If you see it the same way, I believe we don't need to discuss this item any more ? --Lysy (talk) 22:06, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What are you saying? People occupied tv tower??? They were protecting it from Russian forces. In essence: people gathered around (not inside) not to let the russian solders inside. But the solders got in and the translations stopped. Just they did not stay there for a long time. Renata3 02:45, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You'll never hear me say that it was a good thing that the Soviets killed those people.  As a matter of fact, my personal opinion is that it was a bad thing on a number of different levels.  But it's not my job to put my personal value judgements into the article.  As far as why I removed it the first time, the passage read as if the people in question were walking around with halos and the Soviets were bloodthirsty people with no moral compass who just wanted to kill some innocent people.      The easiest way to make it objective would be to provide as little information as possible, which is what I did in my first edit.  What's easiest might not necessarily be best though.  What about "in a violent confrontation at the Vilnius TV tower, 13 Lithuanian pro-independence protestors lost their lives along with a Soviet paratrooper, while many hundred more received various degrees of other injuries."  Oh, and with regard to the Hill of Crosses--I meant to use that as an example of how tragic deaths can often become a political tool.  I realize that it ws there long before the 1990 events.  68.33.74.123 03:25, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "The easiest way to make it objective would be" not to write anything. You have to mention that those were unarmed civilians. You cannot deny it and I won't let you hide it :) This photo is considered to be the best one . You see - civilians with bare hands against tanks. Please notice somebody's feets under it. Renata3 05:45, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Number of victims

message: Finally, can we at least agree to put in the section on how Lithuania suspended their independence after Moscow cut off their oil and gas shipments?  It's got particular relevance to the recent disagreement between the Ukraine and Russia and it'd be nice to have that working while interest in the topic is so high.
:This is interesting, but hmm, was it significant ? Frankly, I've not even heard about this, and my biased and nationalistic books about modern Lithuanian history are also silent about the role of the embargo or any "suspending" of Lithuanian independence because of this. Where did you get this from ? --Lysy (talk) 22:12, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, and by all means feel free to refer to secondary sources. We do not want to do any original research here, do we ? --Lysy (talk) 22:52, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You are gonna need sources for that, and not Russian. The moratorium was for 100 days only and it would loose power once the talks with Russia ends. Renata3 02:45, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not entirely sure why you think this isn't significant.  The whole crux of the disagreement was on independence for Lithuania, and the anti-Soviet leaders really didn't have the power to achieve that with anything but diplomacy and referenda (again, not saying that what they did was legal or illegal, but pratically speaking).  I'm not sure about your 'biased and nationalistic' books, but a few seconds of searching brought me a New York Times front page article from 5/17/90 titled "EVOLUTION IN EUROPE; LITHUANIA AGREES TO SUSPEND LAWS ON INDEPENDENCE."  I know about the rule regarding individual research, but I did a term paper in college about this that I'm going to try to dig up and use the bibliography.  If I remember, there was quite a bit on JSTOR so if you've got access to it you should check it out.  I think it's relevant to the recent Ukraine-Russia dispute because it shows the significant power that Russia/USSR can wield with the threat of an energy embargo. 68.33.74.123 03:53, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it is significant. I spend today 3 hours looking through about 1000 articles from US and UK newspapers from april to june 1990. I plan to write a full article on the blocade and moratorium. But whatever you do, you need to get your facts straight: that article says that Lithuania agreed to suspend laws (mentioned in my earlier quote: about drafting to military, about citizenship, etc.), not independence (indepence was suspended on June 30 for 100 days; if you speak any Lithuanian, here is the original text: ). And at that time it did not suspend even those laws. It just agreed to if Moscow would start negotiating. But it did not and the laws were not suspended. Renata3 05:45, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Suspended independence

message: :Huh, why was the Holocaust photo from Kaunas removed now ? --Lysy (talk) 00:57, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please explain or put it back, or let me revert it. --Lysy (talk) 10:07, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The Holocaust photo

message: In response to the copyedit tag, I'm going to work my way through this (very good) article trying to improve the language.  I'm not an expert on the subject though, so if I mess anything up, please let me know or correct it. Kcordina 13:17, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No prob, I'll check it. It's on my watchlist. I am sure User:Lysy will join me. And thanks for being interested! Renata 17:39, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Very good! I just caught one tiny thing... Nice job! Renata 18:57, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyedit 

message: :1.Here's your citation: "Lokyz, too bad you opposed my idea without even taking time to look at it." 
:2.My proposition - let's leave interwar period or time being. It is not as systematical and nazi thing, as you're trying to put it. All that hatered only began to escalate a the the time - shooting and expelling Lithuanians from Vilius (for exmple Director of gymnasium Mykolas Biržiška was saved from firing squad only representatives of League of nations, constantly closing Lithuanian schools in Vilnius and the one left Vytauto Didžiojo Gimnazija constantly confiscating it's buildings it's a Polish style also, like closing Cultural organisations and jailing leaders of them. Need examples or will you believe my words? It's even understandable - technically both countries were at the war.
:3. as for WWII period, I do regret that has happened, although nationalism was to explode from many sides, (marszalek prowadz nas na Kowno, anyone?). And it did. I do not try to say it didn't happen. Also I do not say it could not be avoyded. And to avoyd this again, respect from both sides should help. I do not justify all those Lithuanian born nazis (2 thousand?), just accusing Lithuanians in a whole it is a little too far. Remeber that, not all batalions of police were involved in kilings and prosecutions. These were not Lithuanian national units, these were Lithuanians serving in German army and Germn police, so calling them everywhere "Lithuanians" is well, a bit overboard. They did act by orders of Germans - they did not choose where to serve (location, not army). Once again by any means i do not justify them, An yes this should be mentioned amnogst WWII crimes for the sake, this would newer repeat. 
:I'm just asking - do you really think, that actions of some 5 thousand werewolwes does represent whole Lithuania? 
:4 Well, for soviet union: So according to you, Lithuanians also did organise rresetlement from Ukraine and Belarus? Article, you've given mentions that all the treaties were similar. And one more question, do you relly believe that Lithuanian SSSR could have had it's foreign policy at the times of Stalin. Or the army, that organised all the major acts was Lithuanian? Or do you beleive that in brougth form Russia Lithuanian SSSR comunist "goverment" was similar nationalisic and had the same (presumable) bias as Smetona's nationalists? IMO, this was another one of chack mate games of Stlin - lke moving Crimean tatars, Chechens, assembling all Jews in Siberia, in autonomic republic, and so on. Ant resetlement of poles also fits to the same scheme. 
:That's how I do see the problem. Let's hear your opinion.--Lokyz 20:56, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I do agree wit Dude about those citations, but IMO this question should be moved back where it does belong, here it is OT. we might continue THAT dscussion there.--Lokyz 21:39, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Piotrus, as to the scope of the section/article I proposed, I believe that it would be much better to describe the issue in whole, without limiting it to German expulsions, Lithuanian expulsions or Soviet ones. I know I'm going to get bashed for this shortcut, but I'd rather write a section on how Poles disappeared from what is now Lithuania and not how Poles were expelled by the Soviets, how Poles were expelled by the Germans and How Poles were expelled by the Lithuanians. Hope you get what I mean. In any way, I proposed it here first, hoping that a discussion would be a step in a good direction and that the Lithuanian contributors would appreciate that I don't do anything without their consent, especially that the matter might bring some bad blood. I'm sorry to say so, but it seems that it was but a waste of time. Instead of suggestions of what to include, I received quite a bashing for proposing it here. But let's leave that. I will some more time and try again in, say, one year. Perhaps then the matter would receive more serious consideration. //Halibutt 07:03, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spliting issues 

message: I accidentally found out that the article uses verbatim paragraphs long text from external site, this US DoS page. While not a copyvio, since the text is probably PD, it is perhaps not a very good style. I found two paragraphs exactly dupicated. Perhaps, there is more. Someone interested, please overhaul this. It is too important an article and we have to show that we can do it better than copying material from elsewhere. Whoever has time and interest, please consider this suggestion. --Irpen 00:49, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Usage of verbatim text

message: I think the article lacks the explanation of why/how the territory of Lithuania changed so significantly at the turn of 19th/20th century. --Lysytalk 05:32, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Territorial change 

message: "...ultimately the Germans annexed Lithuania."
: I don't think this is correct. I've never read anything about Lithuania being "annexed" to the so-called Greater German Reich during the Nazi period. Obviously, it was occupied by German forces in 1941-44, but I don't believe it was annexed — as, for example, the Polish territories of the so-called "Wartheland" and the Suwalki district were annexed to the Nazi Reich.
:Of course, it's true that the Germans re-annexed, if you will, the former Memelland, which had been part of Germany and Prussia before WWI. But as I understand it, the rest of present-day Lithuania was part of the so-called Reichskommissariat Ostland, which was essentially an occupation regime, not part of what the Nazis considered the German Reich proper.   Sca 18:00, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, is Balstogė County coterminous with the former Memelland, as it existed pre-1920? This area (which included Memel / Klaipėda), long had a mixed German-Lithuanian population, which it seems to me would be relevant to mention here. Sca 15:33, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Annexed" 

message: The population figure for Vilnius after partition is unbelievable. with 250,000 citizens it would be as large as Vienna, and twice bigger than Warsaw (which was certainly the largest city of Commonwealth before partitioning. I guess there's one "0" too much in this figure.62.179.74.97 12:52, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Population of Vilnius after partitions. 

message: Is there another article detailing what happened in Lithuania under Soviet rule? Surely it is worth going into in some detail as it spans 50 years of the country's development despite as part of another state. The Lithuanian SSR article is not exactly in-depth coverage of a major part of Lithuania's modern history. Lstanley1979 (talk) 18:39, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Soviet history 

message: For quite a time ,a  single registered contributor is trying to remove a particular picture   Favorite rationale WP:UNDUE. Historic picture represents significant events in Lithuania’s history, namely result or Armia Krajowa criminal actions, which is responsible in total  for thousands of Lithuanian people deaths, (like Dubingiai massacre). Actions of  Armia Krajowa covered in various Lithuanian academic publications like the newest one (in which I am aware) Lithuanian Historical Studies, 2006; etc. Therefore AK actions in important aspect of Lithuania’s history and this why specific image meets necessary criteria required by WP. Looking deeper ,If we going to use  WP:UNDUE as an “argument” in similar  cases, almost  all pictures of  The Holocaust article should be also removed, as they, to certain type  contributors, may look like not neutral. In other hand in current article we have various pictures including alleged meeting in Vilnius for “welcoming” occupying Red Army. Of course if any contributor has accesses to pictures there Lithuanians greeting AK with flowers, please by my quest and add it.M.K. (talk) 13:34, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Dubingai massacre is a footnote to a footnote to a footnote in Lithuanian history; there are hundreds of events (and photos) more notable for a general article on Lithuanian history. WP:UNDUE sums the issue very well. Ponary massacre, for example, was much larger in scope and is much more known; Glinciszki massacre is just as well known; Ypatingasis būrys is fifteen times (at least) more often described in English works than "Dubingai massacre" (which is virtually unknown; 15 vs 0 hits on Google Print). Nonetheless I was did and never will insist on adding those minor events to general article on history of Lithuania. For the same reason I will continue to object to add minuscule highly non-neutral trivia and photos to that article. This is Wikipedia, not "history by Vilnija". PS. And for the record, it's not a "single editor"; others apparently agree with me too (ex. ).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  14:55, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: A) present academic facts that there are hundreds of photos more notable. B) present facts that  Armia Krajowa crime scene is regarded as trivia. C) do you have photos related to Glitiškės? D) history of Vilija is presented in  separate  article, lost? M.K. (talk) 12:01, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

text: Dubingiai massacre is not a footnote to a footnote to a footnote, but still does not merit a photo here in this article, but text still may be expanded. --Doopdoop (talk) 19:47, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Certainly the article needs much expansion. Nonetheless I still maintain that Dubingai and Glinciszki events are marginal in importance, and too often are brought up by those trying to sour Polish-Lithuanian relations (ex. Vilnija-sponsored publications).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  20:53, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Vilnija is a footnote to a footnote to a footnote in the list of organizations in Lithuania, so do not bring it up here. While I agree that there is no need to mention Dubingiai events in this article, we should discuss whether activities of AK need more mention in this article. Can someone check Lithuanian history textbooks whether they mention AK at all (absence of mentions would be a good proof of WP:UNDUE regarding the photo or additional text)? If there is a limited coverage (I seriously doubt it can be extensive) of AK in the textbooks perhaps it can be condensed and presented here as a text (but not a photo). --Doopdoop (talk) 23:11, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Doopdoop, why do you so emphasizing  Dubingiai massacre, Armia Krajowa carried out ethic cleansing across Eastern Lithuania.  I already presented the newest publication which I am aware of in regards of AK:  Lithuanian Historical Studies, 2006; same goes with Panorama, 2007 (72), of older publications – Armija Krajova Lietuvoje, 1995 and 1999; moreover Lithuanian government had special commission to evaluate AK activities; Prosecution service of Republic of Lithuania even has case involving criminal charges; in web can be and various additional information. So the pictures clearly illustrate and those activities.  In other hand do you suggesting to move this picture to Armia Krajowa   and Dubingiai massacre articles.? M.K. (talk) 12:01, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

text: I'd be very surprised if AK need more coverage than it already has - particularly if we stick to reliable sources giving due weight to various issues. Do note that "history of Lithuania" armia krajowa gives 0 hits on Google Print; same for "history of Lithuania" "Home Army" and "history of Lithuania" "Polish partisans". --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  23:24, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You have not checked the works (history textbooks, encyclopedias) about Lithuanian history that are written in Lithuanian language by reputable Lithuanian historians. If they do not mention AK at all, that would end the debate. Can somebody perform this check?  --Doopdoop (talk) 00:05, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  For sources see above. M.K. (talk) 12:01, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  These sources support your interpretation of AK activities. However they do not clarify the relative importance of these activities for the history of Lithuania, so WP:UNDUE argument remains. --Doopdoop (talk) 16:25, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I will respond then one of the other dispute is solved in which I also participate (due to limited time). Please be patient. M.K. (talk) 11:31, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd add that M.K.'s sources were (and apparently, still are) too often reliant on newspaper publications or in case of 'academic publications' come from the chapters written by certain Kazimieras Garšva. The exceptional claims about AK ethnic cleansing are not cited by anybody but a few Lithuanian sources and are strongly criticized by Polish scholars (and also some Lithuanian ones as well). See Polish-Lithuanian relations during World War II for some background; in any case this issue is too UNDUE/FRINGE/POVed to be included here, as we have agreed on above. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  17:12, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ok, Doopdoop, I now have few moments and I would like to resume discussion. Could you say specify that exactly I should present in order to clarify the relative importance of these activities for the history of Lithuania . M.K. (talk) 11:49, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Textbook of Lithuanian history with a similar photos would be a good proof. --Doopdoop (talk) 21:37, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  A, i see will try to find additional one, M.K. (talk) 01:06, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  You mean this photo is included in some history textbook?!? --Doopdoop (talk) 10:16, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of picture continues

message: The cruel Poles demanded normalization and poor Lithuania wasn't able to wage a war. A real tragedy...Xx236 (talk) 15:12, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lithuania, having weaker military power and unable to enlist international support for its cause, accepted the ultimatum 

message: I tried to improve this History of Lithuania article. Some periods are still barely covered and I hope to be able to do some more work here.
Orczar (talk) 13:34, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improvements to the article 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 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.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant 
This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 01:11, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Bunker of lith partisans.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: A total fantasy, depicting "ethnic Baltic pagans" (allegedly solely carrying the name of Litwins (Lithuanians) - although never proved so) "brave warriors", "conquering" the neighbouring despised "Ruthenians"; and not regarding Belarusians as Litwins, although they carried that name. What can I say?... It is a total erotic fantasy of modern Lietuviai (so-called "Lithuanians") and Vatican fiction writers. 
Few remarks: "St. Nicholas in Vilnius, the oldest church in Lithuania, built before 1387". It was well known not long ago, that this church dates back to approximately 1440, which had been the established dating up to recently. But "someone" needed to have an older catholic church in Vilna (older than orthodox churches), to depict Lietuviai (Lithuanians) as "traditional catholics". So what has been done? The church has been redated one hundred years earlier. Yes, there are mentions of it ca. 1387, but the early statements say that it was wooden, and the brick building was constructed much later, perhaps ca. 1440, as the previos investigations showed. Moreover, it is well known, that this church was a church of German merchants, in their traditional trading post. What has it to do with "traditional (??) Lithuanian catholicism in the 14th century"?? One needs to be a lunatic, to make the German merchant church in the foreign town block a symbol of "Lithuanian catholicism" in the 14th century, considering Lithuania was in the state of constant war with all catholic states up to 1387, and with the German Order up to 1410. 
And what regarding "the oldest churches"? I wonder if the author of this statement has ever seen this cathedral church. It was founded by grand duke Olgierd in 1346, and from 1415 it was the seat of Lithuanian Metropolitan. Or this one? It dates back to 1331. Or this one, founded in 1340? Aren't they not "built before 1387" and not older than your German St. Nicholas being wooden before 1387 and existing in brick in 1440, in the trading post of foreign  merchants?... Or you are just counting Catholic churches? You seem to be not very happy with Vilna, and in general, Lithuanian history. So what is the purpose of all these tricks? Just to turn a blind eye on the cathedral of 1346, and a church built in 1331 (by the way, founded by grand duke's wife) - to make your German merchant church, being wooden in the 14th century, "the oldest one in Lithuania". Still feel pleased with yourself? All these activities are just destruction of real Lithuanian history, and an ethnocide against Belarusians, and in general Slavonic people, who were called Litwins in GDL, and ruled it with their language, their administrative system and their culture. You should amend the lies in the article, otherwise you should be ashamed. 
Remark No.2: the map "Lithuania in 1250". The borders of Lithuania here have totally nothing to do with reality. By 1250 GDL embraced Polack, Minsk, Mozyr, Pinsk and all Belarus, as all sources and all researchers admit, but this is not reflected in the map. And at least a part of this Slavonic population were also Litwins, as the papal document of 1257 states: "confinio Litwinorum" (the border of Poles on Lithuanians) lied between Lukow and Brest (Preussisches Urkundenbuch, Bd. I, H. 2, No. 4). If you don't believe me, look up Roger Bacon's Opus Majus of 1268: Bacon's "Lithuania" is "a large country equal to Germany (Allemania)" which borders on Estonia (i.d. comprises either Latygola or Pskov lands) and on Poland (n.b. not Mazovia, which had been an independent state up to 1526, but Poland - i.e. Bacon's "Lithuania" embraced Brest lands). So, that's what Bacon, the contemporary of 1250, said. He seems to be the last British ever telling truth on Lithuanian history... 
I feel that commenting on the errors and outright lies in the articles on medieval Lithuanian history in English medium is senseless, because those seem to be totally consisting of lies or at least striving to do so, by total elimination of Slavonic language, culture and religion from Lithuanian history (although it was the only thing that really did compose its real history)... Rasool-3 (talk) 06:22, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Medieval history 

message: I've incorporated the many valuable insights from Timothy Snyder's book. Orczar (talk) 14:45, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Information from Snyder's book 

message: I wonder if scholars have produced a map of Lithuanian-speaking areas at the time of the smallest geographical distribution of spoken Lithuanian dialects, may be mid-19th century or something like that. It would be instructive to see what the starting point of the national revival was. Orczar (talk) 16:26, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Krzysztof Buchowski gives the following information, speaking of the interwar period and of the entire Vilnius Region: "In the near-Vilnius villages the Polish language dominated. Except that this was a fresh Polish, gradually established from the end of the 19th century, at the expense of the Lithuanian and Belarusian languages." This late advance of Polish, Polonization of the local populations, complicates the issue of the demographic/linguistic distribution. Orczar (talk) 15:43, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lithuanian speaking Lithuanians 

message: Lithuanian territorial issues 1939–40 needs key or at least an explanation, in the caption, of the colors. Sca (talk) 15:28, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Map

message: ...with its Lithuanian majority.
From Klaipėda region:
:A Lithuanian census carried out in the region in 1925 found its total population was 141,000. Declared language was used to classify the inhabitants, and on this basis 43.5 percent were German, 27.6 percent were Lithuanian, and 25.2 percent were "Klaipėdan" (Memelländisch). Other sources give the interwar ethnic composition as 41.9 percent German, 27.1 percent Memelländisch and 26.6 percent Lithuanian.
:
Population	German	Memelländisch		Lithuanian	other	
141,645   	41.9% 	27.1%        		26.6%     	4.4% 	
Therefore, above clause has been changed to ...with its large Lithuanian minority, and the exaggerated, POV map "Lithuanian-speaking areas in the 16th century" (which cites no sources) deleted. Sca (talk) 22:30, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Klaipėda region

message: I think we should add one because people could see info about that period easier in the infobox. There is no problem if it is the same republic as the current one! For example, take a look at the Afghanistan 1996-2001 page! It's the same emirate as the current one, and there it not seems to be a problem!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.25.122.234 (talk) 13:12, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox in the 1918-1940 period