Talk:Wilno Voivodeship (1926–1939)

message: We have a number of articles on other historical voivodeships on Poland, see :Category:Polish historical voivodeships (1921–1939). Why should this one not have an article ? On the other hand I think it does not belong to :Category:Voivodeships of Lithuania. I agree with M.K that maybe it should be better split into two articles (until 1795 and 1921-1939) ? --Lysytalk 00:28, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Before we split it (which I am not supporting but not opposing), I'd just like to be clear if we are going to be using the term Wilno of Vilnius Voivodeship? I believe that W. is the correct term in this context (per arguments above).-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  22:45, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Split

message: I suggest to rename this article to Wilno Voivodeship (1923-1939) and Wilno Voivodeship make an disambiguation  page. Any opposition? M.K. 21:26, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Speedy rename

message: *False, it was Lithuania, not the LSRR.
*It's a POV statement. Many countries didn't recognise the annexations in 1939.
*The year 1939 in the title is also POV. Xx236 (talk) 15:04, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Following the Soviet invasion in 1939, the Voivodeship was divided between the newly created Vileyka Voblast of the Belarusian SSR and the [1] Lithuanian SSR 

message: We have a map in the article identified as coming from a Polish middle school textbook (2001). Although I suspect its legend originally was in Polish, someome probably translated it into flawed, almost pidgin English, with the moniker, "Polish Mother Tongue, 1931". That aside, I am trying to ascertain what the map is telling us regarding the area (looks like Tarnopol) with the Roman numeral VIII. It says that 63% of its inhabitants possessed an "other", and not stated, "mother tongue". Any ideas on what their mother tongue might have been? Dr. Dan (talk) 20:49, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the explanation about middle school vs. high school. Interestingly, I had originally put Polesie as the link rather than Tarnopol (mixed up the maps of the country with the Voivodeship). So thanks for clearing that up too. What remains unclear is what these peoples' mother tongue was. It actually appears that this "dialect" is a Ukrainian one, sort of like Kashubian or Podhalian are Polish ones. These statistics seem to attempt to manipulate ethnic composition based what was "spoken", sort of like what we have in the article, Ethnic history of the Vilnius region. In any case 63% is quite a lot, and I suspect that the Pilsudski dictatorship didn't want to count over a half million additional Ukrainians in the figures. Dr. Dan (talk) 15:25, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Poleszuks feel more closely to Belarusians not Ukrainians, as to the rest please, no OR, sources please.--Molobo (talk) 17:39, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, but growing up in the U.S., I still feel comfortable expressing my opinion on the talk pages. It might stimulate the discussion. Until I make changes to the article, no sources are required to express an opinion. The WP article on the "language"  itself suggests that it is an Ukrainian dialect. But same argument; the manipulation of censuses by dictators to implement a policy is a well known fact on the continuum of history (and not only dictators). If these people "felt" more closely to Belarusians (whatever that means), instead of Ukrainians, evidently the Pilsudski dictatorship felt it prudent not to try to say they were Polish, and add them to the Polish population. It's likely that Stalin used these demographics to lop off over a third of Poland. On an OT subject, is there an available website where one can trace former members of the PZPR? Dr. Dan (talk) 18:52, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest to read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_publisher_of_original_thought
Also your whole argument is flawed because the people in question didn't respond that they were Poles,Ukrainians,Belarussians but said simply "tutejsi" in polls. It is mentioned quite cleary in relevant article which I gave link to before. Their national identity became crystallized due to WW2.--Molobo (talk) 20:20, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Like I said, I believe that the above policy does not preclude me from expressing my opinion on the talk pages (see No. 4). I often get confused with your train of thought. What does the 1931 census map, out of this High School textbook, have to do with Their national identity became crystallized due to WW2? Does that fall under your premise that WP:OR is not permitted, or only when I express a similar opinion? The war started in 1939. What were these people crystalized into? Who crystalized them? Dr. Dan (talk) 01:26, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest reading the article Poleszuk-the wikilink to it was contained in article I already gave you as a link before.--Molobo (talk) 02:53, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Read it before and read it again. Short story, they weren't Polish, and the "various powers that be" didn't see any purpose in allowing the development of their national identity. Not in Tsarist Russia, nor during the Pilsudski dictatorship in Poland. Dr. Dan (talk) 14:43, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Nobody claimed they were Polish in census, the censuses were made during the whole interwar era, not in the brief period when Pilsudski took temporary control.--Molobo (talk) 13:23, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Another Map

message: I confess that I simply don't understand this edit  or the edit summary. What numbers? Are you seriously suggesting that the majority of Voivodeship's inhabitants were Jews rather than Poles? What numbers are you referring to? The ones in Majority of population was Polish (59.7% claimed Polish as their native tongue). Among minorities there were: Belarusians  (22.7%), Russians (3.4%), Jews (8.5%) and Lithuanians (5.5%)"? As far as I know 59.7>8.5. Or is this some kind of "anyone but the Poles" kind of edit? Volunteer Marek  21:32, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  puzzled 

message: @Cukrakalnis can you explain this removal? Marcelus (talk) 20:53, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is not Poland, so his changes were inaccurate. In addition, the things he added are irrelevant. The banning of Polish language is irrelevant to an article about an administrative unit. No one talks about the ban on Latin-alphabet Lithuanian-language books when it comes to an interwar administrative unit in Lithuania. Cukrakalnis (talk) 20:57, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Third Partition of Poland is accepted on Wikipedia, see: Third Partition of Poland. Situation of Polish language after 1863 seems quite important for the background section. I don't know why Lithuanian administrative units articles should be standard here. Also what about (at that time, Vilnius and its vicinity were mostly inhabited by Polish people), why did you remove that? Marcelus (talk) 21:05, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Because the last claim is very contentious and doubtful. There's already a separate article called the Demographic history of the Vilnius region and there's no need to copy information from there to here. Cukrakalnis (talk) 06:51, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unwarranted removal