Wikipedia talk:Baltic States notice board
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Tere, labas dienas, sveiki! I would suggest replacing the geographical limitation at the outset of the page with "those people contributing articles related to the Baltic States." --Pēteris Cedriņš 00:33, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
- Of course. Much work needs to be done to get this ready. What's your ideas? Renata 01:22, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Marketing
Any ideas how to spread the word? Also, I suggest we keep it abc order: estonia, latvia and lithuania. Renata 02:31, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
- Labas dienas! I will mention this board here and there, for instance at Latvians Online. I append a link to my user page in the signature to my e-mails lately (and will link this board at my user page, too) ...but I haven't had much luck with getting people I think would make valuable contributors and good editors involved (as I'm sure everybody contributing has noticed, articles can take an awful lot of time, and participation can be intimidating). A hearty ačiū to DeirYassin for coming up with this idea for Baltic co-operation and acting upon it so quickly! --Pēteris Cedriņš 13:21, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
-
- I had posted invitements to join Wikipedia in Lithuanian history forums once, but as well did not get much luck it seems. Anyways, it is easier to help people who are already in Wikipedia to stay/contribute more than to attract completely new people I guess. So, once we decide that thing sare done with this board, we could write informative messages to tell Baltic contributors of Wikipedia about this board, using the talk pages (taht informative messages could be written in Lithuanian, Latvian and English - it seems we have no Estonians here still to write the Estonian version. As well, we could write welcome messages in Baltic langauges, which we would send (via talk page) to every new presumable Baltic member; we would encourage them to stay here, explain some things, tell to ask us in case they'd have some questions, and tell about this board too. In order not to get too much into details (if we will wait until this board will be perfect before advertising we will never start), how about setting a date for "official opening", it could be for example next Monday (13th of February). And no need to thank me, I was thinking about such board for long, but did not seen enough active contributors, as I think Renata and me would be not enough to start such a board (especially as I don't plan to spend much time on wikipedia), while 3 people might be good for start, and 4 (if User:Vecrumba will take part) will be even better. It will take some time for it to start up I believe so that many people would come, but a few enthusiasts can already make the board alive for enough time. So, the best what we can do now is to use it by reporting things and such, if other users will join and report - check the articles they report so that the board would seem useful to them. For now we are setting it up, and when it starts we will see - if we will use it, it should come up eventually. DeirYassin 14:48, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
- People know abot wikipedia, but they are not craving to edit. Anyway beside user talk pages maybe note on articles (talk pages) about Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania should be left - I think that article about ones country is one of the first things a newcomer will read. -- Xil/talk 19:11, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
- I had posted invitements to join Wikipedia in Lithuanian history forums once, but as well did not get much luck it seems. Anyways, it is easier to help people who are already in Wikipedia to stay/contribute more than to attract completely new people I guess. So, once we decide that thing sare done with this board, we could write informative messages to tell Baltic contributors of Wikipedia about this board, using the talk pages (taht informative messages could be written in Lithuanian, Latvian and English - it seems we have no Estonians here still to write the Estonian version. As well, we could write welcome messages in Baltic langauges, which we would send (via talk page) to every new presumable Baltic member; we would encourage them to stay here, explain some things, tell to ask us in case they'd have some questions, and tell about this board too. In order not to get too much into details (if we will wait until this board will be perfect before advertising we will never start), how about setting a date for "official opening", it could be for example next Monday (13th of February). And no need to thank me, I was thinking about such board for long, but did not seen enough active contributors, as I think Renata and me would be not enough to start such a board (especially as I don't plan to spend much time on wikipedia), while 3 people might be good for start, and 4 (if User:Vecrumba will take part) will be even better. It will take some time for it to start up I believe so that many people would come, but a few enthusiasts can already make the board alive for enough time. So, the best what we can do now is to use it by reporting things and such, if other users will join and report - check the articles they report so that the board would seem useful to them. For now we are setting it up, and when it starts we will see - if we will use it, it should come up eventually. DeirYassin 14:48, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Discussion about un-written articles is needed
I think we would benefit from such thing - there defenetely are things that deserve article, some things are already covered in other articles or there already is article named diferently so they don`t need article and proper naming in english is important, so I think that maybe this board should have section for that (or something) -- Xil/talk 19:11, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
- I agree -- "Articles needed"? Any other comments? --Pēteris Cedriņš 07:11, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Baltic Way
I was expanding the article and I came upon the image gallery of pics from early independence movement days and there is a number of pics about Baltijos apkabinimas (hugging Baltic Sea). It looks like it took place in 1989 either early spring or late fall and was not that much political (i.e. was more about ecology). But it seems somewhat similar to the Baltic Way (human chain hugging the Baltic Sea, all three states participating), so if is was before it... I could easily draw parallels. Any thoughts? Renata 17:28, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
- I have no Idea about this event, but it reminded me another thing - there is an event called "prayer to sea" in Latvia so I googled a bit and found out that it dates back to september 3. 1988. as that webpage I found said "live chain of people encircled largest part of Latvian coastline. Interesting that exposition at museum of popular front begins with similar large scale photograpgy". As far I know This event is still held once in a while. And in fact Latvian ecology movement in the eighties was pretty much political. Image depicting event(s) -- Xil/talk 02:20, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Pictures
Copyright page on photo archive of University of Latvia says that you may copy, reproduce and publish pictures found there without premision as long as you don't use them in advertising and put reference to author. Since page is in Latvian I'm not completly sure if that applays world wide, how do you think ? -- Xil/talk 03:29, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
- "don't use them in advertising" means no commercial use. And such images are not allowed on wiki. If they said something like "use it, but just cite the source/author" - it could be used. You have to claim it under fair use if you want to use it. Sad, huh? Renata 23:57, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Geographical Names
I have attempted to keep the names of Lithuanian cities first English, and then Lithuanian, in the English Wikipedia. The need of some Polish editors to maintain "mental" possesion of these cities seems to be part of some relentless campaign to revert my efforts. As a compromise, I have left Polish names of towns and cities during the "occupation" of the Vilnius Region alone. My position is that the names of geographical locations in Lithuania do not have to have their "Polish" names included in the leads of articles (especially when there is a link to a Polish article). To see if there was a Quid Pro Quo attitude, I put a few Lithuanian names into Polish articles (Liublinas and Gnieznas), and the response was predictably to remove them. So what was good for the Gander was not good for the Goose. What is the consensus? Dr. Dan 02:01, 7 May 2006 (UTC) p.s. I have made the same edits to German and Russian names as well.
OK, Dr. Dan. But it's better to write up all our arguments here or, even better, in a separate page before doing that. I understand, that all arguments are already known and it's no fun to repeat them once more elsewhere, but , i'm afraid, we need a general discussion instead of many local discussions. Having that, we'll be able just to redirect all escalations of discussions on many different pages to that page after we'll have revised Lithuania-related articles as you suggest.
The main problem is that, looking formally at single cases, inserting of Slavic variants for Lithuanian names isn't bias itself. But many users have already warned about possible political context of this action, especially when it becomes frequent. We shouldn't ignore this admonition, even if it isn't real but impressive only. I always remember some our Lithuanian users that were so affected by that impression, that couldn't contribute profitably, focusing their minds at that and ignoring many other aspects of writing in Lithuania-related articles. So, this impression of some planned political bias is real, despite it was or not a planned bias in reality.
The next problem is, that the present style to put the Slavic variants in the head section of an article is misleading. When we present any object (a city, a town, a river etc in our case) it's obviously held in the mind that we write about the current state of the object (if it has a current state at all). But all these Slavic forms are from the historical usage, that is also very hypothetic in many cases (meaning, obviously using in English. I believe, that English-speaking people really used Slavic forms for Vilnius re it was the capital, but I doubt if Slavic forms for some small villages could be found in English sources other but maps that merely repeated the official usage of their time). But using in the header section makes them to seem as if they are of the current usage. So, I think, the information about names in the past should be transferred to history sections everywhere, if such information is necessary at all. It should have an acceptable and not biased form too, i think. --Linas Lituanus 07:51, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
P.S. Let's think about the moving the discussion to a separate page. Linas 07:51, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
I'd also like to say few words about the issues you did write in some different pages or articles. For example, You wander, how young Lithuanians lost their ability to communicate in Russian User talk:Lysy). But it's very simple thing. Russian had never been a native language for the majority of Lithuanians. We were taught at school to speak Russian. Since 1990 Russian language is taught in Lithuanian schools as an elective discipline and, consequently, many young people do not know Russian at all. Number of Russian lessons was also reduced after 1990 to a standard level for foreign language. It also affects quality of learning. But nothing wandering in it. I say this, because I see, how you face all these absurds about Lithuania's past, that are disseminated especially by some Poles. Spread of Lithuanian language has been well-documented at least since the 16 th century, Lithuanian language had its written grammars since the 17 th century, but one Polish user says, that common people in Lithuania (In Tauragė) spoke Belarusian. And he can write about a 16 th century lexicographer of Lithuanian language after it! It seems very strange, looking objectively. On the other hand, to strive against totalitarian nationalism isn't the objective of Wikipedia. I try not to pay much attention to what some people think about Lithuania, even if they suppose that no Lithuania exists at all. Fair attitude towards World reality is, perhaps, a personal choice of everybody. I'm Lithuanian, i know Lithuanians, many of the are quite big nationalists. But Lithuanians aren't totalitarian nationalists in any case. Nationalism almost never subdues their mental possibility to judge about something. And even this difference shows that Lithuanians are sui generis nation that is different from its neighbor nations. That's why i don't afraid the 'mental possession' as You name it. Polish thinking is sunk in the history too much. There is no much difference for our being what language did we speak or even do we speak presently. Irish people mostly communicate in English, and what from it? Every nation has more essential attributes than linguistic forms or historic legends.
But what i say doesn't mean that we shouldn't oppose bias, wherever it becomes evident in Wikipedia. So i say thanks for your sincere and courageous (isn't this word old-fashioned?) position. Thank You also for Your analyzing of this strange picture of Lithuania, made by the users i 've told above. But the reality is much essential than any pictures, despite how much they differ from their original. Number of Lithuanian users was never big, but they have put many useful information about Lithuania here. Wikipedia readers now can know at least anything about Lithuania. Let's work for increasing this amount of information. SĖKMĖS! Linas Lituanus 09:50, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
- I'd like to use this opportunity to invite you to contribute at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names) where a policy is being prepared in hope to address the multi-national naming issues that you mentioned in the beginning. --Lysytalk 20:47, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Thank You for the idea :). I am not against that, but i think, that the existing conventions are good and that no possible situations have been skipped making them. I think, they is an acceptable set of rulles with well ballanced interests of specific groups. But those, that are not ballanced yet, leak, i think, evidence, how to do it. - I have yet another idea, but i shoud wait , what Dr. Dan will answer, as it's his initiative, to discuss here about all it. Linas Lituanus 13:21, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the courtesy. I'm ready to begin the more detailed discussion. Where shall we do it? Dr. Dan 15:01, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Jana Seta
Is this notable? Should this be translated/transwikied? Please comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jana Seta. Kusma (討論) 00:25, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Soviet Image tags
My dear Estonian, Latvian and Lithuanian colleagues, as you might be aware there are thousands of images on wikipedia published in the USSR and because of an action of one person now their future status is under question. Please read this RfC and help to endorse it. --Kuban Cossack 
12:59, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Translation request for Nevėžis River
Would somebody beso kind as to give English title for the quoted Lituanian sources? I also suspect "Nevėžis" might be a meaningful word, if that is the case, could the English meaning be added?. Circeus 02:41, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
- I'll translate sources, but Nevėžis is not a meaningful word. I will explain in the article. Renata
[edit] Sockpuppet (internet) and "Voting"
I am outraged by the sockpuppetry and its concurrent voting, that has affected many subjects that would be of interest to people concerned with issues dealing with the Baltic States. Recently it has been confirmed that the user:Logologist has "rigged " votes concerning the Jogaila vs. Wladyslaw Jagiello naming debate. The administrator user:Mackensen, has verified this to be the case, and there is no doubt whatsoever, in regards to it. It seems that user:KonradWallenrod, user:Mattergy, user:Anatopism, and some others, are all concocted Sockpuppets. There is an ongoing further investigation as to what's, what, and who else has been involved. Anyone with information or the computer skills to look at this by reading edits and histories to expose this, please contact me by email or on my talk page. Dr. Dan 02:14, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Standard naming scheme
Please see the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Regional notice boards#A uniform naming scheme. Zocky | picture popups 00:45, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Help with translations
I'm currently working on a script intended to create short articles on political parties on a variety of wikipedias simultaneously. However, in order for the technique to work I need help with translations to various languages. If you know any of the languages listed at User:Soman/Lang-Help , then please help by filling in the blanks. Baltic languages includes Estonian, Latvian and Lithuanian. Thanks, --Soman 12:14, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] DYK
The DYK section featured on the main page is always looking for interesting new and recently expanded stubs from different parts of the world. Please make a suggestion.--Peta 01:59, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Memel / Memel (disambiguation)
There has been an ongoing discussion about what "Memel" should be. Some users prefer that "Memel" be a disambiguation page describing the different meanings of the word. Other users (including myself) prefer that "Memel" redirect to "Klaipėda", which would then use Template:Redirect as a disclaimer for "Memel (disambiguation)". Currently, "Memel" redirects to "Memel (disambiguation)", which goes against Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages). There are discussions at Talk:Klaipėda#Memel town? and Talk:Memel (disambiguation). Further input would be helpful. Olessi 22:06, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
