Talk:Kernavė

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Kernavė is within the scope of WikiProject Lithuania, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Lithuania on Wikipedia. To participate simply edit the article or see our to-do list. On the project page we have some tools to help you out. Don't hesitate to ask questions!
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
Top This article has been rated as top-importance on the importance scale.
Comments M.K. 19:25, 10 February 2007 (UTC)


Contents

[edit] Cultural Preserve of Kernave information

All information for this article is taken from the [website of Cultural Preserve of Kernave].


Their representive has given a grant to use that information, including visual elements, i.e. images in Wikipedia articles. You can get original email under request to darius_at_soften_DOT_ktu_DOT_lt or directly from Cultural Preserve of Kernave.

Excerpt from the email and translation follow bellow :

[edit] Original message

Laba diena, Dariau,

susipazinau su medziaga. Kol kas labai gerai, tegu ji ten ir buna, sutinkam, kad naudotumet nuotraukas. Siuo metu atnaujinam savo svetaine / www.travel-lithuania.com/kernave /, medziaga yra nepabaigta, muziejus-rezervatas reorganizuotas i Kernaves kulturini rezervata, kuri Lietuva siulo itraukti i UNESCO Pasaulio paveldo objektu sarasa. Musu svetaines tikslas ir yra sio objekto, taip pat ir specializuoto archeologijos ir istorijos muziejaus pristatymas. Taigi, jeigu jau pristatote Kernave kaip miesteli, butina bus ta medziaga netolimoje ateityje papildyti issamesniu kulturinio rezervato ir muziejaus, gal but ir renginiu, pristatymu. Jeigu sutinkate, tai bandykim bendradarbiauti,

Dalia Grigoniene, dizainere (priziuriu svetaines reikaliukus)

[edit] Translation

Hello Darius,

I checked the material [on the Wpedia website -Darius Mazeika]. Very good, let it be there, we agree you to use the photos [from the website]. At the present time we update our website [[1]], this information is not complete, museum is now reorganised into Cultural Preserve of Kernave, which is offered now to be included to UNESCO World Heritage List. Our website object is to introduce this object and specialised Museum of History and Archelogy. If you are introducing Kernave [into Wpedia -Darius Mazeika], it is necessary in the near future to add more detailed information about the Preserve and the Museum, even maybe cultural events here. If you agree on this, let's work together.

Dalia Grigoniene, a designer (I am working on the website)

Hi Darius, Thank you for the great amount of information you have included in your article. Excellent details and the beautiful photos! Can I just help you from an editing point of view to make this a great article? Can you tell me whether it was the Grand Duchy of Lithuania? I have changed the reference to the "Cultural Preserve of Kernave" to read: "External link", as this is the usual Wiki convention. Of which Lithuanian district is Kernave the center? Can you tell me about the courtyard at the bend of the Neris, and has the river in the Pajauta Valley a name? The mounds in the distance, are they hills? Can you tell me why the 10,000 year history is mysterious? If it is alright with you, I will help you with this. -- Dieter Simon 02:33, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)


Hi again Darius, You are doing very well with your article, it is very good indeed. I hope you don't mind my giving you a little helping hand. I have changed a few items where it was obvious what was meant, such as "human made" in English is normally given as "man-made", although very recent developments do seem to allow "human-" but it is stylistically still a controversial subject.

I have also changed the header History of Nowadays Kernave Town to ...present-day Kernave Town. "Nowadays" is an adverb, not an adjective and present-day is the proper adjective. This is mainly a matter of proper style, however.

Titles such as Monsignor/Monsignore are always spelled with a first capital letter and if something is found in archaeology it is normally an archaeological "find" rather than "finding". A finding is usually a conclusion reached at a judicial enquiry.

I need to ask you one or two things, for example, when you say, "In 1920 a new church was built, and the chapel "staffed" to decay..., do you mean it was "left" to decay? "To staff" means to employ people as staff, or very rarely to supply something with "staffs", that is "sticks". Perhaps you can clarify that.

The word "swampy" is slightly derogatory, might it be better to call it "marshy" Lake Pragarine? And lastly, did you mean "Kernave is also famous "for its" traditions? At the moment it says "forts" traditions.

Thank you again for having made it such an interesting article.--Dieter/ Dieter Simon 22:51, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Courtyard

Hi Lysy, Man vyi, CanisRufus, et al,

Can you throw light on what the ‘courtyard’ is in the second sentence of of the second para of the section “Geographic Information”.
Normally a courtyard is ‘an open area of ground surrounded by walls or buildings’ as Collins English Dictionary has it. Does it have a special meaning in this context or does it refer to any special building? If so, the name of the building should be mentioned. Or, is it a reference to the courts of law? Dieter Simon 22:00, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

No idea. I guess it could be meant to be some sort of access road to the site itself Lysy 06:22, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
It is difficult to explain if you have never seen Kernavė. Imagine, that you go by the narrow path to the direction of the river. You are surrounded by man-made fortification hills, so tall, that only piece of sky above is seen. This is what I mean under `courtyard` DariusMazeika 15:16, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
The village itself is on a hill, and one descends down the slope from the yard behind the church towards Neris river, along a path amidst 3 smaller mounds where the hillforts once stood. These hills are natural, not man-made BTW. There's no courtyard there, maybe the church yard ? Lysy 20:53, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
The church yard walls are not tall - you can definetely see above them. DariusMazeika 28 June 2005 08:23 (UTC)
Yes, in fact there are no walls at all around the yard behind the church :-) Lysy 28 June 2005 15:05 (UTC)
Are you sure? I a have photos with the wall arround the NEW (CURRENT) church. Or maybe we call "a church yard" different things.DariusMazeika 28 June 2005 19:15 (UTC)
OK :-) To be precise, there is a red brick wall around the church, but I don't think you can see much from behind it, as it's quite away from the edge. I meant the landing *behind* the church, next to the wooden chapel that's been moved there. That's the place from which you can see the mounds and Pajautos slenis. There's no wall there, just a small barrier next to the stairs. Lysy 28 June 2005 19:52 (UTC)
Now I understand what you mean, and I couldn't agree more. The landing behind the church you refer is a bit (don't know how much) restored basement line based on excavations of the old church. DariusMazeika 28 June 2005 20:11 (UTC)

I thought it might mean some sort of metaphorical reference to some larger area that is surrounded by ramparts, man-made or otherwise, when I first queried it. So, it really doesn't warrant inclusion in a general description of the area, does it? If, however, some of these parts of the scenery are important and well-known they should be included to give a well-rounded idea of the area. Dieter Simon 28 June 2005 23:22 (UTC)

It's just a picturesque view. Maybe a picture would illustrate it better ? I'll try to add one. Lysy 29 June 2005 06:14 (UTC)
It would be nice. But it's a difficult task to find a good place to take a picture in Kernave to document a generic impression of the place - use a fisheye or panorama technique. I should try on my next visit to make one. BTW, is it valid on Wikipedia to include several galleries with one article? DariusMazeika 29 June 2005 06:18 (UTC)
You're right, it's difficult. I've included one picture that shows Pajauta valley as you see, but a movie would be better... As to several galleries, I would include a picture gallery at the bottom of the article. Lysy 29 June 2005 06:50 (UTC)
Many thanks, you two. I can see your points, that's all from me. Dieter Simon 29 June 2005 22:58 (UTC)

[edit] Pictures

Are you sure that the pictures used in this article were released under GFDL by the original copyright holder/author ? Lysy 29 June 2005 06:50 (UTC)

I think they are not under GFDL but have a specific permission to be used here (who's the author anyway?). Lysy 1 July 2005 17:52 (UTC)

There are free pictures on Commons now, I think we should phase out the permission ones (they are not very high res anyway). Justinc 23:49, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Style

I believe this article would benefit from converting from an informal "tourist pamflet" into a more encyclopedic style. --Lysytalk 11:21, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Same Question

To Lysy, and to whom else it may concern, same question as to why the Polish name for this town has be included in the article, as was asked on the discussion page about Panevėžys. Dr. Dan 15:44, 24 February 2006 (UTC) p.s. Pamphlet is spelled with ph not f.

Dr. Dan, you've already asked this question in my talk page yesterday and I have already explained this to you (and asked you a question in turn, for which I'm still awaiting your answer). In the meantime, can I ask you another one: Why are you now addressing me with exactly the same question in a number of other places ? I'm still assuming your good faith, but could you please explain this behaviour ? --Lysytalk 16:26, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Gladly, the question concerns different towns and cities, and others who may not read our talk pages, may wish to contribute to the discussion. What better place that on the talk page of the article? Dr. Dan 03:38, 25 February 2006 (UTC) p.s. I would have thought this more obvious, with my inclusion "and to whom else it may concern".

If your question (which I answered) was, why does the naming of Lithuanian geographical locations in Polish bother me? Especially those locations which have no historical or geographical connection to Poland. I answered that it doesn't bother me, it irritates me. It irritates me that there is a Double Standard; when the reverse is applied to Polish towns there is an outcry about a "consensus" reached earlier, and it should be dropped, and not questioned by a different or fresh point of view. Dr. Dan 03:49, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

The reason is that many people, including myself, have spent many hours reaching the consensus, so if you're asking for the patience of repeating the same arguments again and again, I would first like to ask you to take time to read the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names) and contribute there. Then the general rules can be applied to a number of articles without the necessitiy of wasting time at each of them. I'm commenting out the Polish name in Kernavė article in order to avoid the lengthy and inproductive dispute. Now you might want to consider working on the article itself, which could benefit from copyediting by someone with as good command of English as yours. --Lysytalk 09:55, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Balance of the article

I'm considered that the article is not well balanced. Most of the text is devoted to 20th century buildings of the church and primary school. I've tried to add some more information about the history and the archeologic site but it still seems way out of the right proportion. --Lysytalk 10:50, 26 February 2006 (UTC)