Talk:Kaunas

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Kaunas 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	Very sketchy, no references. Renata 17:57, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

The name "Kovno" is frequently used in English. It should be mentioned in the article. It's obviously an anglicization of the name "Kowno"...I shall try to rephrase. john k 20:19, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Actually, it's simply the Russian traditional name. --Explendido Rocha 10:05, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I am always wondering why all Lithuanian city names in wikipedia have Polish equivalent writen inthe article? Why not Latvian or Swedish or German? Has Poland anything to do with Kaunas? Dirgela 18:02, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Check the article on Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth for instance. Halibutt 19:21, Feb 2, 2005 (UTC)

To see what? Shall I put all Lithuanian names for Polish cities? Varšuva, Poznanė, Gdanskas, Krokuva to name just a few. Warsaw surprisingly sends us to a separate page (Cities_alternative_names) to see alternative names, where Kaunas is listed either. So what is that special relationship between Kaunas and Poland that makes this article to provide the Polish version of its name in the first sentence? Dirgela 20:16, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Dear Dirgela, first let's make one thing clear: I don't want to offend anyone's feelings or sense of national pride. Keep it cool and I'm sure we're get somewhere. All right?

As to Kaunas - it was a part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and then of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The official state language of that state was, from certain point in time, Polish. I wonder why didn't you know that, but now you do. Here in wikipedia we usually list all former official names of a city (if it had such). Check the articles on a plethora of Polish cities, including Suwałki that lists the Lithuanian name of the city. Halibutt 01:35, Feb 3, 2005 (UTC)

That much I can understand, but I still don't wee any consistency I would expect from encyclopedia. Let's look at some examples: Suwalki has never been part of Lithuanian, nor Lithuanian was ever official language of that city. Lithuanian name there is probably because there was relatively large Lithuanian minority living there. Klaipeda has Polish version in the first sentence, however Polish has never been official language there, even when Prussia was dependent on Poland. Vilnius has Russian, Belorussian and Polish equivalents (all three languages used as official in different time periods). Siauliai has German, Polish, and (surprise surprise) Yidish versions. Yidish was widely spoken there at certain period in the history (Jews made a very large proportion of its population). Panevezys has only Polish version, Alytus has no versions, although as far as I know traditionally it was called "Olita" in Polish. These are 6 biggest Lithuanian cities. Every city has random collection of their name versions in other languages. Some may be justified as former official names in different than Lithuanian official language, some might be related to ethinc minorities living there at certain period of time, for some I do not see any justification (Klaipeda - Polish version of this name is used probaly since the end of WWI, Polish has never been oficial language there, there were virtually no Polish people living).

I am not against Polish language in particular, traditional German names for some cities look as strange as Polish, however it seems that somebody was going around in wikipedia and putting in brackets Polish city names as many as he/she knew ;) Some of them were zealously translated in many languages (Klaipeda). As it seems that there is no agreement on the use of these alternative names I would suggest to put them into (Cities_alternative_names), however I am afraid that somebody will find that I do it because of "feelings or sense of national pride". ;) And as far as I know, to delete something is almost taboo, so I don't think something will be different anyway, just could not stand to express my wonder. Dirgela 17:15, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Well, indeed, the whole fuzz with Klaipeda makes me wonder, since I can't remember any city of that name, neither in the times of PLC nor in the times of Poland ruling those lands. There was a small settlement named Memel, but I doubt the Poles (even the locals, if there were some) called it differently. As to the rest of names - I believe this should be left as it is - or cleansed slightly for greater consistency, but this might only create more troubles. I believe that leaving the alternative names would be the best choice. Firstly, they are not so many and in all cases you quoted are relevant, at least to some extent. Secondly, the whole problem with Warsaw and Cities alternative names emerged after an attack by an anon vandal, who erased the Polish version of the name and replaced it with German. Since the guy (or a gal) was using lots of different IPs and could not be blocked, we decided to put a link there to make him stop - and it worked (the German name of Warsaw was "official" only during WWII). As to Olita - you're right, that's the Polish name for that town. As to the traditional German names for Lithuanian cities - I'm not sure, I can't tell whether they are relevant or not. Apart from Memel, which is a slightly different case, the only period when those names were official (thus relevant) was WWII. Am I right? Halibutt 00:01, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)

It maybe is more appropriete for Talk:Klaipeda but truly "Klaipeda" is traditional Lithuanian name for "Memel". Traditionally it was called Memel in Polish either. I am guessing that the "Klajpeda" version appeared after WWI when Poland had claims to Memelgebiet as compensation for Gdansk. So basically it is similar to Baltstoge/Bialystok or any other Polish city which was never a part of Lithuania, however has a Lithuanian version of its name. However you're probably right - the question is not so important to start changing everything to one consistent model and risk an editing war.Dirgela 15:03, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Contents 1 Infobox 2 Soviet repressions 1940-1941 3 Wikilinks?! 4 Tables? 5 Statistic data? 6 University Wikilinks 7 Gentle suggestion 8 WWII section and Jews killing 9 Kowno and Kauen

[edit] Infobox

Could anyone from Kaunas really confirm that Kaunas yra Kaunas is an official motto? DeirYassin 10:46, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Well, it depends what do You define as "official"... Of course, it is not bureaucratized by solution of city council ("Miesto tarybos sprendimas"), but it is in use de facto - it's in use on stickers, T-Shirts, advertisments. Ask Your reallife friends from Kaunas, dude;-> A.BigHead 02:56, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

The Infobox does not at all say that its in Lithuania ... Jake95_(talk!) 19:50, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Soviet repressions 1940-1941

People were deported to the East, imprisoned in the 9th Fort. As far as I know some murdered prisoners were found after the Soviets left the city. Some prizoners were murdered in Belarus (Bigosovo ?). Xx236 14:54, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikilinks?!

This article uses wikilinks very heavily, often redundantly. I noticed through the Special:Random page, noting heavy use of wikilinks and correcting the "Basic Information" section. I, however, don't have time to remove all the redundant links, and thus request that it be done by another Wikipedian. Thank you. Nihiltres 03:07, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tables?

Maybe, who have time and skills could do the tables for inhabitants and ethnic pop., cuz it distort article quite bad now. M.K. 16:26, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Statistic data?

I find the statistics of 1919 disturbing. 42 percent of Kaunas inhabitants were polish? correct me if i'm wrong but i don't think it is true. Where did all those people go in 1939? There were population census in 1897 and in 1923. So the data of 1919 might be (and i think it is) inaccurate. Adm.alvin.k 18:20, 10 Oct 2006 (UTC)

[edit] University Wikilinks

Shuold the Universities have wikilinks to their respective articles in wikipedia and not to their websites? Iulius 19:34, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

I guess the articles of the individual universities would have the links to their respective websites already, so other articles could just wikilink the universities. --Lysy^talk 21:45, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

It should be wikilinks. But I guess some universities do not have articles yet and therefore to avoid red links someone put external links. BTW, WP:LITH collaboration is on the university articles, but because of this whole PL-LT nonsense it got neglected... :( Renata 21:51, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gentle suggestion

There are 244 books returned by Google Book Search which use the name Kovno for this city, almost as many as Kaunas (266), yet that name is not mentioned anywhere in the article (apart from one external link at the very bottom). I think omitting it is quite simply a disservice to Wikipedia readers. I hope some way may be found to work it in. Any suggestions? Balcer 16:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

How about restoring the line that was already there? --Explendido Rocha 22:34, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Alternative names already presented in the article, do not push more. M.K. 10:24, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

There are presented nowhere in the article. And I don't think that any article about Kaunas is complete without even referring that this is the city traditionally known in English as Kovno - that should be well up in the article. So, yes, I will push. --Explendido Rocha 10:34, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

You are stubborn, aren't you? Of course you are. Kovno appears exactly once in the article - in an external link, Kowno appears nowhere. I don't know exactly how it hurts to mention that for a couple of hundred years, the name Kaunas was unknown in English, and that the city was known as Kovno, being a part, however unwilling, of the Russian Empire - it's not like we are talking about the city name in Icelandic. People who are unaware of it won't even notice that Kaunas and Kovno are the same city - and I fail to see why that is a good thing. That simple information should be in the article, and not in a trivia section - it should be on top, and Kovno/Kowno should be in bold. So, unless you present me a more compeling argument than "I don't think the Slav name should conspurcate this page", I'll restore it. --Explendido Rocha 10:50, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Just a sec, who said it should be in bold? Is it yet another your POV? What does your suggestion implies under his traditional Slavic to as you call People who are unaware of it won't. They could begin thinking that city names origin is Slavic. What about date 1940? It is quite a candidate for {{fact}}, second it could be misleading once again to People who are unaware of it won't that it was Каунас its real name until 1940 and somehow it was changed after 1940 to Kaunas (while it is relevant only to Russian usage). And this is misleading. Very misleading. Btw, that a Polish name has to do with it? Is it matching your Russian Empire criteria too? Actually it is you should present to me more compelling arguments …M.K. 11:23, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I say that it should be bold, it's my opinion, and I still have the right to have opinions. I think that it should be in bold so that is well visible. You think that it shouldn't be there at all. This is not a matter of POV, it is a matter of relevant information being presented. I think that the name by which the city was traditionally known in English before Lithuania became independent is quite relevant. What's the problem? Are you so insecure that You don't want people to know that Kaunas used to be known as Kovno in English? Go to the 1911 Britannica: the word "Kaunas" doesn't even appear. It's part of Lithuania's history that the Lithuanian language only became a state language in the modern sense after World War I, and it is nothing to be ashamed of.

Second, nothing in my text implies that the Slav name is the original one. The name of my country's capital is the re-Latinization of the Arabization of the Latinization of a Greek name. It's an interesting fact, that nobody cares about. I call "Kovno" "the traditional Slav name", because it is no longer used in Russian, otherwise, I would simply call it "the Slav name", since the difference in the name between Polish, Russian and Belarusian are simply those you would expect to find in the three languages. And, as that simple sentence states, it is the name under which it was known in English and the rest of Western Europe for at least a century (and I'd bet, probably for much longer), and used in many pre-World War II sources. If you think that the sentence is confusing and makes people think that the name is originally Slavic, rewrite rather than delete the sentence: better yet, find information on the name's etimology, and put it in the article. The Lithuanian article mentions an Arabic citation from the 1140s. Add it.

Каунас should be there simply to make clear that Ковно is not currently used: to omit that would give the impression that Ковно is still used in Russian, when, at least officially, it hasn't been the case for more than 60 years. If you find a better redaction, be my guest. As for 1940, there are several sources claiming 1917, but I can't confirm that Kaunas was indeed used in Russian from that date, not that it would be relevant before 1940, when I don't think there's many doubts that Kaunas was used, at least officially.

As for the link, it's confusing and not enough. You have to jump a lot to find that Kaunas is Kovno and Kovno is Kaunas, and it doesn't clarify the importance of the name Kovno in the city's history. The Russian and Polish name of the city isn't equivalent to the Bulgarian or Portuguese names.

Regardless, you still haven't presented me a compelling reason. I'm waiting for it. --12:15, 19 December 2006 (UTC)~

I adjusted your text a bit, I hope your don't mind. And look at your explanation and you say it is not misleading, a? Somehow your just provided only one thing I, I and once more time I. I am sorry to inform you but Wikipedia is not all about you. While you call others may not call or understand as same as you. While you think that link style is not good to others it is ok, and it is used across Wikipedia. So i am afraid until you manage to ban usage of links to alternative names here in wiki, it will be used. I also quite surprised that you want to add in the lead and Arabic name :(. Nevertheless I have some new thoughts about placement of different names, I will wait my 24h, because I do not to be blocked and find myself in one line with others who violates policies. BTW, what are you doing so far away from you native waters? M.K. 16:30, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Please, read what I wrote, because you obviously haven't. You still haven't given me a valid reason why the name by which the city has been known in English for more than a century shouldn't even be allowed to be mentioned. Why is your opinion that the word Kovno should be banned from this article so more valid than my opinion that it should be clearly mentioned? --Explendido Rocha 17:44, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

The names you want are presented in established link, which is used all around Wikipedia projects. Sorry but excuse You have to jump a lot to find is clearly only your own POV. BTW, you have nice edition - Beaumont, who restored your version, by provided "interesting" argumentation - per talk. Wondering does he/she really read talk... M.K. 21:47, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Don't pretend that the matter is about me. Just give me one valid reason why the name by which the city has been known in English for more than a century shouldn't even be allowed to be mentioned. You still haven't. --Explendido Rocha 22:22, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

It is mentioned in link which is provided M.K. 22:29, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I asked for a valid reason. --Explendido Rocha 23:58, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

And you suggesting this is not a valid reason to keep link style? You pushing one name placement style and I another. You suggesting that my link style it's confusing and not enough. You have to jump a lot to find that Kaunas is Kovno and Kovno is Kaunas, while I say that your presented formulation instead of informing - misleads, and link style is neutral. Yet again I trying another name formulation placement, in neutral way. I hope you will like it. M.K. 23:38, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

This is absurd. M.K. is clearly not worth arguing with. There is absolutely no reason not to list the alternate name, and in fact wikipedia policy is that alternate names should be in the intro. john k 23:52, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Alternative names presented in link no? or you missed them? M.K. 23:55, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

No, I didn't miss it. Well known alternate names should be in the intro. There is absolutely no possible legitimate reason to exclude them. john k 01:51, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Left some notes on your talk. M.K. 23:31, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I'd strongly recommend checking the brand new WP:NC(GN) policy, which was designed to address exactly those kind of disputes. Unless the list of alternative names is really long, the names should go to the lead.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  18:42, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WWII section and Jews killing

Groups - group

Sadly there was a single and quite big group of "activists", and they were quite organised (some researchers suggest, that they were heavily influenced direct orders form Germany, Tilsit to be exact) and it does not seem to be any spontaneous act. Algirdas_Klimaitis was leader of that group.Another one note, that at the time special Eisnsatstaffels operative agents already were in Kaunas. After that pogrom as a "security measure" Kaunas Ghetto was created, and all the Jews were relocated there "to be protected". Lokyz 14:36, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

There is no WWII section. Censorship?

If there exists Jedwabne pogrom article, why no Kaunas pogrom? Xx236 07:54, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kowno and Kauen

Where there German settlers or local people obtained Magdeburg rights? Eventually - which name was used by the settlers? Xx236 07:51, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Feel free to add any referenced information.--Lokyz 21:41, 2 February 2007 (UTC)