From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article Lithuania was one of the Geography and places good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
December 14, 2007 Good article reassessment Delisted
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Lithuania (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lithuania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lithuania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Note icon
Review comments: Needs better referencing & culture section
WikiProject Countries (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of countries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.5
WikiProject icon This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
Taskforce icon
This article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality scale.

A suggestion on the climate section[edit]

List seasonal averages, not just the recorded extremes. Are you trying to scare people?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:45, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

International rankings[edit]

What we should do with International rankings part? Leave it as it is or reduce it's size? M.K. (talk) 07:31, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

I would support pruning it, to copy Canada - which is still a WP:Featured article - and use the ones there: (Canada#International_rankings): State of World Liberty Index, United Nations Development Programme, Human Development Index, World Bank Ease of Doing Business, The Economist The World in 2005 – Worldwide quality-of-life index, Yale University/Columbia University Environmental Sustainability Index, Reporters Without Borders Press Freedom Index, Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index, Institute for Economics & Peace Global Peace Index, Fund for Peace Failed States Index, World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Report, The Economist Democracy Index. Since all the rankings here are referenced though, maybe we could prosify/then move them to sections inside this article? For example 'the World Economic Forum ranks its Networked Readiness Index as 35...' in the infrastructure section. Any objections? Novickas (talk) 00:31, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
I agree about these improvements. M.K. (talk) 16:30, 22 April 2010 (UTC)


The soundfile actually gives the usual American pronunciation (/lɪθuːˈeɪniə/, "lithooaynia," not the otherwise more usual /ˌlɪθjuːˈeɪniə/ ("lithyooaynia")). Kostaki mou (talk) 03:08, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

I have moved it accordingly. Kostaki mou (talk) 22:02, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

This article is crap[edit]

It is rife with English punctuation mistakes/omissions, factual errors, and it reads like a promotional brochure. If someone knows anything about this country, please clean up this page.

Thanks174.20.59.23 (talk) 05:48, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Have a read of WP:SOFIXIT, you presumably speak English as your native language and therefore you're as capable as anyone of fixing the punctuation. Valenciano (talk) 08:02, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Agreed - this page reads like Goebbels' propaganda - wishful thinking replaces facts that are judged as unfit to the "editors" delusional vision of history of lands only very recently under Lithuanian occupation (e.g. Wilna region) ond only by implicit permission of the previous occupants - Russians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:10, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Population lost[edit]

Did Lithuania really lost 400 000 people in last 10 years? Its more than 10%, is this due to migration, low birth rates or different methodology of Census? Seems too much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:48, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

I think this phrase in the source explains the problem: "Tai sudaro apie 94 procentus pagal Gyventojų registro duomenis ir Statistikos departamento metodiką įvertinto Lietuvos gyventojų skaičiaus, kuris kovo 1 d. sudarė 3234,9 tūkst." Roughly it seems to say that the 3.054 million figure is 94% of the total in another department which uses a different methodology to arrive at a 3.234 million figure. I believe we'd be better going with the 3.234 million figure as it sounds more realistic compared to the 2001 figures. Valenciano (talk) 18:19, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

"Did ... lost" isn't valid English. It should read "Did ... lose". (talk) 11:47, 25 July 2013 (UTC) Twitter.Com/CalRobert (Robert Maas)

Lithuanian language[edit]

At the moment it says "...the official language, Lithuanian, is only related to the other Baltic language, Latvian." Firstly Lithuanian is an Indo-European language so it's related to English and every other language in that family, and secondly that sentence implies Latvian is the only other Baltic language, forgetting Estonian. Fugyoo (talk) 21:46, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

It needs rewording yes. The editor who added that no doubt meant that Lithuanian and Latvian are the only two surviving languages in the Baltic branch of the indo-European language family. Estonian isn't an indo-European language. Valenciano (talk) 22:01, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Must have meant from the Baltic branch of Indo-European. If so, then yes that is correct regarding official langauges which exist. Estonia is a Baltic state but its language doesn't fall into the common Baltic category precisely for not being Indo-European. The Big Hoof! (talk) 12:40, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Content Blanking in Intro, Possible SOCK[edit]

two users and possible sock RammyJuice should explain the content-blanking they keep doing. example. Cramyourspam (talk) 02:03, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Other languages, such as Russian, Polish, Belarusian and Ukrainian are spoken in the larger cities[[edit]

Many Poles live around Vilnius, so the statement misinforms.Xx236 (talk) 14:16, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Compatability View[edit]

I've been surfing Wiki extensively since it was founded, long before IE offered Compatibility View. To date, in the many thousands of pages I've been to, this is the first time Compatibility View jumped into action the very nanosecond an article began loading in my browser. In fact, it has never jumped into action ever before here on wiki. Compatibility View isn't enough it seems, as after a short while of being locked up, I got hit with a confirmation dialog box telling me a script on this page is causing IE to run slowly, do I want to stop running the script or continue?

Reloaded the page, same thing. Visited several other similar pages, no problem. Came back here...still locking up. I had a quick look but can't spot the problem. Thought it might be the anthem, removed the template, previewed the change but the problem persisted so I left it alone. Just thought someone might like to know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:19, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Independence from USSR (bad wording)[edit]

"Lithuania became the first Soviet republic to declare the restoration of independent State of Lithuania" is mis-worded. Lithuania is likely the ONLY Soviet republic to declare itself the "State of Lithuania". Other Soviet republics declared independence later but each declared itself by a different name. How best to re-word this? (I was math, not English, major; I can see the problem but can't find a good solution.) (talk) 11:40, 25 July 2013 (UTC) Twitter.Com/CalRobert (Robert Maas)

Molotov Ribbentrob agreement[edit]

According to Lithuania was part of the German sphere of influence. Hence the soviet occupation of Lithuania was a violation of that agreement. -- (talk) 04:59, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

According to the same page, the agreement was changed by an additional protocol in September 1939. Lithuania was transfered to the Soviet sphere.No longer a penguin (talk) 13:31, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

July 6[edit]

July 6, 1253 is currently mentioned in at least three places in the article as the date on which Mindaugas was crowned / Lithuania was established as a state. No qualifiers or notes are included with the date to reflect that the date is by no means certain and is challenged by other experts on Lithuanian history. In fact, the reference used for the date is an article criticising the validity of this very date, which is a bit ridiculous. If there are no objections, my suggestion is to leave July 6, 1253 in the infobox but add a note briefly explaining ambiguity. Other instances in text should be changed to just 1253 which is something that everyone more or less agrees on. No longer a penguin (talk) 13:36, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed[edit]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: here. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 00:15, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Lock this article!!!![edit]

Almost all country articles are locked and people keep vandalizing this article!! Is it really that hard to lock it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plienas26 (talkcontribs) 12:13, 12 April 2014 (UTC)