Jump to content

Talk:Vilnius University: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Vilnius was returned [1] to Lithuania: Lysy stop personal attack
Line 110: Line 110:
:::M.K., why don't you just back down? Lysy can certainly find a reference that Vilnius is occupied by Lithuania, and a reference that Lithuania occupied Vilnius again in 1991, (like we were recently informed). Haven't you learned that there are a "plethora" of [[tygodniks]] out there proving everything except that ''if one's Aunt had a moustache she'd be your Uncle''. [[User:Dr. Dan|Dr. Dan]] 21:40, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
:::M.K., why don't you just back down? Lysy can certainly find a reference that Vilnius is occupied by Lithuania, and a reference that Lithuania occupied Vilnius again in 1991, (like we were recently informed). Haven't you learned that there are a "plethora" of [[tygodniks]] out there proving everything except that ''if one's Aunt had a moustache she'd be your Uncle''. [[User:Dr. Dan|Dr. Dan]] 21:40, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
:OK, let me rephrase this. I understand that your personal POV is that Vilnius was "returned" , you believe it and you dismiss and other POV. However as a wikipedia editor, you should try to avoid taking sides. It's much better to avoid terms like "returned" in such contexts if not absolutely necessary. Using such words does not add any valuable information to the article itself. On the contrary, it might suggest that Vilnius belonged to Lithuania before WW2, which is not true, as it was in Poland. Other than that, I'm sure you know that the Soviets did not "return" Vilnius to Lithuania but first occupied it and then traded for their military presence in the country. --[[User:Lysy|Lysy]]<sup>[[User talk:Lysy|talk]]</sup> 08:06, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
:OK, let me rephrase this. I understand that your personal POV is that Vilnius was "returned" , you believe it and you dismiss and other POV. However as a wikipedia editor, you should try to avoid taking sides. It's much better to avoid terms like "returned" in such contexts if not absolutely necessary. Using such words does not add any valuable information to the article itself. On the contrary, it might suggest that Vilnius belonged to Lithuania before WW2, which is not true, as it was in Poland. Other than that, I'm sure you know that the Soviets did not "return" Vilnius to Lithuania but first occupied it and then traded for their military presence in the country. --[[User:Lysy|Lysy]]<sup>[[User talk:Lysy|talk]]</sup> 08:06, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
::First, you making personal attack here, stop this now! Second why you failed to see that word is directly referenced? And why do you not consulting with other English sources which uses same formulation? And stop accusing me with one sided approach, you have been warned. [[User:M.K|M.K.]] 09:50, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 09:50, 5 February 2007

Wouldnt have time for such, actually would be too lazy. What was the author of the first book(in Europe) about rocketry? He must have studied here. anyway.. respect--Vytautas 21:27, 2004 Jun 21 (UTC)

First book about rocketry? They tell tales of such guys in most of the universities I know (well, except for Warsaw University which is relatively new). Probably there was a similar guy in Wilno too... Any details? Halibutt 02:44, Jun 22, 2004 (UTC)

Kazimier Siemienowicz -- Artis Magnae Artileria 1650

After googlin a bit it becomes clear that all these telling tales about such guys have smth. to prove it. It is actually about artilery but contains a chapter about rockets. It was used as a manual for more than a hundred years, was translated to many languages.

I have found stated(lithuanian source) that there is a source (sort of university book containing names of all students) stating that Casimiry Symonowicz studied here at the time and got a magister degree. Compare with „Artis Magnae Artilleriae Pars prima, studio et opera Casimiri Siemienowicz, Eguitis Lithuani, olim artileriae Regni Poloniae…”. It is undoubted here that this is the same man.

This man deserver his own page on wikipedia :)

[1] -- interesting.

By the way there should be a translation to polish printed in 1963.

I never heard of this guy but it seems that he was a very interesting personality. I'll prepare an article on him soon. As a sidenote, ther was a book on him published in the late sixties, I'll see if I can reach it. Halibutt 19:01, Jun 24, 2004 (UTC)

Revert war

I must say that I like this article the way it is. I must also say that I'm quite worried by the latest additions by Zinvibudas ([2]). Could someone explain to me:

  • Why should we translate all names to Lithuanian, even if those people did not speak that language nor were they using Lithuanised names? I understand that translating foreign names is common in Lithuanian language, but this is English wiki, not Lithuanian.
  • Why should we change perfectly working links to already-existent articles to non-UTF compliant links to non-existent articles?
  • Also, is adding more POV to this article really necessary? I mean mostly the deletion of the word Poland wherever possible, deletion of mention of the repressions against the university community in 1940 and so on.

I understand that our honourable friend Zinvibudas has his ways, but could someone ask him to discuss his edits before he starts yet another revert war? Halibutt 10:55, May 19, 2005 (UTC)

This is not English wiki. This is an international wiki and belongs as equally to me as to you. It would have NEVER exceeded 1 million article threshold were it not for the contributions of people from all over the world.--RokasT 13:08, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the general standard of Wikipedia for historical articles is to use the names of cities,etc that were commonly used at the time or of the ruling power. Thus, the names, if anything, should be in Polish. As the above user pointed out, it is intolerable to many Lithuanians to think Vilnius, or Wilno, is for the most part a historically Polish city, and it is sad that some must resort to things like removing mention of its Polish past through means of Lithuanization of names, and deletion of certain inconvinient facts as if this self-deception actually changed the past. That being said, RokasT this is a wiki which is fairly international. Therefore, it would be inappropriate to go around and convert names like Sniadecki and the like to Lithuanian versions as that is the forcing of one's chauvinistic self-deception on others. It would be in good taste to refrain from such edits, and I encourage Zinvibudas to follow that logic. --24.91.40.69 02:58, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image

Whenever this page gets unprotected again, this nice image from Commons should be added. u◦p◦p◦l◦a◦n◦d 19:46, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)




Oldest University in Eastern Europe?

Surely not the oldest university in Eastern Europe, since the Jagellonian Unversity in Krakow is at least 100 years older? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Krak%C3%B3w

Krakow is in central Europe, not Eastern! Lithuania is Eastern Lithuania.

Not according to the map of Europe as stated by the U.N. Dr. Dan 02:12, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would anyone be interested in uploading a better version of the logo than the current one? I could provide it in a lot of formats, including small PNG (with white background), PS or SVG (converted from PS).

my contact address: rimas.kudelis -AT- cr.vu.lt

By all means, please do so. We welcome all contributions!-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  23:14, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Relevancy

The Polish name for this institution is irrelevant in the lead. I left in Stefan Batory (as it is relevant). Whatever historical information concerning VU and Poland is relevant, can be added to the article. And P.P., just curious, was Wroclaw "returned" to Poland or "transferred" to Poland, in 1945, (just like you I don't want weasel wording used either). Dr. Dan 16:43, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say transferred (it's neutral) - just as Vilnius/Wilno was transferred to Lithuanians in 1939. But since this article states Vilnius was returned, I guess we should be consistent...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  23:14, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question

After Soviet invasion of Poland (1939), Lithuanian language programs and faculties would be established. What happened to the existing Polish language programs and faculty? Otherwise, an interesting article! PS. Other possible issue: the Marshal of the Crown, Kazimierz Lew Sapieha was supposed to become one of the sponsors of the university. As it is written, it suggest he was one of the founders - but 1) I cannot find information about 'Kazimierz Lew Sapieha' who lived in 16th century nor about one who was 'marshal of the crown'. There was however Kazimierz Leon Sapieha (Leon=Lew) who lived in the first half of the 17th century [3], attended the university and was Court Marshal of Lithuania and Marshal of the Sejm. I think this needs correction...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  23:14, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.P., is that a rhetorical question, What happened to the existing Polish language programs and faculty?, or are you asking seriously because you don't have even a small clue? If you're serious, I'd say probably the same thing that happened to the faculty and programs at the University of Breslau, in 1945. Dr. Dan 02:09, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's not rethorical and I'd like a clear, referenced answer. The article states However, soon after the city was occupied by the Soviet Union, most of the professors returned, and most of the faculties were reopened on October 1, 1939. I do wonder how much they were change than, and how much were they changed after oDecember 13. As for the comparison with Wrocław/Breslau in 1945, do note that most of the (German) city population was expelled, including professors, student and most of the German speakers. This, to my knowledge, was not the case of Vilnius in 1939/1940 (there were expulsions, but I don't think they involved most Polish speakers... or did they?). On a related note, I wonder if there were any courses in foreign languages (particularly Lithuanian) before Sept 1939 at the university? What was the cirriculum for foreign languages anyway than, in Poland and worldwide (but that's a question not for this article to answer).-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  02:02, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Vilnius was handed over to Lithuanians on October 27. Before then, the Soviets grabbed most of what they could, including supplies, art, industry, coal, some people etc. - the usual thing you'd expect. Under Lithuanian rule the names of the streets and people's surnames were immediately changed or Lithuanised. Polish social or cultural organisations were dissolved and banned, including all non-primary level education, with the exception of two secondary schools. Polish faculty and students of the university were dismissed. Poles were denied citizenship, and as such were not eligible to work (considered foreigners). About 150.000 Poles were left jobless in the town. --Lysytalk 22:53, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would you have some refs for that? Particularly the dismissal of Polish faculty and students from the university would be certainly useful to this article. PS. History of Vilnius has this unreferenced yet interesting sentence: One of the unfortunate decisions made by Lithuanian authorities in this period was the closure and liquidation of Vilnius University on December 15th, 1939 and conducting a policy of repressions against the inhabitants of the town.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  03:38, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Off-topic play by Dr. Dan and Xx236

Lysy,doesn't it sound a lot like what happened in Breslau in 1945. Just substitute Polish for Lithuanians and Germans for Poles, leave Soviets as is? Dr. Dan 23:00, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
But Dear Dan, using your logic one could come to the conclusion that Poles tried to conquer the world and exterminate all Lithuanians... I don't see much point in that. And Uncle Joe wasn't in charge, neither (at least, not until 1940...).-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  03:38, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
But Dearer P.P., my logic has nothing to do with who was calling the "shots" or whether "Uncle Joe" was in charge or not. If Lysy is correct, and the Soviets grabbed most of what they could, ...The usual thing you'd expect,... then Uncle Joe would have been in charge. If none of what Lysy stated took place, then an apology to the fewer and fewer Soviet war veterans is in order, from you boys. As for "logically" coming to any conclusion concerning world conquest or extermination, please get some rest, and loosen the collar of your żupan. Dr. Dan 04:17, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I took the liberty of splitting your usuall off-topic remarks from the content that is actually relevant to this article. I'd think you'd be familiar with history of Vilnius; but seeing as you are unaware of parts of it, you may be interested to find out that Vilnius was actually occupied by the Red Army during the Soviet invasion of Poland (1939) before being turned over to the Lithuanian government (not for very long at that) - Lysy wrote as much. As it is indeed late, I will not look for sources about looting of Vilnius by Red Army now (hopefully Lysy has some refs handy), although I will offer you this quote from the history of Vilnius article: A month of Soviet rule in Vilnius had catastrophic consequences: the city was starving, the museums and archives robbed, the valuables and historic documents were stolen and transferred to Russia, and many people were deported.. Finally, knowing your love for off-topic arguments, let me give you those two photos of a mostly unrelated event: [4], [5] - Russian forces stripping Warsaw of metal before their retreat in 1918. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  04:28, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Dr. Dan, I think this might be somewhat similar to Breslau. But that Breslau thingy happened later, after all the horrors of WW2, the concentration camps, mass killings of civilians and all the stuff you know. I'm not trying to justify the oppression of Germans in Breslau, but it can be somewhat explained by what the Poles went through. --Lysytalk 09:56, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

liquidation? As far as I remeber they expelled (all?) Polish professors and moved the Kaunas University to Wilno. Xx236 14:57, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Answer to dr Dan - Breslau Professors were evacuated by German authorities in a train, the students probably fought against the Red Army so they went to Soviet POW camps after the war. Xx236 15:00, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Xx236, is any of your comment researched and verifyable, or just "some of it"? Ever hear of Festung Breslau and see pictures of the University of Breslau and the University of Vilnius in May 1945? Please try to stay away from inserting your POV into this discussion. You have no idea of what the German students of Breslau did or didn't do, let alone their fates, and whether they were imprisoned in Soviet POW camps or not. And the Breslau professor's train ride, where did that come from? Dr. Dan 15:16, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Dan - if you want to say that I'm a liar, do your job - get some reading and go the the right talk page. Xx236 07:27, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now, now, Xx236, no one has called you a liar. Please don't insert you "opinions" about German professors, German students, and Soviet Pow camps with information that cannot be sourced or verified. Also please don't refer to this being off topic, and then continuing to put in more off topic "information". And finally, if you truly do not like "off topic" entries, please chide all editors contributing with off topic remarks and photos equally. Dr. Dan 06:05, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The University's international students

Weren't they memebers of minorities in Poland? It's almost impossible that students from Soviet Russia studied in Wilno.Xx236 14:53, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm also puzzled with this sentence. What is the supposed meaning of "international" there ? Foreign ? What is the source of this information ? --Lysytalk 18:40, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vilnius was returned [1] to Lithuania

It's a biased statement. How a 98% non-Lithuanian city can be returned to a state created in 1918?Xx236 15:04, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The same way that you think it belongs to different state created in 1918. Dr. Dan 15:19, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
But a little differently than a 99% German city was "recovered"(ziemie odzyskanie), by Poland in 1945. Dr. Dan 03:39, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dan, this article is about the University, let's concentrate on the subject. Your opinion about the Recovered Territories should be placed on the related talk page.

I don't think, I'm writing about documented facts. The modern, nationalistic Lithuanian state was created after WWI. Xx236 07:25, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As was Poland. Dr. Dan 05:38, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And many other countries. How is that relevant here ? --Lysytalk 08:19, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Good question. Dr. Dan 15:01, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do not remove info which is directly referenced. M.K. 11:50, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can easily find a reference confirming that Vilnius was occupied by Lithuania. Do you want this ? Why are you doing this, M.K ? --Lysytalk 16:45, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What are you talking about? Do you separate difference between words "occupation" and "return"? M.K. 17:45, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
M.K., why don't you just back down? Lysy can certainly find a reference that Vilnius is occupied by Lithuania, and a reference that Lithuania occupied Vilnius again in 1991, (like we were recently informed). Haven't you learned that there are a "plethora" of tygodniks out there proving everything except that if one's Aunt had a moustache she'd be your Uncle. Dr. Dan 21:40, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK, let me rephrase this. I understand that your personal POV is that Vilnius was "returned" , you believe it and you dismiss and other POV. However as a wikipedia editor, you should try to avoid taking sides. It's much better to avoid terms like "returned" in such contexts if not absolutely necessary. Using such words does not add any valuable information to the article itself. On the contrary, it might suggest that Vilnius belonged to Lithuania before WW2, which is not true, as it was in Poland. Other than that, I'm sure you know that the Soviets did not "return" Vilnius to Lithuania but first occupied it and then traded for their military presence in the country. --Lysytalk 08:06, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
First, you making personal attack here, stop this now! Second why you failed to see that word is directly referenced? And why do you not consulting with other English sources which uses same formulation? And stop accusing me with one sided approach, you have been warned. M.K. 09:50, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]