Talk:Riga/Archive 1

Archive 1

Lido

Does anyone have a picture of Lido (esepcially around christmas time)? That would definately be a good picture to include. — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 16:39, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

Demographics

"During these many centuries [...] the Baltic Germans in Riga [...] remained steadfast in their positions, and in 1900 Riga's population of 282,943 was composed approximately of 50% Baltic Germans, 25% Latvians, and 25% Russians." Source? According to Straubergs' history (Rīgas vēsture) and other reference works, the Germans made up 42,9% of the population of the city in 1867, 39,4% in 1881, 23,8% in 1897... and only 13,3% in 1913. I cannot find figures for 1900, but "approximately 50%" is most definitely wrong. The percentages from the 1897 census were 45% Latvian, 23,8% German, 16,1% Russian, 6% Jewish, 4,8% Polish, 2,3% Lithuanian, 1,3% Estonian, 0,7% other -- total population 282 230. --Pēteris Cedriņš 23:38, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

"Occupation"

Soviet military presence cannot be called an "occupation" in terms of international law as there has not been war between the USSR and Latvia. DamianOFF 11:43, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Dealt with extensively on the Talk:Lithuania page, where it was suggested this issue be entered into the Village Pump —Pēters J. Vecrumba 13:45, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

German Repatriation

Prior version made it appear Latvia threw Germans out when it was Hitler who issued the call home (knowing that with the signing of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact it was only a matter of time until Latvia fell to the Soviet "sphere." —Pēters J. Vecrumba 20:07, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Links?

I see "non-encyclopedic" links were removed. Why? Certainly if someone is looking for information on Riga, Riga Municipality portal would be more than appropriate to list. If "encyclopedic" were applied across the board, 90% of the links in Wikipedia would disappear. Any good reason (before I revert)? —Pēters J. Vecrumba 01:05, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Oops, was looking thtough history, some already appear to have returned! —Pēters J. Vecrumba 01:11, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi Pēters. I didn't remove the Riga municipality link, I changed it. Since this is the English language wikipedia our policy is to favour English language links, and to not link to non-English language links in the external links section (except in exceptional circumstances). So it seemed more appropriate to link directly to the English language home page instead of making user click through to it. I did the same with Virtual tour of riga and the University sites. The sites I removed were either non-encyclopedic, like holiday booking sites, or the site had shut down, or there was no English language content. If you think I removed a link that adds useful encyclopedic value to the article please put it back. I was just trying to cleanup what looked like a neglected list. --Siobhan Hansa 01:37, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Siobhan. Many thanks! Since Latvian isn't a foreign language to me that distinction flies by me sometimes. —Pēters J. Vecrumba 12:35, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

People who live in Riga. Who they are?

How to call them ? In Russian language it is рижане, in Latvian Ridzenieki, in German - Rigaer. But how to say in english correctly? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 159.148.88.2 (talk) 07:48, 5 January 2007 (UTC).

It's Rigan as far as I know but I could be wrong. Valenciano 21:09, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Population

The article doesn't state how many people live in Riga. Any idea? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.134.30.228 (talk • contribs) 10:17, December 16, 2005 (UTC)

On a related note, it would be interesting to know why Riga's population is decreasing again in recent times. Emigration? Death rate higher than birth rate? Something else?

Following quote is not neutral in perspective: "...any non-Latvians whose families arrived after the 1940 annexation were stripped of their citizenship.".
How can "non-Latvians" be stripped of a citizenship they never held?
All citizens of the Latvian SSR had citizenship of the Soviet Union until the new Latvian independence. All (even "non-Latvians") who lived in Latvia until the 1940 Soviet annexation and their descendants automatically became Latvian citizens after the new Latvian independence. All (even emigree Latvians) who did not live in Latvia until the 1940 Soviet annexation and their descendants kept their old citizenship - which, for the majority was citizenship of the Soviet Union, which at the time of the new Latvian citizenship legislation (1992) was a non-existing state. The use of "non-Latvians" is vague and really quite undefined. Another aspect to this is the fact, that ethnic Latvians who lived outside Latvia but within the former Soviet Union at the time of new Latvian independence were not given citizenship automatically (about 40.000 people). Philaweb 11:51, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I might add that the Latvian legislation on citizenship has been amended several times since 1992, the above written is based on the original 1992 legislation. Philaweb 12:04, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

A question out of pure quriosity

I don't know the background, nor the precise demographics of Latvia...but why is the Estonian name of the city listed in the opening paragraph? Isn't Latvian and (de facto) Russian the two languages of the country? MoRsE 23:01, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

The only explanaton that comes to mind is the fact that Riga is spelled the same way in all languages, except for Estonian and Lithuanian (and perhaps Polish). Perhaps the Lithuanian, Polish version should be added as well? Philaweb 09:03, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

In Finnish it is Riika. r.Soms

External links

It would be nice if we could do some evaluation of the external links. Some of them belong in other articles, some of them are links to personal photo galleries from some trip to Riga. It would be nice to find some criterias for what sort of links that would fit to this section, preventing linkfarming. Philaweb T-C 10:52, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I think that any article should have only relevant, interesting links, that help reader to learn further details, as for pictures - if there is external picture galery it should contain unique, informative images that are not available on wikipedia or commons. Just remove other links or list them here, if you think that they could be useful elsewhere -- Xil/talk 23:13, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Notable people

I wish to rid the article of this section: there is no criteria for inclusion - some of these people have just been born in Riga, but have lived most of their lives elsewhere, others are only mariginaly notable (some even don't have articles and we can't include half of Latvian national ice hockey team). So if no one minds I will just remove this section (NB: I probably will have time to deal with this article during the lenghtly holidays /1-5 May or so/) ~~Xil * 18:06, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Counter-Reformation

I would like to ask for some refference prooveing this: in 1581, Riga came under the influence of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Attempts to reinstitute Roman Catholicism in Riga and southern Livonia failed as in 1621.
25 september 1621 Riga was actually captured by Gustav Adolf and Sweden at that time for sure wasn`t catholic, Duchy of Livonia was actually Pl-Lt Condominium, it had its own Marszałek, Hetman and had some sort of autonomy. However Sigismund III Vasa was verry conservative, it was just impossible for him to force anyone without Sejm, plenty of highest offices were held by protestants or orthodoxes, in Lithuania almost all. Not to mention Warsaw Confederation of religious peace 1573.
P.S. Picture of Rigas skyline covers some part of text. Mikołajski (talk) 17:04, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Exactly what the text says - Counter-Reformation failed because Riga was captured by Sweden, there is a comma which probably shouldn't be there, maybe it confused you. IMHO it looks that in the history section history of Riga is somtimes confused with history of Latvia (as far as I remember Catholics failed miserably in attemts to restore their faith in Riga). The picture looks fine to me ~~Xil * 17:31, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

In text is written: "then in 1581, Riga came under the influence of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth..." then goes sentence quoted above. So it says that in both 1581 and 1621 was some attempt to force Riga citizens to catholicism, i`m only askeing who wanted to do it and which source reports it. I just doubt if it was possible, even if at that time started counter-reformation in Commonwealth, its most opressive element was propaganda supported by ultra-catholic (and Swedish btw) King with his printing houses, simply nothing more was possible according to law, not any burning piles etc, nothing like this never happend (well once and not in Riga, but then Papal inquisitor was beaten by the crowd and fled from country). Besides as i said Duchy of Livonia (which Riga was part since 1581) was joint-dominium of both Polish Crown and Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Courland, which is present south Latvia, was vassal Duchy under Kettlers family, after secularisation of Livonian Order, and it was by all means acceptable that its ruler and elites were protestant, it was separate state after all. If you say that you remember such thing, please put a source in which you red about it. I was talking that picture covers part of text, not that it looks bad (looks more than fine) and also picture of postcard from 1900 cover one word. Speaking about history, Peace of Riga can be added to this section, especially if it was also speaking about independence of Baltic States. Cheers Mikołajski (talk) 11:09, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

It was in history textbook - I looked trough it and couldn't find anything on catholicism other than banishing clerics and jesuits from Riga. I removed that piece of text hope it looks ok now ~~Xil * 11:40, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, i hope it`s right according to history, that i don`t know if it did happend, doesn`t mean that it didn`t. Sorry for bothering you with this history section, but what exactly Riga have in common with Thirty years war? Mikołajski (talk) 15:12, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't know exactly, but this isn't the only place where these are mentioned together, maybe Sweden gained some advantage in the war by taking Riga or something ~~Xil * 16:03, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I don`t know it either. Well, for sure anyone who would capture Riga will get richer, so indirectly yes, Sweden gained advantage. If it was something more, it should be somehow mentioned and explained in this article. But it wasn`t part of that war by any mean. I think it`s just not a part of Rigas history, in opposite to Peace of Riga 1921. Greets.Mikołajski (talk) 22:09, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

The history section is too long already, it has been copied to seperate article, so if you think something needs longer explanation, maybe just delete it and leave note about it at Talk:History of Riga (be bold - this article has been developing on its own, there is no main contributor here who would know what's going on, the part of history section we are discussing was written in begining of 2005 by someone who seems to have left Wikipedia) ~~Xil * 09:02, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but i don`t want to mess in your city/country related articles without a word of explanation. This or other way in both stands this sentence, rather related to Swedish history than Rigas. Maybe it`s only my POV, but i supose that it was added for some religious purpose, that`s why it was makeing some sense with suposed counter-reformative PLC attempts, but the same now as before it`s just off-topic. It`s not that i need some explanation, but this sentence needs, otherwise it`s like i said, off-top. Mikołajski (talk) 20:54, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm just saying that no-one will mind if you delete it (in my opinion the history section should be even shorter) not that you need someone to explain you something, if you leave a note explainig why you've altered the text it will be more than enough. This period of history really isn't my cup of tea - I can check facts elsewhere, but I don't realy know and I don't want to mess something up ~~Xil * 22:18, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Amber?

Riga is famous for its amber but its not mentioned in the article. What gives? --Ragemanchoo (talk) 08:00, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

the whole Baltic Sea coast is famous for amber. Riga nothing special. Laudak (talk) 02:09, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Riga is not famous for amber, it even hardly is a coastal city as it is centred around river Daugava not the sea. Perhaps you mean it was famous as amber exporter in middle ages or something like that ? ~~Xil * 11:53, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Neighborhoods

Looking at it, the list was getting a bit long. A split might offer an opportunity to add more than cursory detail. —PētersV (talk) 13:25, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't see the need, and no-one has taken action in five months, so I'm going to remove the tag. Greg Grahame (talk) 23:20, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

"Riga" or "Rīga"

I cannot even see the new name of the article (Rīga) on my PC with the fonts installed with MS Windows. This is the English language Wikipedia. How far can we go in the these demands for ethnic spelling?

Moving the article back to Riga -- Petri Krohn 22:54, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

That is not an appropriate reason for renaming an article. (How about a situation where I'm a public servant, you come to get a new passport and you find out that I have printed the new passport with your name spelled completely differently just because I couldn't read it in the first place. Would you feel that the change was justified?)

However, I don't mind in this particular case, because in the English language the spelling Riga is used more often and it is the standard spelling for this city. --Jūzeris | Talk 20:11, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Every article should be titled in English in the ENGLISH Wikipedia. It is darned annoying political correctness - and an insult to the English language - that this is not the case. Greg Grahame (talk) 23:22, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Famous folks?

No list of famous Rigans, Rigaites, Rigaers? Sca (talk) 17:49, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Stone Bridge (Riga)

Stone Bridge (Riga) could be included in this article, and make that article less of an orphan. --DThomsen8 (talk) 13:52, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Project to achieve GA/FA?

This is similar to a proposal I recently floated at Kiev. I searched through quite a number of articles and identified Johannesburg as an FA model to organize content and efforts going forward. Where we are and where we need to get to, adding London as a GA example:
 

Outline of Riga History Geography Cityscape Neighbourhoods Climate Economy Infrastructure Demographics Culture Theatres Universities Sister cities See also References External links

Outline of London, GA History Governance Local government National government Geography Scope Status Topography Climate Districts Cityscape Demography Ethnic groups Religion Economy Architecture Parks and gardens Society and culture Accent Leisure and entertainment Literature and film Museums and Art Galleries Music Sport Transport Railways Buses Air Roads Education Twin cities See also References Further reading External links

Outline of Johannesburg, FA History Government Crime Geography and climate Demographics Cityscape Architecture Parks and gardens Residential Areas Economy Retail Communications and media Music Suburbs Tourism Sports teams and stadiums Transport Airports Freeways Taxis Mass transit Trains Buses Bus Rapid Transit Education and Culture Museums in Johannesburg AECI Dynamite Factory Museum Adler Museum of Medicine Apartheid museum Constitution Hill Hector Peterson Museum James Hall Transport Museum Madiba Freedom Museum Museum Africa Origins Centre Museum Bernberg Fashion Museum South African National Museum of Military History Zoology Museum Sister cities Notes References See also External links

There is a LOT of content to be created and added. As we pick an area of interest to expand, if we can stick to Johannesburg as an outline we can come up with a truly superb article. My two santīmi. VЄСRUМВА  ☎  18:14, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

FA project discussion

According to the language interwiki links, there are 3 FA Riga articles in other languages. The da.wiki article is an almost copied version of the no.wiki article, the Latvian article is heavy on history, but has lots of red links. Perhaps those articles could be of inspiration? ^Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\^Work 20:36, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

There are definitely pieces to be borrow and stolen ...umm... translated from the other articles. The Latvian article is pretty comprehensive, the no/da articles also have good content--all of which I think can be adapted to a "superset" framework. VЄСRUМВА  ☎  01:10, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps I'll tear out a day or two of the upcoming week from the calendar and dedicate them to this article. Borrowing from other articles is quite common, so I'll go for that approach. ^Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\^Work 13:22, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

This weekend I am going to give it a stab at expanding, improving the article. During the week I will use approximately a day to collect images of different locations in Riga and see what it brings. ^Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\^Work 21:43, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Created a sandbox page for the Riga FA article project and already made some changes. Comments and contributions are welcome. ^Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\^Work 17:16, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

References will be an issue at any FA review. The Kipsala towers project for example had been tagged since August 2007 but it took me less than 5 minutes to find a ref for that so if we dig around we can fill in the gaps. Other untagged sentences will definitely need refs i.e. "even though many inhabitants mainly speak Russian" which should be easy enough to prove but would probably need reworded as it seems a bit WP:POINTish. Valenciano (talk) 17:43, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your heads up. References indeed are essential on reaching FA, and my references library will be undusted this weekend for historic stuff. Unfortunately, I don't have a clue on politics in Riga, perhaps that is something for you Valenciano to work on? ^Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\^Work 20:18, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

For sure I can have a go. I've had a look round for refs - what do you think of this for the 2005 elections? It's pretty detailed but I'm worried about whether or not it meets WP:RS? Valenciano (talk) 10:15, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

If it is THE only source we have to utilize it, even though this websites editorial integrity is a bit unknown. Otherwise, I would go for established news and political journalism websites. ^Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\^Work 18:03, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Can't say "stay.lv" is a bona fide news outlet, although it gives us enough information to go hunt more mainstream news sources. VЄСRUМВА  ☎  02:34, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Practical questions

Was wondering what is best practice when it comes to Latvian street names. As English use is preferred a street name like "Freedom Street" is obvious (since the memorial is entitled Freedom Monument, not Brīvības Monument). There are other less obvious scenarious, perhaps we could establish a best practice for Latvian street names in general? Category:Streets by city is a good place to browse and it seems like street names are usually entitled according to the local language, like Brīvības iela, except when they are transliterated from a different alphabet. I really could need some input before I chop ahead with an article. Personally, I prefer the local name approach, which makes it much easier for WP readers to actually use the information to navigate in Riga ^Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\^Work 09:10, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Not necessarily. Category:Streets by city produces ambiguous results. For example in the Luxembourg city section we have the English translation Fishmarket but the French Avenue de la Liberté. Category:Streets in Vilnius, the closest equivalent, has the streets in English. Cluj-Napoca, a good article, produces inconsistencies. Victor Babeş Street is a direct translation of Strada Victor Babeş but there we also have the Romanian Bulevardul Eroilor partially translated as Eroilor Avenue when a more complete translation would be Heroes Boulevard. WP:MOS doesn't really offer any concrete guidance though it appears to favour English language names in general. Personally speaking I would follow the precedent of the monument where it's given as "Freedom Monument (Latvian: Brīvības piemineklis)" or the reverse since that would be most informative to the reader. I've raised the issue here and hope we can get some guidance on this. Valenciano (talk) 10:11, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

I have chimed in over at MOS talk. By the way, there is a reason as to why many Eastern European city names in general are transliterated into the syntax "X Street" instead of using the local language. In ex-Soviet countries it is a leftover from the Soviet era where all street names were transliterated from "another" alphabet, namely the chyrillic Russian alphabet. ^Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\^Work 11:54, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

(Copied from below section) I've been translating streets ("Alberta iela" is "Albert street") but using other terms in Latvian where they translate awkwardly, e.g., Senais kalns (Ancient hill), then using Senais kalns later. It would definitely make sense for us to come up with some sort of consistent style guide. VЄСRUМВА  ☎  20:56, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

A consistency guide is really called for when it comes to Latvian street names in English on Wikipedia. Even though I deeply disapprove of the Russian back-transliterations of Latvian street names into English, it looks like that is the "established" English, i.e. the naming convention we should use in most cases. We can only hope the Anglosphere over time will change their vocabulary like they have done with names of places in Western Europe. ^Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\^Work 20:52, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Where is it that we see Russian back-transliterations of Latvian street names into English? Certainly there are a number of English common usage place names across Eastern Europe which are transliterated from Russian and continue to "stick," but I'm not aware of any issues with Latvian street names. VЄСRUМВА  ☎  21:50, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I think the issue with Latvian street names on Wikipedia is that "iela" is translated to "Street", which is just my opinion. I think geographic names should not be translated at all in the title of an article. Anyhow, Wikipedia policies does not prescribe this approach, so I wont make an issue of it.

When it comes to some sort of consistent style guide, i.e. uniform naming of streets, I suggest that we use the Latvian form in the first part and the English "Street, Boulevard, Avenue" etc. in the latter. Dzirnavu iela then becomes Dzirnavu Street - not "Mill Street". There are naturally the odd exceptions like Freedom Street, Freedom Boulevard and Freedom Avenue. If the first part in Latvian is a name of a person an exception should also apply, like: Alberta iela, which becomes Albert Street and Kārļa Ulmaņa gatve becomes Kārlis Ulmanis Avenue. ^Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\^Work 23:42, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

WIP at User:Vecrumba/Riga LV-EN

I copied the entire LV WP article, but for now I'm just going to work on the history section. It lays out city history by each century, which is as good an organization as any—simple chronology is better than all the various eras under all the various invaders. I'll transplant pieces as I finish them up. (Might still need a ref or two once copied over.) To the question above, I've been translating streets ("Alberta iela" is "Albert street") but using other terms in Latvian where they translate awkwardly, e.g., Senais kalns (Ancient hill), then using Senais kalns later. It would definitely make sense for us to come up with some sort of consistent style guide. VЄСRUМВА  ☎  20:56, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

I've transplanted the longer version of the "founding of Riga" to History of Riga and the abbreviated version here to Riga. Comments solicited, as my re-do of Riga's history will likely continue in the same vein. At this point I'm leaning toward sectioning the History of Riga article century by century, then seeing what makes sense as I summarize that for here. I wasn't planning to do History of Riga, however, as it didn't seem to have much more or different than here, I decided to address that too. Time permitting, perhaps another installment in a week or so. VЄСRUМВА  ☎  00:44, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Well done. I have fixed the citation technique and some minor stuff. ^Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\^Work 20:12, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks to you and others cleaning up behind me! More history to come. Writing the "long" version for History of Riga and then condensing for here looks like the way I'll go. I think I'll just let the content dictate the section headings. :-) VЄСRUМВА  ☎  03:05, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Laying groundwork for the next section of history has resulted in a bunch of edits at the non-abridged History of Riga "founding" section. I think the best course would be for any interested folk to follow there with comments and suggestions, then do a separate and subsequent effort to abridge and replace the history section here. VЄСRUМВА  ☎  16:04, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Dividing workload

Over the next couple of weeks I am going to work on the geography, demograhics, infrastructure and culture sections of this article. Needs a lot of work if the sections should not have abundance of red linked articles. At the same time I will gather references to dig deeper and create uncondensed articles as Geography of Riga and Culture in Riga (or similar titles). Anyone interested in working on the economy, education sections and the sports subsection? ^Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\^Work 22:52, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

The LV WP article has a whole separate section on the evolution of the city ramparts. I was thinking that might be of enough separate interest—but it would definitely need to be rewritten for someone not familiar with Riga and also require a map if possible. VЄСRUМВА  ☎  23:55, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Latvia Family History

I am researching my husband's family who came from Latvia. He was born in China, as was his father, but his grandparents came from Latvia in the early 1900's, his grandmother being born in Riga. I was wondering whether Birth, Death and Marriage and other records are kept in Latvia and whether they are accessible. I would be very interested in finding out more if anyone would be able to suggest where i would be able to contact about this, I would really appreciate it.ThanksAnnafritz (talk) 07:26, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

this isn't really the place for this but here you go: http://www.arhivi.lv/index.php?&110 good luck! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Unlikelylads (talk • contribs) 08:20, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

The records are available online here: http://www.lvva-raduraksti.lv/ but you probably will need an expert to decipher them ~~Xil (talk) 23:19, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

demographics in WWI

I see that the population of Riga dropped dramatically during/after WWI. But there is no explanation of why in the article. Could you add that? David s graff (talk) 17:22, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Reference

Here's a list [1] in Latvian of important milestones, this can be used to structure and mention major events.—  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 21:24, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

An offer on what to do with this

I quickly went over the article and noted few issues on which I would like to hear some comments - I observe history section at large is based on rather old sources, which is a problem because they may be based on guesswork of the author rather than realistic data. It also gives undue emphasis to events in 13th century - having section Hanseatic League, Holy Roman Empire, Lithuania, the Swedish and Russian Empires, the Soviet Union and Latvia is ridiculous, it should be just history, most information from subsections could be moved to other, more relevant articles (articles on Livonian crusade and Bishop Albert). Etymology could be explained in separate section. And I thin parts of the history section are more relevant to Latvia or Livonia in general, not to Riga. I dislike the sections on cityscape, buildings and theatres - Wikipedia shouldn't serve as sightseeing guide, besides list of things to see could get quite long and selecting most notable sights is slightly POV, a description of architectural styles and more general culture section might be a better idea. As for neighbourhoods the list is uneven - it lists larger regions, such as Pārdaugava together with their parts and doesn't mention others. Riga city development planers have made more structured division, which could be used, however it has become a controversy on Latvian Wikipedia. Economy section could give less emphasis to particular objects and projects. Infrastructure, at its current state, seems well written, however perhaps should be titled transportation. The crime section contains one sentence which seems exaggerated to me should perhaps be removed. The sports section should be expanded to list more types of sports and unnotable facts - nobody cares what TTT Riga (does it even still exist ?) did thirty years ago and even more, Riga being home to most sports federations in Latvia, each of them shouldn't be mentioned here, especially if it is of such obscure sport as bandy. Universities section should be expanded into more general education or science & research section. Plus I am uncertain how significant issue tow twining is - last time I checked this list I couldn't found references on all cities listed indeed being sister cities to Riga ~~Xil (talk) 10:32, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps listing only administrative regions is better idea than neighbourhoods ~~Xil (talk) 02:20, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, thank you for your praise on the infrastructure bit, some of it was my work. Infrastructure at the moment only contains transportation related stuff, but could also contain other infrastructurial matters such as sanitation, energy, waste disposal etc. All things that makes a metropole function, i.e. infrastructure. Then of course there should be subheaders for this as well.

I have made a bold decision and moved neighbourhoods out of the geography section to Administrative divisions of Riga - the cityscape section is soon to follow, and I agree with you so far, that the text here should be spread out into Architecture of Riga and perhaps Visitor attractions of Riga or something similar.

Some of the other things you mention - be my guest and knock yourself out! ^Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\^Work 10:56, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Philaweb, sorry to rain on your parade, but what you split is not administrative divisons - if you inted to keep the conten you may want to rename the article (how's simply divisons ?), though after all arguments about the matter on lv.wiki I'm happy to see them go. I figure we should copy subsection I linked from Latvian Wikipedia here (and nothing else). ~~Xil (talk) 11:33, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

No rain on any parade. Did you notice the "underconstruction" template? I am certainly not finished with that article, yet. ^Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\^Work 12:05, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I figured, however, that you have chosen a title under which to leave it. Anyway, I moved sights to another article, removed the crime section and updated twin cities section (though I am confused that some cities still don't appear in iga.lv list, despite it having been updated). I'll try to do some research on architecture. BTW Paris has a good structure for cityscape ~~Xil (talk) 12:22, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

No Cat House?

Wow, no mention of the supposedly famous cat house? Type "cat riga" into Google or google images. I was only recently told about it, so I'm not adding it to the article. 188.204.147.121 (talk) 07:11, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Why should an article on city detail one house ? It`s not like it was the only example of art noveau architecture in town ~~Xil (talk) 16:11, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Wrote a stu on it - see Cat house (Riga) ~~Xil (talk) 20:26, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Sister cities

A recent edit by User:174.112.138.72 added Vaughan, Canada, as a sister city of Riga. However, neither of the Twin cities of Riga or the City of Vaughan International Partnerships official sites currently lists the other city as a twin.

The WP article on Vaughan did show a sister city relationship, with a date of 1968. It is possible that such a relationship may have existed in the past - but an establishment date of 1968 seems extremely unlikely. I have therefore removed the reference from both articles. Bahudhara (talk) 06:12, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Dscf3812la2.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Dscf3812la2.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:56, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

List of tallest buildings

I don't see this is necessary at all. hardly any of them are notable, and this is not Dubai or Shanghai where people compete to build the tallest. LibStar (talk) 03:19, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Transportations

Could some one tell me about the transports in Riga...is there a metro, is it easy to use the transports, prices, etc. Does anyone know how far is Riga from Ventspils? Tnx

Nope, there is no metro currently in Riga, but there is a wide network of city trams, buses and other public transportations. Tickets in most public transports cost 0.30Ls (30 santims, $0.20-0.23). Well, I guess, that useage of transports isn't much more complicated than in other countires/cities :) And the distance between Riga and Ventspils is 159km, but the highway between them is ~200km long.

--The thruth is in here 16:26, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Now the transportation cost is higher, since introduction of e-talon. The cost of all trams, buses, trolleys without e-talons is 0.70 LVL, with e-talons it costs 0.50 LVL for everyone and 0.25 LVL for students. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.30.138.9 (talk) 10:02, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Saules Akmens (p8290783).jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Saules Akmens (p8290783).jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Saules Akmens (p8290783).jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 22:56, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

"Highest crime rate in Europe"

I've removed this section: "Between 1996 and 2002, Riga had the second highest murder rate of any capital city in Europe (behind Moscow), and in 2008 it was named "Europe crime capital" by Forbes.[2]" The part about Moscow is completely unsourced and the Baltic Times article refers to Latvia, not Riga. In any event, the opinion of Forbes magazine is that of one source and shouldn't be given undue weight per WP:UNDUE. The Council of Europe's own figures in the European Sourcebook of Crime and Criminal Justice Statistics 4th edition 2010 here show Latvia's recorded crime rate to be the fifth lowest of EU countries ahead of Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia and Cyprus. Of course this most likely relates to a variety of factors including crime reporting, crime detection, competence of the police etc however this information would need to be presented in a more balanced way than presenting the word of Forbes as the Gospel truth. Valenciano (talk) 19:30, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

By the way, last year Riga has the highest murder rate in all Europe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.84.1.247 (talk) 12:54, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

If you can provide a source that says that, we can include it. Valenciano (talk) 06:20, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

2014 World Choir Games

In the run-up to the World Choir Games next year, it would be nice to see some more info added about the event. This is by far the largest event of its kind in the world and would bring a lot of exposure to Riga within the culturally inclined population of the world. I have been to three past World Choir Games and could add a lot of info on the event itself, but I'm quite unfamiliar with Riga/Latvia, so won't necessarily be able to add relevant info. Maybe in conjunction with someone from Riga, we could build a proper section on the event. Please feel free to contact me if you are interested in doing so. Janneman27 (talk) 09:34, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

First of all there is such section already. But I seriously doubt that was a good idea as this article should describe the city, not one time events taking place in it - all other major events have gotten exactly one line in lead section. IMHO this should be the same and that section should be removed and probably added to article on the event itself (although it doesn't seem to contain much of original information) ~~Xil (talk) 03:20, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Xil, the World Choir Games article needs the information more than the Riga article. ^Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\^Work 20:06, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Riga Metro Population

The Riga Planning Region is definitely NOT Riga metro area. Its not even remotely close. The Riga Planning Region includes large towns that are a 1.5 hour drive away from Riga (like Limbaži). Nobody from Limbaži commutes to work in Riga.

AFAIK, there are no official statistics of a metro area. The concept hasn't actually caught on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.92.61.11 (talk) 19:44, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Repatriation of Baltic Germans

The article currently states that "By the end of the war the Baltic Germans were forcibly repatriated to Germany.". As "repatriate" means to send back to one's own country, the term would appear at best contentious here, if not plain wrong, as, as far as I am aware, the vast majority of those sent to Germany would never have been there, let alone born or having lived there. The Baltic Germans article uses the term "resettlement" (no use of "repatriate"), which may be more neutral and preferable to the term I used in an edit to amend the sentence, "expelled". My edit was reverted with the summary "this implies that one party expelled them, when actually it was result of bilateral agreement and was officially called repatriation". Details of this agreement would be useful, in regard to when it was made and thus which German regime was involved and what the official term in the respective languages was, as English would not have been the language of either of them so "repatriate", per se, would not have been the word. If the only reasonable translation of the term in the agreement is "repatriate" we are not obliged to use it if a loaded term, or use it without commentary at least. If this was 1944, by which all but a tiny number had fled according to the Baltic Germans article, the two parties were at war so presumably not in a position to make agreements. If it was post-war, that this regarded very small numbers would be worth noting. That said, the sentence in the article does seems rather ambiguously phrased - is "had been" rather than "were" intended, in which case agreements don't come into play, or is "at" rather than "by" intended? Mutt Lunker (talk) 14:53, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

I have made some changes to the text, since most of the Baltic Germans were resettled in 1939, hence prior to Operation Barbarossa. It might have been that the resettling was called "repatriation", but the use of this word does need some explanation. ^Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\^Work 19:07, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Mutt Lunker (talk) 20:07, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Returning to one's country isn't always limited to returning to country of birth or citizenship, the term is also used for when a person resettling to supposed homeland of his or her people (such as a nation state with that people being the ethnic majority). Since you're doubting that this is true in English as well, note that article on repatriation details such scenario as well ~~Xil (talk) 01:55, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Ok but @Philaweb's rewording more fully and accurately explains matters now and without the potential ambiguity of reference to repatriation. Mutt Lunker (talk) 09:34, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Ethnic composition

Something is wrong with ethnic composition now. Actually in 2019 Latvians made up 44,42% of population, Russians 37,03%, Ukrainians 3,65% , Belarussians 3,62% etc. Velirand (talk) 11:09, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

You're right, it was an anonyme vandalism (+10% for Latvians and -10% for Russians). I edited now it (my official source gives a little another data than yours, but similar). --Egilus (talk) 11:44, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Downtownofriga.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:22, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

“Primate city”

User:Žemėpatis reverts this change with the rationale, “Primate city is not about size, but about rank/population ratio compared to other cities of the country.” The rationale is a misunderstanding of why the text was structured as it was. The text before Žemėpatis’s reversion read, Being home to 632,614 inhabitants (2019), which is a third of Latvia's population, it is large enough to be the country's primate city. This text does not mean “Riga is Latvia’s primate city because the definition of ‘primate city’ is to have 632,614 inhabits and achieve a third of the country’s population”. The text means that, in Latvia’s circumstances (which includes comparisons against its other cities), Riga’s population suffices to make it the primate city. Meanwhile Žemėpatis’s edit restores the editorially offensive redundancy of Riga is the capital, the largest and primate city. It has other editorially poor elements. I have reverted. Strebe (talk) 16:58, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Please read and understand the definition of the term "Primate city". Riga is primate city not because it is "large enough", but because it is significantly larger than other cities of Latvia. Not every city, which is "large enough" is a primal city of a country. Primate city is not about being large enough, but about comparisons to other cities in the country. Your edit was a complete misunderstanding of the term. Žemėpatis (talk) 17:17, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Your edit was a complete misunderstanding of English. I agree with what you say about the meaning of primate city. I disagree with how you read my edit. I already carefully explained what my edit means. My edit does not mean what you keep saying it means. Your edit is poor English. Please stop. Strebe (talk) 17:39, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Riga, Latvia.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:53, 9 November 2019 (UTC)