Talk:Nemenčinė

WP:UNDUE

Placing the Polish name for this small town in the lead, which prior to the Second World War, was primarily a Litvak shtetl, is undue and unnecessary. Dr. Dan (talk) 19:26, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

How about the fact that 55% of the current population is Polish?radek (talk) 20:35, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

So where would you put it? Once again, you've removed (instead of simply moving) information from Wikipedia, and once again, it's not the German name for a French town, or Swedish name for a Finnish town, or any of the countless other places where Wikipedia routinely includes alternative names for places (and yes, usually in the lead), but as always - it's a Polish name for a Lithuanian town. How am I supposed not to conclude that you have something specifically against Poland or Polishness?--Kotniski (talk) 09:05, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Since Dr. Dan is concerned about the "Lithuanian Jews", I added the Yiddish name to make him happy. - Darwinek (talk) 13:15, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

incorrect ... well, inaccurate, info

Re other versions of the name include Nementchin (נעמענטשין) in Yiddish, Niemenczyn in Polish. Actually "Nementchin" isn't used much in Yiddish [1] (3 hits). Generally the Yiddish name is the same as the Polish name "Niemenczyn": [2] (39 hits of which 6 out of the first 10 have to do with Jewish history (page actually gives 45 but I looked through them and 6 of them are non-English)). (Nemenčinė gets about 69 hits; 97 minus 28 non-English ones I counted [3]radek (talk) 20:32, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

I don't know anything about the Yiddish names, but I don't see the relevance of these searches - you'd need to search sources written in Yiddish, not English.--Kotniski (talk) 09:21, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Name in lead

Sorry to offend anyone's sensitivities, but this place is more than 50% inhabited by Poles - there can't be any reasonable doubt that the Polish name belongs in the lead in this case.--Kotniski (talk) 08:17, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Sorry but people keep removing this without joining in the discussion. I know it's "already present in the names section", but this is a far more significant name than any others in that section, being (apparently) the name used for the place even today by the majority of its inhabitants. If it was in South Tyrol, the Polish name would be the title of the article - I don't think that should be the case, but certainly by normal Wikipedia standards, a name of that level of significance would always be placed in the lead, even if it's mentioned further in the article as well.--Kotniski (talk) 10:19, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Claiming that Polish people live there is irrelevant. Now, if you have reliable sources that they use the Polish-language name instead of what's apparently the current legal name of the city, that would be useful. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 11:20, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Er, why is it irrelevant? Presumably they (and most others) use the Polish-language name when speaking Polish (for example, the agreement downloadable from here, an official document signed by the town's elder and regional mayor, uses Niemenczyn). Why is there such resistance (I'm genuinely curious to know) among editors of Lithuania-related articles to doing something that everywhere else in Wikipedia is accepted without question?--Kotniski (talk) 12:13, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Claiming that Polish people live there is irrelevant. It's really appalling to hear such nonsense from a Wikipedia Administrator. Far for being irrelevant, it's the decisive reason for inclusion here. In fact even if there would a significant historical population it would be enough for inclusion but here the Poles are even the majority of the population. It's an almost tragicomic situation, there are many Polish cities and towns which have the German name in the lead, even if there are no Germans living there, but because more than 60 years ago Germans lived there. Here the majority of the population is Polish and we have to go trough all this crazy drama.  Dr. Loosmark  15:20, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Again. It's not who lives there -- it's what they call it. Sources, please. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 15:56, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Well I've just given one pretty conclusive source - Googling reveals countless others of various types. What exactly is the problem here?--Kotniski (talk) 16:54, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Sarek I don't know if you are from US or what but in Europe I don't think there is any minority, anywhere, which would not use their native tongue for the name of the location they live in.  Dr. Loosmark  17:07, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Umm, above it's stated several times that Polish people form the majority in Nemenčinė. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:26, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

But they do, which make it even more obvious that the Polish name should be in the lead. My point is that even if there would a minority the name should be in lead. Here it's much more than that so it's very obvious the Polish name should be there.  Dr. Loosmark  21:07, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Local Poles most certainly call the place "Niemenczyn". In fact they do so despite attempts by the Lithuanian government to suppress such usage (this anti-Polish names thing on Wikipedia basically parallels the same phenomenon found among some, more extremist, Lithuanian politicians who like to pretend that there are no Poles in Lithuania only "confused Lithuanians" [4] and outlaw the public usage of Polish). Here are some sources:

• Dzienik Polski na Litwie - a story about the UNPRECEDENTED (!) usage of signs in both Polish and Lithuanian by Polish owned private bus companies with specific reference to Niemenczyn. In the past bus companies which used signs in both Polish and Lithuanian, as opposed to just Lithuanian, were subject to fines and harassment by authorities [5]. Imagine the kind of stink that would arise if some private business in Houston was fined for using Spanish.
• Samorzad Rejonu Wilenskiego - local government of the Vilnius region.
• Magazyn Wilenski - another Polish language newspaper from the Vilnius region. Again uses Niemenczyn.

Of course all these sources are in Polish. But apparently SoV was asking for sources which show that local Poles use the term "Niemenczyn". Here they be. There are more as a simple google search easily indicates.radek (talk) 22:01, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Split

"Of course all these sources are in Polish", and are therefore the final word as to what needs to be done here. Indeed. But my, my, how the matter has come full circle in the last ninety-one years. In 1919, when the Lithuanian dictator of Poland Pilsudski, issued his famous Proclamation to the inhabitants of the former Grand Duchy of Lithuania bilingually (even though according to many of you, only 2% of the regions inhabitants spoke Lithuanian, in these erstwhile "Polish" lands), today the Samorzad Rejonu Wilenskiego is gracious enough to actually allow the Lithuanian language [6], as an alternative language at their web site. This is especially gracious of them considering that they are operating out of Lithuania. Dr. Dan (talk) 00:39, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

And once again Dr. Dan starts talking about completely irrelevant things.radek (talk) 01:02, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

And the hey, i'm reformed user goes into accusing Lithuanian government just above. Over and over. Lokyz (talk) 01:49, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

And what in heck does that have to do with anything, except as a personal attack?radek (talk) 01:54, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

(OD) "And once again Dr. Dan starts talking about completely irrelevant things", I know Radeksz, mea culpa. Things like "this anti-Polish names thing on Wikipedia basically parallels the same phenomenon found among some, more extremist, Lithuanian politicians who like to pretend that there are no Poles in Lithuania only "confused Lithuanians" [7] and outlaw the public usage of Polish" are only relevant if you say them. Dr. Dan (talk) 01:58, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

They are completely relevant to the topic we are discussing. One source in particular is about how using the name "Niemenczyn" on private buses is a BIG DEAL in Lithuania.radek (talk) 02:12, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

BIG DEAL - nevermind the caps, is there an owner of some private transportation company, is there anyone interested on investing into wikipedia editors to promote specific transportation firm? I'm a bit confused what this "big deal" meansLokyz (talk) 02:39, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

What on earth are you talking about? It's a big deal because up until now, Lithuanian government repressed anyone trying to use bilingual signs on their private businesses. In rest of Europe you see signs in all kinds of languages and it is generally assumed that what language someone wants to advertise their private business in is their own choice. Not so in Lithuania were you get fined if you try to use Polish (along with Lithuanian). Up until now it seems, though we'll see how the story unfolds. So in that sense it's a "big deal". I have no idea what you're trying to say - you seem to be implying that some Polish owned Lithuanian bus company is paying off Wikipedia editors or something. Sorry.radek (talk) 03:01, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh. "phenomenon found among some, more extremist, Lithuanian politicians who like to pretend that there are no Poles in Lithuania". Really? Is this your reason to start this WP:DRAMA and put Polish rendering of names in Lithuanian villages names? WP:POINT maybe? Or WP:POV bashing? Talk:Seredžius is rather illustrative. And the coordinated pressure at my personal talk page with ridiculous question - why cyrillic, and the plethora of former(??) EEML users at my talk in an hour. Think about it and try to look from a different perspective.Lokyz (talk) 10:13, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Lokyz, who are these "plethora" of former EEML users at your talk? Who are you referring to? Remember, "plethora" means "many". So who exactly? This isn't DRAMA - it's discussion, and a possible reason for the behavior of some Lithuanian editors.radek (talk) 22:50, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

(outdent) Ok, look. SarekOfVulcan said: if you have reliable sources that they (the Polish majority in the town - r) use the Polish-language name instead of what's apparently the current legal name of the city, that would be useful. (I have no idea what the word "legal" in that sentence is supposed to mean, but nm). I've provided sources which show that Poles in the town do in fact use "Niemenczyn". In fact the original request - to show that Poles in the city use its Polish name - was a bit weird, but ok. Here's the sources. All this other stuff about Pilsudski etc. is off topic and irrelevant. If people want to discuss current Lithuanian politics instead, I'd be happy to do so on their talk page.radek (talk) 02:58, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Look, irrelevancies aside, does anyone have any remaining reasons for not placing the name used in the language spoken by the majority population in this town in the lead right after the official name of the place, as it would be anywhere else in Wikipedia where such a situation was known to exist?--Kotniski (talk) 09:44, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Technically majority of Lithuanian Poles does not speak standard Polish, but local dialect sometimes informally called "po prostu" which is a mix of Polish-Russian-Belorussian-Lithuanian languages. Russian is also a native language to many Lithuanian Poles, couple decades ago it was even more popular than Polish among Lithuanian Poles. But sorry to interrupt. Please carry on. But I must say that this whole thing looks stupid to me. Don't you all have nothing better to do? —Preceding unsigned comment added by AndPau (talk • contribs) 12:39, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

AndPau, I will certainly agree with you about "po prostu". Having had the experience of conversing with many "Lithuanian Poles" in Polish, I can tell you that it's not as easy as you might think. As I've said earlier, there is frequently a humorous quality to the dialect. Kind of like when someone's Auntie (third generation) comes to visit relatives in Poland from Cleveland, Ohio, and "thinks" she can speak Polish. Dr. Dan (talk) 15:27, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, yes, this is the official line of certain Lithuanian politicians, as well as extremists of organizations like Vilnija, who try to pretend that there is no Poles in Lithuania only "confused Lithuanians" or "confused Belarusians". And they use this as an excuse to ban private bilingual signs or to refuse the right of people who identify as Polish to write their own names down in the way they would like to. Read the articles I provided, they pretty clearly show these people are Polish.radek (talk) 19:00, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Who is saying that there are no Poles in Lithuania? The question was what language is spoken by Poles in Lithuania. Sorry, but po prostu is not identical to Polish, but obviously that does not mean that people who speak this dialect are not Poles. If topic is language spoken by Poles in Lithuania - then the Russian is also tremendously significant. Even now one third primary Polish school pupils prefer Russian to Polish. Among Soviet generation due to the obvious reasons the percentage must be way higher. In fact one language is spoken at home only in 25% percent of Polish families. Russian is second most popular with 66% percent that speak Russian also at home, according to 2010 data. And Vilnija what has to with it? Jesus Christ, how many members they have? Ten? This is stupid. AndPau (talk) 19:40, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

To answer your question, the language spoken by Poles in Lithuania is Polish. And yes their Polish is a bit different than the one spoken in Warsaw or Poznań. Big surprise, do you think that say the Spanish in Spain is same as the one in Argentina? Me think not. Yes, the majority of Poles also know Lithuanian and older generations might know Russian as well, but it's the same with Lithuanians for that matter, as the Russian was the main language in the Soviet Union. It's irrelevant for our discussion here. One third of Polish primary school pupils prefer Russian to Polish!? Right, whatever. Please let's stop this "Poles don't really speak Polish but some unknown XY language", "Poles prefer to speak Russian" etc etc etc nonsense. Time to cut the crap.  Dr. Loosmark  20:28, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Sure we can tell Tilburg university (The Netherlands) staff to cut the crap on their nonsense, but I doubt they would take this proposition seriously, because that's where data is from. This conversation is too stupid to continue, I'm out. AndPau (talk) 20:37, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm still in. I'm happy to hear Loosmark say "Yes, the majority of Poles also know Lithuanian..." (presumably he means in Lithuania). I guess it boils down to a person can claim to be anything they want to be. And that's that. Language ultimately is not the bottom line. It has significance, but it's not the bottom line. Pilsudski could speak Russian, John Paul II could speak Italian. So what? And Radeksz, this business about "confusion", i.e., "confused Lithuanians" or "confused Belarusians", is that a theory concocted by you, or do to have a citation from a newspaper article or tygodnik that you can link everyone to? Dr. Dan (talk) 22:37, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

I think that when a group of people put out a newspaper in a particular language, which includes articles about how they'd like to use that language in public but are prevented from doing so by government authorities, and when they refer to themselves and their language as Polish... I think that means they're Polish. Crazy me.radek (talk) 22:47, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Maybe so, maybe not. But the confusion part, is that your opinion or do you have a source for it? Dr. Dan (talk) 22:52, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, the three which I just provided!radek (talk) 23:13, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Is that so? All three of your sources claim that there are certain Lithuanian politicians... who pretend that there is (sic) no Poles in Lithuania, only "confused Lithuanians" or "confused Belarusians"? I read your sources, I don't think they claim that. Perhaps you are personally interpolating something, maybe that's your opinion. Please don't try to palm something off to people reading this thread, who don't read Polish, and might believe you. Dr. Dan (talk) 02:12, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Sigh... no Dan. The three sources show that the Poles in Niemenczyn use Niemenczyn as the name of this town. That's what SarekOfVulcan asked for sources for and that's what I provided. These three sources also address your and AndPau's contentions that somehow the Poles in Niemenczyn aren't "real Poles" or something. The confusion arises because once again you managed to hijack the discussion into irrelevant topics.

Like, I said, if you want to discuss modern Lithuanian politics, I'd be happy to do so on your talk page. Sources for forced Lithuanization policies of certain Lithuanian organizations and politicians can certainly be provided. But as of now, nobody's trying to write about the discrimination against Poles in Lithuania in THIS particular article (and the info probably belongs in Poles in Lithuania anyway). Hence there's no need to provide sources here - we're only addressing some weird comments where some editors think that Poles in Lithuania aren't real Poles.radek (talk) 02:23, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Your allegation that I am "try(ing) to palm something off to people... who don't read Polish" is a blatant example of bad faith and a personal attack. Please retract it.radek (talk) 02:24, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

(Outdent) Radeksz please. "Hijack the discussion". And I'm guilty of bad faith? Let me quote you, "Yes, yes, this is the official line of certain Lithuanian politicians, as well as extremists of organizations like Vilnija, who try to pretend that there is no Poles (sic) in Lithuania only "confused Lithuanians" or "confused Belarusians"." My question to you was, "And Radeksz, this business about "confusion", i.e., "confused Lithuanians" or "confused Belarusians", is that a theory concocted by you, or do to have a citation from a newspaper article or tygodnik that you can link everyone to? ...is that your opinion or do you have a source for it"? And you responded with "Yes, the three which I just provided!" Well, the three sources which you provided say nothing of the sort. Are you saying that they do? No bad faith, no personal attack. Please show me where your sources, reflect your statement about confusion and you'll get your retraction. I think AndPau did the right thing by bailing out. Dr. Dan (talk) 03:30, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Like I said, discussion of contemporary Lithuanian politics belong somewhere else. So do weird statements about how the Poles in Lithuania aren't real Poles, whatever that means. What was asked for - and what I provided - here was sources to document that Poles in the town of Niemenczyn use the name Niemenczyn.radek (talk) 03:34, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Sure, but that's not what I asked you. You, on the other hand, clearly stated that the answer to my question was in the "three" sources you provided. Yet, that's not the case. Just forget it. Dr. Dan (talk) 03:44, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Now it's interesting again. Since I'm mentioned in this context " AndPau's contentions that somehow the Poles in Niemenczyn aren't "real Poles". Where did I say that? Can I have my qoute please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AndPau (talk • contribs) 10:58, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

What you said was "Technically majority of Lithuanian Poles does not speak standard Polish, but local dialect sometimes informally called "po prostu" which is a mix of Polish-Russian-Belorussian-Lithuanian languages. Russian is also a native language to many Lithuanian Poles, couple decades ago it was even more popular than Polish among Lithuanian Poles." - which more or less implies it, and the implication is particularly clear if one is aware of some of the things that have been said by Lithuanian politicians and activists over the years.radek (talk) 21:38, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

what, are you already back? I thought the conversation was too stupid for you.  Dr. Loosmark  12:48, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

"Stupid is as stupid does" -Forrest Gump. AndPau left because he felt this thread was stupid. He returned because he resented a remark attributed to him that he never made. I wouldn't expect a retraction, if I were him. I think Radeksz claimed that it was supposedly my contention too. I don't expect a retraction either. Radeksz is entitled to believe what he thinks is true. He simply shouldn't verbalize his beliefs and thoughts into "contentions" that were never made by others. Sound reasonable? Dr. Dan (talk) 21:22, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, you told us some story about some Aunt from Cleveland or something with the same implication as AndPau's remarks. I will verbalize(sic) (actually "write down") my thoughts as I like, tyvm.radek (talk) 21:38, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Dan, you seem to have the surprising ability to read the mind of the editor AndPau and act as his spokesman. Btw Radeksz's analysis was quite correct but I am not surprised you guys now try to backpedal yourself out of the claims that it's not known which language the Poles in Lithuania speak. If I would claim something as dumb, I would probably try that myself, although to be totally honest, I would never claim anything as absurd in the first place.  Dr. Loosmark  21:57, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Loosmark, who's acting as who's spokesman at the moment? Hmm! Certainly not you, right? Claiming such a thing would be absurd, wouldn't it? And Radeksz, it wasn't my Auntie, but the lady in question was absolutely 100% Polish. No doubt about that. Btw Radeksz, wasn't it you who said your grandfather spoke Lithuanian? Or am I confused about that too? If in fact he did, would that relate in anyway to his ethnicity? And Loosmark, shouldn't you be careful about using terms like "backpedal", it's kind of like my assertion of "palming something off", and Radeksz might ask you to retract that. Dr. Dan (talk) 03:25, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

"Re:what, are you already back? I thought the conversation was too stupid for you. Dr. Loosmark 12:48, 22 August 2010 (UTC)" I'll just cite Wikipedia deffinition of trolling - "In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into a desired emotional response" This post fits deffinition perfectly, because it has no connection to my request of clarification directed at Radek, it has nothing to do with the topic of language spoken by Polish community and it can't be replied so, that a reply would fit topic that is being discussed. So this my only response to this. Any other future troll posts will be simply ignored by me. As for the rest I can break it down my reply bit by bit

Re:"the language spoken by Poles in Lithuania is Polish".

INCORRECT. The languages spoken (as mother tongue or at home) by Poles in Lithuania are Polish, Russian, Lithuanian and mowa prosta or jezyk tutejszy of course.

Re:". And yes their Polish is a bit different than the one spoken in Warsaw or Poznan„. Big surprise, do you think that say the Spanish in Spain is same as the one in Argentina?". WRONG AGAIN. Jezyk tutejszy is basically an uncodified Belarusian vernacular for one. Surely it has a lot common with Polish language but to say that it is simply Polish and Polish only, or just Belarusian, would be a simplification. Anyway the varieties of Polish which came into existence in southern and eastern Lithuania cannot be considered a prolongation of the main Polish speaking territory.

Re:"Yes, the majority of Poles also know Lithuanian and older generations might know Russian as well"

NOPE it is not what we are talking about. There is big difference between language that is spoken at home environment and not about foreign languages that people are able to speak. Many Lithuanian Poles not "know Russian", they speak it at home.

Re:"I am not surprised you guys now try to backpedal yourself out of the claims that it's not known which language the Poles in Lithuania speak. If I would claim something as dumb, I would probably try that myself, although to be totally honest, I would never claim anything as absurd in the first place."

The part of this post that is not pure trolling can be replied simply. Neither part of this discussion except Dr. Loosmark himself ever made a claim that it's not known which language the Poles in Lithuania speak. Because it is known. I'll repeat again that the languages spoken by Poles in Lithuania are Polish, Russian, Lithuanian and mowa prosta or jezyk tutejszy which vernaculat of Belarusian language.

Re:(Radeksz)"which more or less implies it" The answer is NO it does not imply that. It does not imply it more, it does not imply less, it does not imply it at all. It is you and only you that is using and pushing in this discussion a definition "real Poles" which does not have any sense from scientific point of view. Closest to scientific description of that term I could come is this [8]. Is that what you have in mind I'm not sure? Still it does not make sense to me, so I strongly object to this or future attempts, that I hope would not happen, to put in words in my mouth that were not spoken by me. AndPau (talk) 14:24, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

I suggest you withdraw accusations of trolling as it is in direct violation of WP:civil. As for the rest of your post, apart from being full of nonsensical original research, it seems you also have no idea about the difference between mother tongue and a second language.  Dr. Loosmark  15:10, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Nemenčinė. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150801051703/http://osp.stat.gov.lt/en/2011-m.-surasymas to http://osp.stat.gov.lt/en/2011-m.-surasymas

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:11, 24 December 2017 (UTC)