Talk:Vilnius

Polish military failure before Soviet arrival

Template:Ping regarding this. Prior to the Soviet invasion of Vilnius and its surroundings, Operation Ostra Brama is clearly a Template:Tq, as I wrote in the Vilnius article. As clearly written in the article Operation Ostra Brama: Template:Tq, Template:Tq. Furthermore,Template:Tq

After looking through the pl.wiki article, the military failure and even incompetence becomes even clearer: Template:Tq (last paragraph of the section Działania bojowe). In the section Samodzielne walki oddziałów Armii Krajowej (Independent fighting of the Home Army units):

Clearly, the added phrase Template:Tq was historically accurate and should be kept in the article.--Cukrakalnis (talk) 13:34, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

The goal of the operation was to liberate Vilnius, and AK succeded in that. The fact that operation was ill-prepared doesn't mean it was a military failure. You are confusing two simple things. Marcelus (talk) 13:39, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

The operation was a military failure. AK did not achieve what they wanted to achieve - i.e. taking over Vilnius before the Soviets. Operation Ostra Brama was a failure for its initiators, while the Battle of Vilnius (1944) that the Soviet Union fought was a Soviet victory, not a Polish one.

Template:Tq You are confusing that the phrase Template:Tq was about Polish attempts before Soviet arrival. Such a statement is historically accurate, no matter how you put it. Removing it is unjustified. Cukrakalnis (talk) 12:21, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

The goal of the operation was to liberate the city, preferably before the Soviets arrived and to demonstrate Polishness of the city. Out of those three goals only one wasn't achieved. The battle for Vilnius was a joint Polish and Soviet victory, especially since the diversion within the city was crucial Marcelus (talk) 16:26, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Page 55, The Warsaw Uprising of 1944 by Włodzimierz Borodziej (2006):

Template:Tq

Page 56 of the same book:

Template:Tq

Both clearly substantiate keeping Template:Tq in Template:Tq Cukrakalnis (talk) 16:47, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

I don't really see your point here, operation wasn't a failure, it just didn't achieve one of its goals, a politcal one to be exact Marcelus (talk) 20:05, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Population figures

Can someone fix the ridiculous first paragraph? It is not necessary to provide three different population figures in the first three sentences about the city. 2603:7001:9640:1:C07F:CCC8:AB53:5448 (talk) 18:30, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

I am planning to add a a new section called population, but due to my limited knowledge in Lithuanian popuation statistics, I humbly request everyone to help me out. Pimlokto (talk) 20:53, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

I am planning to add a a new section called population, but due to my limited knowledge in Lithuanian popuation statistics, I humbly request everyone to help me out. Pimlokto (talk) 20:53, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

I have added the population information with the same exact data under the demographic section. But the citation shows different population number from the number shown in the page. Would appreciate it if someone checked the citation. But for now, I am deleting the part in the introduction. The citations and the data will be preserved under the demographic section and as citations 14-17.

LAF dissolved

Apparently there is a point of contention over whether the LAF disbanded itself or was disbanded. Just pointing out the question: this article says self-disbanded: Template:Tq Right now I am as far as this article is concerned, doing a simple copy-edit and do not have an opinion on which is correct. I have also just seen a source for the Germans dissolving it. A point source as far as this article is concerned. Will come back to this. (somewhat later) Here is another source for the Germans dissolving it Template:Tq

Sources

Elinruby (talk) 08:32, 29 December 2023 (UTC)o Template:Ping since you asked about this the other day. I am on the wrong device to run machine translation but offhand am inclined to believe the more detailed Bubnys cite. Elinruby (talk) 12:22, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Template:Ping The Universal Lithuanian Encyclopedia (abbr. as VLE in Lithuanian) says in two articles (https://www.vle.lt/straipsnis/lietuviu-frontas/ and https://www.vle.lt/straipsnis/lietuviu-aktyvistu-frontas/) that the LAF was dissolved by the Germans and banned on 26 September 1941.

The Provisional Government of Lithuania disbanded after the Germans told it must stop functioning (https://www.vle.lt/straipsnis/lietuvos-laikinoji-vyriausybe-1/) on August 5, 1941. In this academic article (https://www.lkma.lt/site/archive/metrastis/XXVI/lkma-metrastis_t26_p511-527_Jegelevicius.pdf) it says that: "due to Nazi pressure the Government was forced to disband." The picture that emerges in my view is that the ProGov disbanded itself "against the will of itself and the nation" (as it said in its last statement) after German pressure.

Overall, considering what the sources say, LAF was clearly disbanded by the Germans with force, while the Provisional Government disbanded after German pressure against its will. It seems disingenuous to me to call it self-disbanding if someone else told them to do it, but maybe that does not matter for using that word. +JMJ+ (talk) 12:48, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

I think we have clear consensus: the provisional government and the LAF were disbanded by the Germans Marcelus (talk) 22:33, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Academic research about Wilno/Vilnius dispute

And it is about Wikipedia, so this very article (and related). In German, but https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110376357-011/html but OA, with downloadable PDF that machine translation tools should be able to translate without too much trouble... _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:53, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Third paragraph - multicultural character

@Blowwhite please stop disrespecting WP:AGF and reverting my good faith edit for no reason. What do you find wrong about the paragraph now in particular? Furthermore I have edited the sentence mentioning Jerusalem, because in the past it featured the word "Jerusalem" twice in one paragraph, which is a tad too much.

The city was noted for its multicultural population during the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, with contemporary sources comparing it to Babylon. Before World War II and the Holocaust, in the Second Polish Republic, Vilnius (then Wilno) was one of Europe's most important Jewish centers. Its Jewish influence had led Napoleon to compare it with Jerusalem, when he passed through in 1812. The city retains a multicultural character, with a sizable Polish population. Chick Pea Corea (talk) 18:54, 30 March 2025 (UTC)