13:21, 4 rugpjūčio 2020 versija taisyti Turaids (aptarimas \| indėlis) 528 keitimai Nėra keitimo santraukos ← Prieš tai darytas keitimas		13:23, 4 rugpjūčio 2020 versija taisyti anuliuoti Turaids (aptarimas \| indėlis) 528 keitimai SNėra keitimo santraukos Kitas pakeitimas →
Eilutė 1 723: ::::::::::Well, there's quite a difference between Kaliningrada and Karaliaučius, for example. Both are Lithuanised names, but one has nothing to do with the current official name. We also Latvianise toponyms in Latvian Wikipedia, but we don't call [[:lv:Pitalova\|Pytalovo]] Abrene. –[[Naudotojas:Turaids\|Turaids]] ([[Naudotojo aptarimas:Turaids\|aptarimas]]) 16:47, 3 rugpjūčio 2020 (EEST) :::::::::::I don't think anyone is looking at that as a political problem, I would not even see a problem, if there will be the Polish names in Vilnius region municipalities, as there is a sizeable minority speaking Polish and using a bit different forms (that is problably the reason why nobody cared much about the Samogitian place names as these are widely used). The idea of placing historical names in infobox is to remove clutter and avoid identity politics - most of the towns have different historical German, Polish, Russian, Jewish, Latvian, Belorussian names plus many historical variations. Most of these names are obscure and not used anymore. In order not to start playing identity politics the consensus was that the first sentence has Lithuanian name and all the historical forms go to the infobox, preferrably with sources. I don't think there is any clear consensus about the other countries. I think if you would start adding the historical names for Latvian towns you will be the one who sets a standard there, and you can use the same infobox logic as with Lithuanian place names. Lithuanian traditional names for Lithuania Minor, Poland and partly Latvia is a bit different story, you can search and find discussions about it.--[[Naudotojas:Dirgela\|Dirgela]] ([[Naudotojo aptarimas:Dirgela\|aptarimas]]) 17:48, 3 rugpjūčio 2020 (EEST) ::::::::::::The paper I referred to describes how the Kurseniekiness of the region was downplayed (and probably overemphasised by Latvian authorities, to be fair) and obstacles were put in place by both Lithuanian and German authorities for Latvians to establish contacts with the Kursenieki. Now, I don't want to jump to conclusions and accuse anyone of anything, especially ~~because~~since my edits may also be seen as a political statement by some, so I'm just sharing my understanding. I still don't see how the use of historical Lithuanian names (the difference I highlighted in my previous comment) as article names for former Lithuanian cities goes together with avoiding identity politics, but that's fair enough, I'm not here to challenge that. My point was that just as it makes sense including the indigenous Latvian names for Latvian cities it would also ~~makes~~make sense to include the indigenous Kursenieki names for Kursenieki cities in the lead section. We're on the same page with not over cluttering the lead section with numerous historical names and variations. –[[Naudotojas:Turaids\|Turaids]] ([[Naudotojo aptarimas:Turaids\|aptarimas]]) 13:21, 4 rugpjūčio 2020 (EEST) == Novoaleksandrovsko ==

Dirgela