Talk:List of cities and towns in Latvia

I tagged the Ex-cites of Latvia section bceause I'm not really clear as to what "Ex-cities" actually refers to. Is it that these places are no longer located within Latvia, have they been merged with outer cities.... ? Some kind of explaination should be given. Travelbird 00:12, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal[edit]

I oppose the proposal to merge List of cities in Latvia with Latvia. It would clutter up the Latvia article. Also, this is a list and should not be merge into an article. I don't know that we really need this list, but it doesn't belong in the Latvia article. RJFJR 14:34, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I second the motion of opposition for the same reasons. b_cubed

Keep the list[edit]

There seems to be an entire collection of countries with List-of-cities-in-XXX. It has a purpose. However, the Ex-Cities list, upon following their links, seems to refer to disputed historical territories. This should probably be clarified with a different title to "Ex-cities" (which might be interpreted as a biassed statement of former ownership) to something like "Regions of teritorial dispute" or "Cities once in Latvia/Russia, and Years of Latvian 'ownership' ". Comments? - Karlis Atvars

Ex-cities[edit]

It refers to cities that has lost their status as Latvian cities: Abrene - is not in Latvia anymore; Gostiņi - merged with Pļaviņas; Grīva - part of Daugavpils; Krustpils - now is part of Jēkabpils; Sloka, Rīgas Jūrmala, Ķemeri - together formed Todays' Jūrmala ; Lejasciems, Straupe, Koknese, Rauna, Sēlpils - simply don't qualify for status of city anymore. I`ve seen such lists in printed and proffesionaly edited form - it should not labeled POV just because there is teritorial dispute over one city. -- Xil/talk 19:00, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removing tags[edit]

Merge - because of the opposition above, cleanup - I explained what is "ex-cities" above. Soon I will add a decent explanation to article as well -- Xil/talk 13:23, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Split[edit]

Because former cities dosen't exactly fit in the scope of this list----Xil...sist! 16:38, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pilsetas=towns, lielpilsetas=cities?[edit]

Why was this moved ? There is no definition of towns in Latvian law and all related articles by now are refering to cities, while towns and villages are setlements without such official recognition ~~Xil (talk) 06:07, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why we could't call major cities just "cities" and regional - "towns"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kasp2008 (talk • contribs) 20:07, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why not, really? Ridiculous to call little villages of a few thousand (or a few hundred as Durbe) folk living there 'cities'. 'Pilsetas tiesibas' mean 'town rights' & not necessarily 'city rights'. --K, 3rd Nov 2008

City rights in this context has nothing to do with number of inhabitants. City rights were given by law and are privileges beyond that of a town and mostly dates back to historic events. Have a look at City of London for an example. ^Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\^Work 18:57, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, so we are discussing medieval history. Now why do you think German 'Stadtrecht' (& in consequence Latvian 'Pilsetas tiesibas') equals English 'City Rights'? Any books, encyclopaedias, internet links where one can learn that? I'm hardly a specialist in accepted historical or contemporary usage & correspondence of the terms in various languages, but IMHO correspondence of Pilseta=Stadt=Town & Lielpilseta=Großstädt=City is near perfect. To my understanding 'Stadtrecht' historically granted to Latvian settlements are 'Town Rights' historically given to English villages. Or isn't it? --K (Apologies didn't sign it before, only just learned of signatures & how to draw 'em. A wikipedia ignoramus, me)Karlis44 (talk) 13:20, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Town rights[edit]

Um, there is a bit of problem - there are contradictions as to when some towns first got town rights and some apparently have had their rights revoked for some time and then restored, obviously some records have been lost to history too. So maybe it would be better to lose this column as explaing these issues could take too much space and there is no certainty ? ~~Xil (talk) 14:25, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is OK with me to remove the info from this article. ^Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\^Work 17:24, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chatuchak?!![edit]

During this week (according to the history of this article), someone named Gunmito has modified the article to add informations about Chatuchak, district of Bangkok. This has, obviously, nothing to do with Latvian cities and towns, and should be removed. Also I remembered there was a list of the towns, and not only the cities, that seems to have disappeared. This should come back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.65.192.84 (talk) 08:58, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of cities and towns in Latvia. 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:

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) 19:42, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]