Talk:Lietuvininkai we are born

Section
Lang lt twemplate refers to Lithuanian language and orthography, not Lietuvininks - use templates properly. Lietuvininks as such do not have language (or rather dialect) template. Stop disrupting Wikipedia.--Lokyz 08:34, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * You forgot base thing - Lietuwininkai used different orthography compared to Lithuanians. There was no such newspaper as Lietuviška Ceitunga. Lietuwininkai never used letter š. Stop falsify history. --Vulpes vulpes 08:52, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I repeat - this is Lithuanian language template you are using, not Lietuvininks. Lithuanian language does not have nor w neither ß but it does have š. Original writing is left, as it is not Lithuanian as you're trying to persuade - so don't use Lithuanian language template for this orthography.--Lokyz 09:11, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Are You afraid of the ß? What's the reason of transliteration? I know in Lithuanian all names and titles are lithuanized, but this is English WP, not Lithuanian. Lietuwininkai and Lithuanians used the same Lithuanian language. Would You say British English or American English is not the English language? --Vulpes vulpes 13:36, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Read WP:NPA and stop attacking me. I'd suggest you to read Lithuanian language and find out what letters representing vowels and consonants are used in Lithuanian language. I suggest you to do so, because the template you are trying to apply on "original Lietuvininkai script" points to page dedicated to Lithuanian language. I modified it simply because there are no such letters in official Lithuanian alphabet.
 * The Lietuvininikai script derived from Gothic alphabet is preserved in the text as such, but without denoting it as Lithuanian language script. I cannot grasp why in one article you write, that Lietuvininkai did not think they were Lithuanians, in the other part you're trying to present the "original" script, used by Lietuvininkai as standard Lithuanian. I am truly confused.
 * As for "original writing" - I'd rather say it's invariant of non standartized language (and rather unnotable one in this arcicle) - many languages underwent this, and many things are written different in different periods of time, mostly until the Enlightement and standartised school system. Someone might want to write Lietuvininkai dialect with a subsection Linguistic differences between Lietuvininkai and Standard Lithuanian languages -there it would be notable. --Lokyz 14:00, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I am not attacking You. I only see You are using various self-created theories. Do you think different script creates different languages? What is standard Lithuanian? For Lithuanians standard was one, for Lietuwininkai standard was another. In Swiss ß never was used, but Swiss German without ß is standart German language in Swiss. Now You are translitering in modern Lithuanian, why? This is English WP. --Vulpes vulpes 07:06, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * that's why, and that's why. As for the language template you might be aware that Samogitian dialect has it's own template - that's why I did suggest you create an article about it. Furthermore - it's not modern Lithuanian, it's standard Lithuanian.
 * As for WP:NPA - this I only see You are using various self-created theories - is PA. And - for Lithuanians standard was one, for Lietuwininkai standard was another - is exactly what i was saying all the time.--Lokyz 19:57, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Giving links You only confirmed - in Lithuania is used lithuanized version. I knew this, but this is English WP. What's the reason  of transliteration? --Vulpes vulpes 12:15, 26 September 2007 (UTC
 * You are right this is English Wikipedia not German. As for transliteration is it about 5 times more popular then your provided "original" version. I did not put template into article, I did just correct the information you provided, because this template is used for standard Lithuanian language, not dialects. To identify different dialects use appropriate article - like the above mentioned Samogitian, Dzukian (that also are Lithuanian, but not standard Lithuanian) or Lietuvininkian or Prussian Lithuanain if you prefer it better. Please don't confuse the reader. Best wishes.--Lokyz 12:49, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Exactly, 5 times more popular in Lithuanian language, but not in English. Best regards. --Vulpes vulpes 10:57, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
 * P.S. By the way, read Georg Sauerwein's letters in Lithuanian language and decide how author himself named this newspaper - . And not mix Great Lithuanian and Prussian Lithuanian. --Vulpes vulpes 07:46, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * All this discussion mainly concerning orthography is more elaborate thing where should be a clear consensus in which cases which one should be used. As I understand, the main problem is that Prussian Lithuanian phonology is at best no different than the standard Lithuanian - this is where disagreements begin. I think some more unbiased foreign wikipedia editors should come up to the acceptable and fair resolution. Therefore I would suggest to look at this issue from a certain distance and then decide.Iulius 11:56, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't understand where is a problem? Is Lietuwiska Ceitunga was a Lithuanian newspaper? 81.7.98.250 08:31, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Verify source
I would like to ask for help, as I failed to find information in presented source, which confirmed the following info - The 7th stanza of Lietuvninkai we are born is applied to Kaiser. Thanks in advance, M.K. (talk) 14:08, 27 January 2008 (UTC)P.S. and particularly if the lines there to apply to Kaiser William I or just generally.

-- One year before, in 1878, a Prussian-Lithuanian delegation, accompanied by Georg Sauerwein, had been received by Wilhelm I. In 1879 they sent him a petition: http://forum.istorija.net/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=1015&mid=9792#M9792 So there is no doubt that THE (with article!) Kaiser of the poem is Wilhelm I. Lutz Szemkus —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.156.197.181 (talk) 23:36, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lietuvininkai we are born. 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/20110704024301/http://193.219.47.10/mokslo-lietuva/node/876 to http://193.219.47.10/mokslo-lietuva/node/876
 * Added tag to http://www.ku.lt/sociologija/files/2001_nr.1-2.54-65.pdf

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:00, 23 December 2017 (UTC)