Talk:Simonas Daukantas

Szymon Dowkont
I see no harm in having the Polish name in the article, it seems to be used by several publications .--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 22:52, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Interesting do you support and usage this in Dlugosz or it will be POINT, a? M.K. 06:27, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Only one bilingual book, Lithuanian-English, I am afraid. --Paul Pieniezny 18:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, only one book in English (and please forget the German book altogether as it is a dictionary of anonyms and pseudonyms). So it should be beyond reproach. Unfortunately, it was "Published 1984 Institute of History of the Polish Academy of Sciences" !). Worse, I had the audacity to click the starbel link and found more: "Including an annotated Edition of the 1887 Inventory Compiled by Stanisław Ptaszycki." If Ptaszycki included Polish versions of the names of contributors to the 1887 version, you've got a problem: perhaps Patricia Kennedy was then forced to stick to Polish versions. In any case it does not look like a unilingual English book. --Paul Pieniezny 18:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Even the memorial bulletin of the University of Vilnius gives both the Polish and Lithuanian name. .  // Halibutt 18:59, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Can you even imagine the importance of Karolina to the Polish culture in comparison of importance of Daukantas and Basanavičius to the modern Lithuanian one? You have no reason to compare them at all. I consider your practice misleading and false.Iulius (talk) 18:08, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
 * When you'll begin to read sources you provide? take a look at page 83 "only the name of first modern Lithuanian - Simonas Daukantas - is written in Lithuanian."--Lokyz 19:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * No surprise - it lists names of all alumni in two or more languages, even Polish ones.Iulius 19:30, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

How can a foreign (Polish) name of a clearly Lithuanian person stand on par with Lithuanian in the article lead? Did they all indeed have two names? Shall we name all Poles in Lithuanian as well? Iulius 18:49, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Firstly, a Polish language was not foreign. At that time most of the szlachta in the former GDL spoke Polish. The language of Vilniaus Universitetas was Polish, the language of church administration was Polish as well. Secondly, as to the VU document - indeed, it lists all names in two versions. Why shouldn't we?  // Halibutt 23:17, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * But then why not to use Russian as it was official in the Empire back then?Iulius 22:10, 14 November 2007 (UTC)


 * And do we have sources for that? If so - let's add the Russian name as well. Why not?  // Halibutt 10:49, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * But by no means as coeaqual to the Lithuanian ones and in bold. That is unacceptable practice.Iulius (talk) 17:15, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * But that's how many of our Lithuanian friends use Lithuanian names in, say, the article on Karolina Proniewska. And that's how the WP:MoS suggests we did that. Either we apply the rules to all articles equally, or we scrap the rule altogether. Consistency is the key to resolve the issues Lithuanian wikipedians have with people of mixed Polish and Lithuanian culture. Otherwise this dispute will never end.  // Halibutt 16:41, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

quote needed
First I would like to see a exact quote from ''The "Lithuanian Metrica" in Moscow and Warsaw: Reconstructing the Archives of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Warsaw'' source and page number in order to verify the text, and to see the context in which this name is used. M.K. 06:30, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

quote needed 2
I would like to request an exact citation and translation from the Giedrius Subačius (6 2004) source, for support  this edit. I have troubles opening the pdf file. M.K. 06:33, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Then use a different pdf reader. Sorry, but "my glasses broke" is not a valid rationale for tagging a source as dubious.  // Halibutt 08:40, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Well what is the problem to give an page numbers and provide citation, as you the one who added this source to the main space? M.K. 08:56, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't like non-English citations and quotes in wiki article citation tags. Go and check for yourself, the link is right there.  // Halibutt 09:35, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Source disruption
I have obligation to inform that on 2007-11-06T22:44:25 was added source which should testify usage of Polish-Lithuanian writer, while the source actually says (as already noted ) an Polish-Lithuanian dictionary. This is the most evident disruption and neglect towards WP:OR. Now it is clear why the same contributor did not provided exact citation as requested. Contributors should be alerted by this new disruption practice.M.K. 12:57, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * It should be noted that this is not the first time. This user had conducted another apparent misuse of references at Karolina Proniewska article, the probloem with this edit is explained at the respective talk page.
 * This is rather bad precedent disrupting verfiability and reliability of the whole encyclopedia.--Lokyz 13:49, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Guys, the reference is to "writer", not to "Polish-Lithuanian". The guy was Polish-Lithuanian by birth and I didn't see the need to source that info.
 * As to Proniewska, the edit was made after no citation was provided for the controversial link to Lithuanian nobility, when the source clearly meant Samogitian nobility. Doesn't the source mention that? If not - correct me. If it does however - please stop spreading false claims about my humble person.
 * Finally, if you guys argue about this or that source - that's fine. How about adding your sources as well? All of the articles you have problem with were in most part unsourced until I did the job. Feel free to brag about it here and there, but remember that it might sound funny.  // Halibutt 18:56, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * First there is no writer in the provided specific source's information, but there is dictionary. Dictionary and writer is too different flings. Of course such information is clear visible and could be spotted with proper verification of source, despite claims of doing so . Yet another prefect example of WP:OR and source disruption. M.K. 15:32, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
 * An attempt to clear your good name and correct your mistake was made in form of M.K request for you to cite the source, but you did refuse. So there's noone to blame.
 * Sure, if you insist on your WP:OR interpretation that Samogitians and Lithuanians are different people. But since there is only you who holds such beliefs, your opinion is interesting but not important. I have provides source, that states completely different things you o believe. English source btw. And let me remind you - things are the way they are, not th way you see them (or would like them to be). Your attempts to push your POV is a big waste of time of many busy people.--Lokyz 19:29, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


 * The Subacius source has no relevance to his ethnicity; it mentions that he wrote a Polish-Lithuanian dictionary. So I am removing it as a source supporting that statement, and moving it to support that he wrote such a dictionary. Novickas 00:55, 8 November 2007 (UTC) D'oh, too slow on that one. Is there a source for the Metrika yet? Novickas 01:13, 8 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Sure, and who claimed otherwise?  // Halibutt 06:55, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Delay of diploma
Could someone elaborate Because of the suppression of the Filomat and Filaret student movements at Vilnius University, he received his diploma in 1825. a little please. Not understandable without further knowledge. --Gf1961 (talk) 14:39, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Old problems
Despite multiply contributors expressed dissatisfaction of certain information inclusion into this article in main space etc. etc. and on talk (see above) and despite the fact that there is not presented requested citations back from 7 November 2007 (!). I remove contested info. And another thing, this article about person not about his painting.M.K. (talk) 14:26, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Misnaming the picture is OR. The picture was named by the author a portrait of Szymon Dowkont, not a portrait of Simonas Daukantas. It's a title! Translation of titles in Wikipedia is acceptable, changing them to suit the needs of a group of wikipedians is not. Similarly, if a documentary on Czesław Miłosz named "Wilno Miłosza" was to have its' article on wikipedia, we would not call it Vilnius of Milošius just because that guy is called with that name in Lithuanian.
 * As to the presence of the Polish name of that guy in the lead, it's clearly an established version, known and used by the guy in question, sourced (even though you tend to delete the references every once in a while), and - above all - adding it is in accordance with Wikipedia's naming policies. WP:UE for instance clearly says that we should include alternative names, preferably in the header. If you have no problem listing alternative Lithuanian names, then why not a Polish name? Because it's Polish? Any more reasons?  // Halibutt 13:56, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Please, cite the document, which describes the official "name of the picture". As for now i do only see a major copyright infringement - i.e scan form a book and usage of the reproduction without authors permission, as you're trying to indicate? Did you upload the picture and do you know the source? If not - then obviously the reference does not belong here. And another question is the source you're citing English?--Lokyz (talk) 14:35, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Ask the person to upload the picture, not here. Besides, the direct citation is "Portret Szymona Dowkonta". It's not "Portret Simonasa Daukantasa". All of it belongs to that image's talk page indeed. OTOH the source belongs here as apparently you would like to change that picture's title. That's why I provided a reference proving that the title is not what you state. Sorry, back down on this one.  // Halibutt 21:23, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Birth date
According to many sources, including the Lithuanian source, his birth date is October 28. Is that wrong? Andres (talk) 07:34, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

The painter of the portrait
The painter of the portrait is Jonas Zenkevičius; this is verified news, based on the inspection of the original painting. I have these news directly from the present owner of the painting; there is painter's signature on the painting. Politics aside, I quote the Lithuanian version of the painter's name, and as to the Polish version, I do not know it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.219.45.2 (talk) 14:08, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Simonas Daukantas. 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/20070715165234/http://ebipol.p.lodz.pl/dlibra/doccontent?id=1192 to http://ebipol.p.lodz.pl/dlibra/doccontent?id=1192&dirids=1
 * Added tag to http://www.leidykla.eu/fileadmin/Knygotyra/49/188-213.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) 12:48, 8 December 2017 (UTC)