Jump to content

Talk:Liepāja

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following article is the biggest crap that I have read about Liepaja. When Liepaja became cultural and industrial center of the region name of the city was Libava.

There is no information about Jews being murdered during WW2 by Latvian Waffen SS troops. There is no information about port, factories infrastructure that’s built by so called occupants.

During Soviet time city wasn’t close, all people needed was passport to enter the city.

This is another pathetic method to rewrite history by Latvian nationalists.

If you have any questions in regards of my remarks, please contact me on atorgash@gmail.com

Latvian nationalists or Russian nationalists/Soviet apologists?

[edit]

The following article is the biggest crap that I have read about Liepaja. When Liepaja became cultural and industrial center of the region name of the city was Libava. There is no information about Jews being murdered during WW2 by Latvian Waffen SS troops. There is no information about port, factories infrastructure that’s built by so called occupants. During Soviet time city wasn’t close, all people needed was passport to enter the city. This is another pathetic method to rewrite history by Latvian nationalists. If you have any questions in regards of my remarks, please contact me on atorgash@gmail.com In 1941 Liepaja was among the first cities captured by Army Group North when Nazi Germany began war with Soviet Union. The local Jewish population, which numbered about 7,000 before the war, was virtuallly exterminated by German Nazis and Latvian collaborators. Most of the mass murder took place in the dunes of Škēde north of the city. Fewer than 30 Jews remained alive in Liepaja by the end of the war. Film footage of an Einsatzgruppen execution of local Jews was made at Liepaja (and is available at the link indicated [2]).

Or, you could write it yourself instead of whining about it. Chris 02:17, 31 March 2007 (UTC)


Nice try - changed everything into its exact opposite. Your Comment and your manipulation of the article is the biggest crap that I have ever read about Liepaja! It is possible that during the so called "Russification" period, starting from the second half of the 19th century and lasting until 1917, "Libava" was the russificized version (or better: Russian "malapropism") of the German denomination "Libau" for the city. If someone made Liepaja a cultural and industrial center during that period, it's still the Baltic Germans of Courland and Liepaja that would have to be mentioned in first place. But I have read absolutely nothing about them in the current version of the article. Seems like Latvian and Russian nationalists and Soviet apologists go hand in hand in erasing the history of the Baltic Germans' 800-years-long regency of Courland and their primary contribution to the developement of the country until World War I. Their regency and benefit is a historic fact, no matter if the Baltic Germans had to recognize the King of Sweden, the King of Poland-Lithuania or the Russian Tsar as their highest sovereign. The baltic provinces were never under direct control of one of those latter powers. Things did not change until the already mentioned Russification period, which weakened the position of the Baltic Germans. The Baltic Germans were leaving the country after WWI in large numbers and were forced to leave the country entirely after the Soviet occupation of 1940.

Regarding the Soviet Occupation of Latvia in 1940 and its German "Liberation" in 1941, the following has to be stated: There is no information in the article of the wide-spread collaboration of Jews with the Soviet occupants' regime (according to Baltic and Polish sources). Immediately after or even simultaniously to advances of German forces into Soviet territory, outrages and massacres by local population against Jews or by Ukrainians against Poles etc. took place all along the Soviet western border. The Jews as a whole were regarded as Soviet collaborators and those feelings eventually mixed with older antisemitism. I don't want to justify those incidents, but it needs to be stated here that in other contexts of the 20th century, "retaliation" against accused collaborators, which can mean individuals, groups of people or whole peoples, even had been (and still is) praised by Soviet and western media! Anyhow, no matter what's your point of view about this issue, if you want to blame someone for these massacres, you will have to blame the local population and not the Germans or some ominous "Nazis" and their ominous-as-well "collaborators". The often heard claim that the SS organisation had instigated local population to outrage against Jews is discussed very controversial among serious historians and a final answer has still not been achieved. But even if it proved true, the question remains what effect such a instigation could have had on the locals, since they took action within shortest time after their "liberation" and therefore apparently didn't need to be instigated ... Another point are the Jewish losses of Liepaja, which sound very spectacular in the article. (Only 30 of 7000 left alive!) But lots of Jewish inhabitants escaped from their home towns together with withdrawing Red Army troops. Parts of them were then put into Soviet Gulag concentration camps! Lots of Jews were of course deported to ghettos and German concentration camps. And lots of Jews fled to the forests where they formated their own Partisan groups, with or without Soviet force. (Russia is a large country and the Germans were always far from controling their entire hinterland.) After the war, only very few Jews returned to their home towns in Eastern Europe. Instead they emigrated to Palestine, the USA, Western Europe or other places. What I want to say is that certainly a lot more than 30 Liepajaian Jews survived WWII.

A completely different subject is the case of the Waffen-SS. This elite combat troop recruited volunteers from almost any nation of Europe, among them also Latvians. Their common aim was to fight "Bolshevism", how the Soviet form of communism was then called. The recruiting of Latvians, however, did not start immediately - at least that's what I know. The Waffen-SS also formed special assault units (in German: Einsatzgruppen) that were engaged in the anti-partisan warfare. Official Soviet-era sources claim that the Soviet partisan army counted about 2 million combatants (nowadays they would probably be called "illegal combatants" in US terminology). Their task was to destroy supply, railway lines, etc. and to kill enemy personnel in the enemy's hinterland. They also surprised, attacked and massacred small groups of enemy soldiers. The partisans' brutal warfare, as well against their own civilian countrymen as against the enemy, was the reason for the corresponding increasing brutalization of the German occupation regime. If German or allied soldiers were killed in a certain place and the partisan perpetrators could not be caught, civilian hostages from nearby that place served as proxies for the partisans and were shot at a ratio of 1:2, 1:4, and occasionally even higher ratios. Soviet-era sources claim hundreds of thousands German and allied soldiers and personnel were killed by partisans. Although these large numbers are not realistic, estimations can be made of how much people might have been killed "for retaliation"; among them definitly lots of Jews, since a large share of Soviet partisans were Jewish. The shooting of proxy hostages was reasoned by the fact that partisans need to be supplied by the local population of a certain region and therefore those local population must have contact (or even does conspirate) with the partisans. But the local population had no choice, since the partisans of course just took what they wanted, if the peasant agreed or not. If he did not agree or even resisted their demands, he was killed by the partisans! And that's the mad thing about the whole partisan warfare and shooting of hostages: The civilian inhabitants of the german-"occupied" territories had to fear the partisans more than the Germans and their allies, a point that Stalin announced very publicily! If for example a Russian village, in the eyes of the partisans seemed to "collaborate" with or just being to friendly to the Germans, the whole village could have been "liquidated" by the partisans. What does all of that have to do with the "Einsatzgruppen"? Not very much, since the anti-partisan assault units were directly routing out and "liquidating" the partisans - not proxy hostages. As already mentioned, a large share of partisans were Jewish.

But the core problem of the above commentator seems to be a historic conscience shaped by US "History" TV Channel, Soviet apologists and certain lobby groups, which try to write or rewrite history since 60 years or so. This is best demonstrated with the link he places in the middle of the article, linking an article of the town Liepaja to an internet site of his - most probable - heart and soul issue. This site can only be described as utter pathological. It shows a video clip that is claimed to have been filmed by an (anonymous?) German soldier, translating Einsatzgruppe with "mobile killing unit"! (I won't comment on that!) Low quality anti-german atrocity stuff like this was (and often still is) produced in large numbers by Soviet, Polish, Czech and other nationalities' producers, often with German POWs and deported civilians as "performers". Countries that are primarily responsible for the expulsion of 19 million ethnic Germans from Eastern Germany and Eastern Europe (including Russia) of whom app. 3 million were murdered or died of starvation. A historic event without comparison in the history of Europe, of which most people will never have heard somthing about. And all of these countries are very much interested (and therin supported by their former western allies) that it stays that way.

Remove picture

[edit]

On a more constructive note - I suggest to remove the historic map of the city. It doesn't really contribute to the article and has no informative value. What's with the red and yellow patches anyway? Either a more up to date map should be used or no map at all, otherwise it just makes the article look scrappy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TomMc (talk • contribs) 23:16, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It ilustarates history section, shows what the city used to be -- Xil...sist! 23:35, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's hard to make anything out of it in my opinion. It looks a bit out of context. It clearly was supposed to illustrate something else or there wouldn't be this strange colouring. And there are no street names or intelligible district names, not to mention the fact that several historical layers are overlaping showing both the original river and the city streets that were later built over it. My point is that this picture is not the best one to illustrate what the city looks like or looked like before, it's just confusing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TomMc (talk • contribs) 01:09, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Do as you wish, though I don't think it disrupts anything. And please sign your coments ---- Xil...sist! 15:26, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Geography

[edit]

I have inserted the Liepāja's neighbourhoods template to the Geography section of the article. You may remove it to your discretion if it feels inappropriate. I must say though, that I feel the Russian versions of the neighbourhoods being inappropriate since this is the English language Wikipedia. Philaweb T 15:12, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Liepāja - Libau - Libava

[edit]

All three names have been used and are, in fact, still used from Liepaja. The first railway which connected Liepaja (this name have been used all the time for nearly 1.000 years in the country were I live for the town)was the private Libava - Kaisiadoris Railway, which was later amalgamed to form the Libava (libau) - Romni Railway. The Russians are late comers in the area. First during the period of the Great Northern War. Liepaja was known better by its German name version Libau in Western Europe. The Jews and Russians have a tendency to write history really their own way. No mention of paniced Russians who, after shelling of Libau sea fortress in August 1914 by German navy, drived the fortress railway locomotives direct to sea, in the the bottom of harbour, where they remain even today. Imperial Russian Navy spent quite number of Gold Roubles to strenghten and modernise the Libava navai base in 1911 - 1914. If looking to the comments of one, presumably of Jewish origin, it gives a conclusion that the Jews were the most important ethnic group in every place where they settled in whole Eastern Europe. And that is not the fact. Regarding the propaganda of Latvian SS men, their brutality to kill Jews, who in fact allied with the local communists, are really exaggerated in the Wikipedia articles. They want to write new way the history as the Russians by "liberating" the Baltic States and their propaganda that all three countries voluntarely joined the Soviet Union in August 1940. There are many describtions available of the Latvian SS men and right wing home security guardist who were protecting the railways behind the front line against the possible Russian partisans in 1943 - 1944. In this job they managed quite well, they could prevent all attacks against the Latvian railway network which was operarated by the German DR Ost, RBD Riga. Please look the war time railway timetables and you even found daily train connections shown from Germany to Liepaja (Libau) and from Liepaja (Libau) to Germany operated by DRB for civilian population. Up to 23.08.1939 there was daily express train connection to / from Liepaja to Berlin. Departure from Berlin Friedrichstrasse at 23.42, from Königsberg at 08.15, from Insterburg at 09.21, from Tilsit at 10.16, from Memel (Klaipeda) at 12.05 arriving to Kretinga at 13.02, arriving to Kaleti (East European Time GMT + 2) at 17.33, arriving to Priekule at 18.10, arriving to Dubeni at 19.05 and to Liepaja at 19.20. The return working departured from Liepaja at 13.20, from Dubeni at 13.36, from Priekule at 14.27, from Kaleti at 14.59, from Skuodas (Lithuania) at 14.32, from Darbenai at 15.46, from Kretinga at 17.05, arriving to Memel (Klaipeda) at 18.12, to Tilsit at 20.12 to Insterburg at 21.17, to Königsberg at 22.23 and to Berlin Friedrichstrasse at 07.10. Today Liepaja have no passenger train service at all thanks to Russian minded Latvian railway personel. They took the Russian transit freight as priority and closed the Riga - Liepaja (both routes) passenger train service. Peharps in furure the Latvians restore this service again. There is possibilities to introduce every two hour service Liepaja - Riga - Daugavpils v.v. with departures from 06.00 to 22.00. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.113.117.142 (talk) 17:44, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Latvian name "Liepāja" and German "Libau" were used at the same time. The city was not renamed in 1919. Dukurs (talk) 18:39, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Germans were a ruling class in Latvia over the centuries and a majority in the biggest cities therefore is important to mention the old German name "Libau". This was the name city was known when the city rights were granted in 1625. Dukurs (talk) 11:28, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's a lie, official name of the Liepaya in Latvian language now without doubt is Liepaja - it's mentioned in the Law about territorial reform in Latvia as a republican city Liepaja. Till probably 1918 year official Latvian name was - Libava, document about renaming still not available on the internet, it's mentioned on all Latvian maps. From 12 century official name of the Liepaja was Liva - it' mentioned in Couronian treaty, see Piemare. German name was used here because of big number of searches on Google. It's old name and was mentioned on the maps of occupational period, it's not acceptable to show occupational name. BTW I'm the main author of this article and is more competent is this matter. Denis Tarasov (talk) 14:06, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a question about the official name today but the historical name. "Līva" was name of the village before the town rights were granted. "Libava" was the russificized version of the German "Libau". If we mention "Libava" as an old name we should put "Libau" at first. Latvians called the city "Liepāja", Germans "Libau" and Russians "Libava" at the same period (19th century, beginning of 20th century). I don't think Latvians ever called it "Libava" as Russians did'nt use "Liepāja" before 1918. Dukurs (talk) 13:53, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Soviet base

[edit]

During the occupation ... the Soviet military set up its Baltic naval base....

The Soviets had more than one naval base on the Baltic. I would guess the largest was in Kaliningrad (ex-Königsberg). Sca (talk) 19:03, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think this means the Soviet naval base that was in the "Baltic Republics" (Lithania, Latvia, and Estonia). Kaliningrad is part of Russia, even though it is between Lithuania and Poland and is not connected to the rest of Russia.66.10.94.35 (talk) 22:47, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Former city mayors

[edit]

It is pure nonsense, pure anachronism use Latvianised names of mayors in all languages except Latvian. It's English Wikipedia. You cann't change person's name. Many of mentioned mayors were not Latvians. Latvia not existed prior 1919. Therefore usage of Latvianised forms is ridiculous. Iam not against Latvia, Latvian culture and language, but hey guys - Amicus Plato, sed magis amica veritas. --84.15.109.176 (talk) 15:18, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:20090316-LiepajaRockKafejnica.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:20090316-LiepajaRockKafejnica.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:32, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Atklasana-3-590.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:Atklasana-3-590.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:32, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Liepajanew.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:Liepajanew.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:32, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Liepaja-vs-Ventspils-3.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:Liepaja-vs-Ventspils-3.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:32, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

republican city

[edit]

What is republican city, as in the intro? --86.178.202.13 (talk) 19:48, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Liepāja. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 19:06, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Liepāja. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 12:24, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

European Capital of Culture...

[edit]

...in 2027 https://culture.ec.europa.eu/news/liepaja-to-be-the-european-capital-of-culture-2027-in-latvia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.116.228.5 (talk) 08:39, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Liepāja&oldid=1212099396"