Talk:Antanas Baranauskas

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

	Antanas Baranauskas is within the scope of WikiProject Lithuania, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Lithuania on Wikipedia. To participate simply edit the article or see our to-do list. On the project page we have some tools to help you out. Don't hesitate to ask questions!
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
Top	This article has been rated as top-importance on the importance scale.
Comments	Please leave a short summary to explain the ratings and to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

M.K. 14:22, 30 January 2007 (UTC)}}

Contents 1 Disputed title 2 Krajowcy 3 Citation links 4 Genealogy question 5 No Surprise 6 Antoni Baranowski 7 Citation request 8 Misusing sources 9 Kurschat on Baranowski

[edit] Disputed title

Why did this article get completely Lithuanized? A matter of national pride or something? //Halibutt 22:25, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Care to read this [[1]], and stop looking for Polish spirit everywhere?--Lokyz 22:39, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

It's funny to hear from you asking why this article was Lithuanized. It shoud be asked why it was completly polonized by YOU, in first place. Even Lithuanian town names were given in Polish first, then in Lithuanian (in brackets), as if Polish spelling was main and original. What was that? I don't know if you do it in purpose, or just don't feel your own bias. Encyclopaedia Editing Dude 18:00, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Right... So a guy who wrote some poems in Lithuanian is automatically a Lithuanian, right? Err... wrong, my dear. Similarly, currently the article suggests Baranowski (as he called himself) was born in Lithuania, even though he was born in the Russian empire to a Polish family. Similarly, the name of Proniewska is reverse-Lithuanized eventhough she most probably did not even speak a word of Lithuanian in her entire life. The name of Sejny is put in its Lithuanian spelling eventhough no Lithuanian name is given its contemporary Polish counterpart in the text, eventhough the Polish names were used back then.

I don't deny he was Lithuanian. But he was a Polish poet in the first place, a fact that you apparently decided to obscure. Fears of Polish spirit anyone? //Halibutt 12:24, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

"Polish family" - very interesting statement, can you give a proof of that? Or anyone who was born in teh lands of commonewealth autmaticaly is Pole? If he would have been Pole, so why would he learn "peasants" language - Lithuanian. I'd rather say he was born in Lithuanian family, only at the end of his life he chose to be "Polish" because being Lithuanian was not respectable and even desipsable. You should study XIX th century situation in Lithuania and specificaly situations in Schools. (Especially "Litwin" table hanged on a neck for speaking Lithuanian in the school). It is a forced choosing to be Polish. So much of the Polish spirit, and that's why your arguments make some people angry (and that's why Poles aren't very popular in Lithuania until nowadys).

As for Proniewska - you might be right, as for Sejny - don't forget, that at the time there were living a lot of Lithuanians, and bneing bishop Baranauskas held mess and addressed people in Lithuanian. But well, because it is in nowadays Poland it should be written Sejny.

As for Lithuania - the fact, that Lithuania was incorporated into Russian empire does not make it Russia - like the fact that nowadays Poland was divided between Austria and Russia does not make it neither Austria neither Russia.--Lokyz 12:57, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

And can you point to some reference claiming his family to be Lithuanian? Other than the fact that he started his career as a Polish language poet and it was not until much later that he started using Lithuanian as well..? As to why did he learn it - it's none of my business. I guess as a priest he wanted to adress the people in their own languges, but he might've simply be interested in it. In any way, it seems Lithuanian was not even his mother tongue.

As to your pro personam argument - you too should study the 19th century history of Lithuania. Enough of personal remarks? Fine.

As for Sejny - I don't deny that there were Lithuanians there - and there are ethnic Lithuanians living there even now, which is enough for me to cite the name of that place in both languages. However, it seems like double standards to erase such double naming in case of places that are a part of modern Lithuania. Lithuanian names for Polish towns - sure. Polish names for towns in what is now Lithuania - never. Strange reasoning, don't you think? Especially given the widespread usage of Polish language back then in.

When it comes to Imperial Russia - you are right that he was born in Lithuania in geographical terms. Which however leads us to another inconsistency: note that in most biographical articles on Poles born in those times we do not hide the fact that they were in fact born in Austria, Prussia or Russia. At the same time your current version of the article claims he was born in the Republic of Lithuania (just follow the link!). Plain wrong, if you asked me. //Halibutt 14:15, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

let me cite polish Wikipedia: "Antanas Baranauskas, pol. Antoni Baranowski (ur. 17 stycznia 1835 w Oniksztach - zm. 26 listopada 1902) - litewski biskup katolicki i poeta.<.>Urodził się w litewskiej rodzinie chłopskiej." somewht it states, that Baranauskas was Lithuanian - if you know better, you might correct me. ere is the same situation as with Sirwydas.--Lokyz 15:04, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

And as for "some poems" you are not right here either - he did wrtoe quite a lot in Lithuanian. And that you don't know this only proves your bias to find "Polskosz" even where it was not. Read Polish wikipedia article, on Banaranauskas, maybe you'll understand the matter better.--Lokyz 15:11, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Never did I claim he was not a Lithuanian poet or a Lithuanian writer, I'm merely asking why do you claim he was Lithuanian exclusively. The same goes for his writings: I'm 100% right when I say that he started his poetic career as a Polish language writer. Yet, this article in your version does all to hide that fact - yet you dare to call me a nationalist and not yourself... //Halibutt 19:13, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Huh. I didn't start ths article, i've just added information. You have right to do the same. and trust me, I didn't hide any of his works. His polish poetry isn't known to me, so I din't put any information on this.

As for you claims, that you don't deny him being Lithuanian poet please, explain how should I understand your statement: "So a guy who wrote some poems in Lithuanian is automatically a Lithuanian, right?"

I did call you nationalist because you're mixing few things - modern Polish nationality, modern Lithuanian nationality and Commonwealths nationalities e.g. "Litwiny" and "Koroniarze", and are applying the same Poland link. IMO you'e using modern approach.--Lokyz 19:29, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

So it was me to change the original "Polish-Lithuanian poet" into Lithuanian poet? Speak about my nationalism... but first compare the original version of this article with your additions.

As to my remark - I meant just that: there's no way to judge his nationality by modern standards, yet that's what you're doing by claiming he was purely Lithuanian - and linking his name to the article on Republic of Lithuania. //Halibutt 09:42, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I did not link it to Lithuania:) As for Poish-Lithuanian, so why not Russian-Lithuanian? Comonwealth did not exist at teh time. Lithuania doe ot point to modern republic only, it has history section. And somehow 2/3 of "polish nobility" points to the aticle Poland, that is also about nowadays Poland republic. You should check:)--Lokyz 10:20, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Then how come there is a link to Lithuania in the very first sentence of this article? And how does it respond to my arguments above? It's easy to call people nationalists all around, just like it's easy to use all other kinds of offences. But it gets harder when people point to you that it was you personally to act the nationalist way and not them. //Halibutt 12:47, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Of cpourse it is easy - especially when you think, that Samogitians used Polish name for their city:) It was teritory populataed by Lithuanisn speking people - so please tell me, why do you think the city was alled Wornie rather than Varniai? Can you giwe any proof of that? Or dpo you think, that Warniai is a Polish word? Or do you think Lithuanian people were stupid enough not to know how to call theyr town? If so - please give russian transcribtion of towns name, because it was Russian empire (and do not forget to modify Варшава). And please spare me of Polonian literature: you know exactly, that Samogitia was not a Polish speaking region:) Or you just don't know where Varniai are located?--Lokyz 13:24, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Which perfectly shows my argument here: we have no idea what did Baranowski think of his nationality, just like we don't have any censuses covering the area of Wornie back then. So we can only assume this or that. That's why I'm putting both versions in. At the same time you're putting only one version - the "nationalist Lithuanian" one, to mirror your argument. Does it seem fair to you? You're doing the exact same thing you're accusing me of. //Halibutt 14:59, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Lithuanian accademical research would answer your question, or you need a speciffical GrandPolish reference? as for accusation: I did not acuse you, I've just followinf your way of action. It is very "productive" ant utterly time consuming. lets play the game - you put polish, i'll put ^{[citation needed]}, I'll put Lithuanian - you'll put ^{[citation needed]}. As far you didn't even explained what do you mean by "local dwellers", and didn't give any reference to Polish name - so let me ask you - do you believe that it was called that way, or do you have any proof (Polish language literature does not count, especialy one from people who weren't living there). Or is Sienkiewicz your only one source of knowledge about history? Or should I point you to linguistical research of Liuthuanian town names origins? It would be in Lithuanian language, and somewhat I do doubt that such great expert on Lithuanian toponyms like you would understand it. This research i purely accademic, not nationalistic. Are you interested? --Lokyz 18:50, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Is the Bible the only source of your knowledge? Or perhaps Mao's Red Book? Come on Lokyz, what argument is that? Resorting to pro personam arguments is not the way to go. I question your arguments, you question my intelligence. Is it me or is there a certain lack of balance here? Basically, I suggest you're twisting facts for this reason or another, while you're suggesting I'm an idiot. Don't. Please, stay civil.

Now on to your real arguments above (I mean those that merit a response): whether the 10th century toponym was Lithuanian, Baltic, Ugro-Finnish, Slavic or Germanic is of no importance here. As far as I remember it was first mentioned in some church document under the name of "Warni". Does it change a thing here? Or perhaps the fact that the "GrandPolish" or "polish", as you call it, name was used by the local bishops in their documents, both mediaeval and 19th century? Nope, Lokyz. It's a fact that both Polish and Lithuanian languages were used locally - with the difference that it was not put down as "Varniai" in Lithuanian until much later, as the Lithuanian literary traditions, while rich and fascinating, did develop later than Ruthenian or Polish. Like it or not, that's how it was.

Now then, do you deny Polish language was used in Lithuania? Or perhaps the local bishops, Lithuanian historians frown upon so mercilessly, did speak Lithuanian rather than Polish? If so, then why are they so criticised for not strengthening the Lithuanian national spirit and instead "Polonising Lithuania"?

But this is of course off topic here. The basic question remains unanswered: why was this article completely Lithuanised as if Baranauskas was a 100% Lithuanian, with a declaration of nationality written by his own hand and preserved to our times? People assume his nationality depending on their own views, yet they present their assumptions as a fact, which is a complete nonsense. //Halibutt 20:07, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Yup - you assume he was Polish - and let me note - ONLY you. even most of Polish encyclopedias speak about him as Lithuanian. And you insist he was Polish. Very intelligent.

As for name spelling - well Poles cannot hear or pronounce some sounds (as also Lithianian do, it is comon difference between different language speakers). And thtas why Warszawa gets Varšuva in other language, Krakow - gets Krokuva, Anykščiai becomes Onykszta and so on. It is called phonetical conversion. (Same story with Jogaila Jagiello). That's why real sound of the name can be found by local tradition and verified by comparing how does it sound in DIFFERENT languages. As for Wornie it is mentioned much earlier in German transcribtion (even few), than in Polish. Altough it does not mean it was German city nor it should be spelled in German maner, could you agree on that?--Lokyz 12:07, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

It is common practice in Wikipedia to write place names, as they are written NOW. It's not complete Lithuanisation, it's common sense. Encyclopaedia Editing Dude 06:40, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

And that's precisely why all mentions of Baranowski's Polish heritage were removed, right? And that's also the reason why we call Babylonia with the modern name of Iraq when referring to BC times, right? Finally, that's the reason why we use the names of Danzig, Koenigsberg or Memel when referring to pre-20th century history, right? Nope, dude. Wrong. //Halibutt 07:32, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, as I've seen you do not like name Koenigsberg and prefer Krolewec, even if local dwellers never used that name:)--Lokyz 12:07, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

nothing that mentions Polish heritage was removed. chill out 82.135.245.211 07:41, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Halibutt: "all mentions of Baranowski's Polish heritage were removed" Wiki: "Baranauskas was born to a humble peasant family of distant szlachta origin." "There he started writing his first poems in Polish language" "considered himself as a one of Polish noble origin" What is your problem? I dont get. Encyclopaedia Editing Dude 08:00, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

All right, I'm tired of this endless discussion. Next time I will simply revert or add what I consider important and ignore the talk page. That would be easier and less time-consuming. Before I leave though, a short information. As per the "Gdansk agreement" I in most cases I use contemporary official names, at least when dealing about Polish/Lithuanian/Austrian/German/French/Roman/Spanish history. That's why it's 100% ok for me to mention Królewiec in the period it was a part of Poland, call it Koenigsberg when Prussia was part of Germany or independent and call it Kaliningrad in modern context. Similarly, I use Wilno for times when it was a Polish city and Vilnius for modern times (check who wrote the article some time ago, BTW, it might be funny if you confronted your slander and accusations of nationalism with reality). And so on and so forth. Over and out. //Halibutt 13:38, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

As for you ignorance of talk page, please cite ^{[citation needed]} or I'll revert you. Because I've just learned a way of acting for a grown up editor. I'm learning quick, you see, I have a good teacher: "I will simply revert or add what I consider important and ignore the talk page." Very good statement. I'd say excelent summary of your contibutions, just it is in fact against WikiPolicy:)

As for Baranauskas Polishness - well, I do not think you a have at least one reference, where it would be said "he was polish", unless you wil; wite it yourself.

As for Koningsberg - please say, how was it called by local contemporary inhabitants?

Well. I do call you nationalist because you're using modern nationalistic understanding of notional indentity in times, when there was no mention of it:) I.E. when somebody in XVI-th century called himself Pole he didn' mean that he is "born in Polish" family, but rather tahn he is from Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth. Inhabitants of it were two different nations, and they identified themselwes as Litwins GDL (Litwa ojczyno Moja ... anyone) and Polish in {Korona). Polish language untill XVIII th century was lingva franca. And you say they were all from Poland and [[Polish language|Polish]. anyway you chose to ignore this, so it looks like the fun is to begin, because you've run out of arguments and now yuo will try to push your bias:)--Lokyz 16:36, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

You see? I try to talk things out at the talk page - and what I get is offences and slander. I ask for sources or clarification - you respond with either accusations of my lack of knowledge or the same question I asked you. I search for some sort of a compromise that would satisfy both sides - you revert to the Lithuanian-only version. Does it make discussing things with you fruitful and constructive? Errr...

As to Koenigsberg, it's pretty obvious that the German name was used by its inhabitants all the way, at least by a huge majority of them (there were also Lithuanians, Poles, Latvians and others living there). Which does not change the fact that some system has to be adopted and the one we chose is simply easier to follow that checking what was the main language used locally. Show me a 14th century census...

As to calling me a nationalist - I merely pointed to the fact that Baranauskas was a Polish-Lithuanian poet, as his heritage was that of the Commonwealth. It was you to deny that (without any sources) and state that he was [[Lithuania]]n. So who's a nationalist here? And who is it to adopt the ways you accuse me of?

And again, I did not run short of arguments. I simply realised that asking you questions makes no sense, as you have no intention to reply to them and instead continue to offend me. Do as you please, none of my business. //Halibutt 19:58, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Please, igf it is not too hard to you, consider reading my last edit and references.--Lokyz 21:49, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

How does your interpretation of someone's statements explain anything? It seems your own research, but it does not change anything, nor does it respond to my doubts above. //Halibutt 08:37, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

So...? How about my questions? It seems to me my question has been asked a dozen or so times in last two months, yet it remains unanswered. Should I simply revert the changes that seem unsubstantiated and their authors are not willing to explain them, or is there any other way to handle this? //Halibutt 17:35, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Polish encyclopedia says - Lithuanian not Polish Lithuanian. He wrote letters to his parents in Lithuanian, his first tongue was Lithuanian. I do not see any reason to believe your unsourced statement about Polish family - all the facts simply contradicts your beliefs. If you could find any reference to his family as Polish, please do, otherwise all this talk is a waste of time.

As for phrase of Maironis - it is not mine interpretation, it is Marcinkevičius'. Reference is given at the end of article.--Lokyz 18:19, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

And again you ignored my remark of July 14: I don't deny he was Lithuanian! I DON'T DENY THAT. I'm merely asking the same question over and over again, and for the last month I received lots of emotions and offences, but sadly no reply. //Halibutt 08:53, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

If you stop hooting and read more that others wrote, it would be better to all, including yourself. M.K. 09:22, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I stopped, gave myself some time and returned here. I re-read the entire discussion and still found no reply to my three simple questions:

1. Why was this article switched from the NPOV version to the one that supports the POV of modern Lithuanian nationalists?
2. Did Baranauskas even know his "Lithuanian name"?
3. What does "baranas" mean in Lithuanian?

//Halibutt 10:54, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Lokyz, I still dispute the title of this article. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is solved. //Halibutt 00:46, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Finally you could check google hits in English websites both for Antoni Baranowski and Antanas Baranauskas, including this [2]: the evidence of a correct naming is more the enough for a widely acceptable name in English.Iulius 18:51, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

And could you answer my questions? //Halibutt 21:02, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I can answer the second and the third one: 2. Yes, he definitely knew his own name, just as Stanislovas Goštautas, since they both were Aukštaitijans. Alhough, I could not say the same about Mieszko I. 3. Baranas or baronas (Aukštaitijan barånas, linguistically older) is a borrowing from slavic languages and means avinas (a ram i.e. male sheep)

OT: some 70 percent contemporary Lithuanian surnames are slavicised during the 18 -19th centuries, when they began to emerge, either by church officials, either by lithuanians themselves in order to get better positions or to enter into state schools, not to mention Maciejewski and Adamkiewicz, Jasikiewicz, Kozlowski. Slavicianization took up either forms: formation of Polish-sounding names from clearly Lithuanian names or patronymics: Jonas, Antanas, Adomas -> Jonaitis, Antanaitis, Adomaitis, or adapting to them existing essentially Polish surnames Kozlowski, Baranowski. In most cases the results of both types of formations are virtually indistinguisable due to the same stems of the words, mostly Christian personal names. Although ancient lithuanian names are clearly distinguishable: Kontrym (Kantrimas/Kontrimas - Samogitian version), Dowgiałło (Daugaila). Some of them experienced a false reversion in Lithuanian, what was the case of Daugaila -> Dowgiałło -> Daugėla, Vytautas -> Witold -> Vitoldas Iulius 10:13, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

So, he knew his name before it was invented or perhaps converted to comply with the reformed Lithuanian grammar? Strange, to say the least. The Lithuanian handbook I browsed through was pretty specific on that... Thanks for the explanation, now let's move to sources. //Halibutt 11:21, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

OT continued, a minor note: -itis and -aitis suffixes are by no means Polish. Both Adomas and Adomaitis sound equally strange to a Polish ear, the latter sounding clearly Lithuanian. The case of reverse translation seems interesting; I don't think there are many similar phenomena in other languages - though I might be wrong on that one. //Halibutt 11:25, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

You are, and do consider the well-taken point concerning Mieszko I, and whether he even knew his "Polish name"? Dr. Dan 15:06, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

yes, -aitis is a typical Lithuanian suffix which was massively replaced by -ewicz, -owicz, -owski and whatever.Iulius 18:31, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

BTW: There were no reforms of the grammar in this exact name Antanas Baranauskas - no diacritics , no long "o", nothing to change... This is a fact.

False reversion or reverse translation as it might be called had been quite widespread in earlier times indeed and should be taken into account by all editors. Iulius 18:31, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Krajowcy

"He followed tradition of krajowcy" -> could you explain/elaborate what you mean by that? Renata 15:13, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

"gente Lituanus natione Polonus" - it means they ar of Lithuanian statehood tradition, not Koroniarzy, who actually are Poles in modern nationalistic understanding. Sometimes they exoplained their identity as "Litwins, not lietuvisai". It is very complex issue, and it needs separate article. But well, probably it was a bad idea to put it here without explanation. --Lokyz 15:29, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Are you 100% sure that the gente Lituanus natione Polonus means exactly the same thing as Lithuanians? I doubt it. If you're accusing others of using modern concepts of nationality for 19th century people, then don't commit the very same mistake yourself. //Halibutt 19:22, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Citation links

Citation links quite messy, please sort it out —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Encyclopaedia Editing Dude (talk • contribs) July 18, 2006.

[edit] Genealogy question

Does anyone have access to more information about Baranauskas's family tree? I'm thinking there is a possibility we might be related... My great-great-great grandmother Agnieszka Baranowska was also a poet, in Mickiewicz's circle. There is also a link to Mickiewicz and szlachta on my Lithuanian Kalinowski side, via the Vilnius-born Raphael Kalinowski. Can anyone help fill in any of the gaps? --Elonka 22:32, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to disappoint you, but Baranowski is among the most popular Polish surnames. It's derived from the generic word for a ram (baran) and was used by szlachta and peasants alike. Finally, it was also used by Jews of the numerous villages called Baranów. BTW, it is quite strange: what is the meaning of the word Baran in Lithuanian? //Halibutt 12:29, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Anyone..?//Halibutt 10:51, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Around 50 percent of Lithuanians have surnames of Slavic origin, and they all are Poles, right? And most popular Lithuanian surnames Petrauskas and Kazlauskas are Slavic too (because all of Petrauskas and Kazlauskas are Poles of cause). There is nothing to comment here.

These amateur linguistics are getting boring. Encyclopaedia Editing Dude 11:06, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, sure - Olgierd, Witold, Jagiello are also popular names. Does it make them Polish origin?--Lokyz 11:40, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually Baranoswki/Baranauskas is of Slavic origin, but this does not proof anything, because it is also common among Lithuanians. Surnames of Slavic origin in Lithuanian case, cannot be an argument of persons ethnicity. Encyclopaedia Editing Dude 11:47, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Does every Baranowski in Poland also write a diary in Lithuanian language from his early youth?--Lokyz 11:57, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Or does every Baranauskas here (http://telefonai.zebra.lt/index.php type in Baranauskas in "Pavardė" section) is Polish? You can ring them and ask, phone numbers are given, it's a phone book Encyclopaedia Editing Dude 12:01, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Let me ask again, since apparently you responded to a plethora of questions I never asked and ommitted the one I did ask above. What does baranas mean in Lithuanian? I did not ask you whether all people of certain surname are or are not of certain nationality, I did not ask of Petrauskas or Kazlauskas, not even of Baranauskas this time. Nor did I become an amateur linguist (much more a professional, to be precise), I simply asked a simple question. Anyone knows the answer? //Halibutt 15:50, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

You know the answer yourself. Don't play games be a good boy. Encyclopaedia Editing Dude 16:22, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

And what means Brazas (like in Brazauskas) in Lithuanian? And what means Jonas or Petras in Lithuanian? If you're trying to prove that his family name sounds slavic - I do not have any objections. This is quite common in Lithuania, as for example Mackevičius, Sleževičius or Žukauskas. Does it prove, he was Polish? of course, at the same level, that all Olgierd's and Grazyna's in Poland are Lithuanians. --Lokyz 16:26, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

For Gods sake, I'm neither trying to prove anything nor am I trying to argue anything. I'm asking a simple question: what does baranas mean in Lithuanian. I don't have a dictionary at hand and there's plenty of native speakers around, so I thought - silly me - that finding an answer would be easy. But what the heck, want something done - do it yourself. I'd have to go to the National Library, wait an hour for them to bring the the dictionary and check for myself, right? //Halibutt 07:19, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Ooops, seems there's no such word as baranas in Lithuanian[3][4]. Thanks for your help, guys. //Halibutt 21:53, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

There is no such word in Polish language as Halibutt, although there are such family names as Baranauskas in Lithuania. And furthermore such nicknames used by Antanas Baranauskas as Bangputys, Jurksztas Smalaūsis and many others are clearly Lithuanian. Please stop disrupting Wikipedia with your "good intentions". BTW, AFAIK there is a much better online source to research Lithianian language boundaries than dictionary.com . If you spend so much energy to understand my language better, you simply might ask me.--Lokyz 22:29, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I did ask you here back in August. I repeated my question several times - to no avail. I've been waiting for some kind of reply since August of last year (yup, that's 8 months). Finally I got fed up with constant accusations of fancy things and lack of response - and checked myself. Are the dictionaries I checked wrong on the matter? //Halibutt 00:34, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] No Surprise

Lokyz, don't even bother to answer. When you provided a reference with information that Praniauskaite was from Lithuania, and were told "no, that the reference states she's from Samogitia", it's pretty obvious where that party is coming from. One would therefore think logically that Chopin should not be called Polish, but Masovian. On the other hand, the obviously Polish surmane of "Chopin" proves his Polish heritage, doesn't it? What does Chopin mean in Polish anyway? Won't the answer to that question prove his ethnicity? As far as waiting for eight months for an answer about baranas, he simply needed to be patient. I'm sure it would happen sooner or later. After all, I'm still waiting for an answer or link, to the "infamous death threat" that's been claimed to have been made against him. Unfortunately that information can't be found in a dictionary or at the library. I'm beginning to think it can't be found anywhere. Dr. Dan 14:52, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Quite strange already removed assertations [[5]] only denote that some people do not understand the context of what's being talked about: neither language, neither geographical. If an eager to dispute person would know agleong proven documents, like for example would have read A. Baranauskas lethers to his father and letters to his brother Jonas, who according to this [6] has earned his fathers estate, someone's willingly shown eagerness to disrupt Wikipedia might have ceased.

I just have some suspicions, that this infamous "disputable" title has something to do with "Slownik Polski Biograficzny", recently removed form internet, and some persons persisist only on naming other nations and people according to Polish manner. Maybe bias, or maybe stuborness as administrator Durova once stated commenting Halibiutt's] actions - in my opinion it does not help nor to make Wikipedia better neither more credible. And as for long and unproductive discussions - our opponent has an long history of wasting other editors time in long and unnecessary discussions and repeating voting and putting "disputable" tags all around Lithuanian topics (and I do suppose not only Lithuanian), as has been noted by another adminisitrator Alex Bakharev [7] .

Can anyone put an end to this kind of disruption?--Lokyz 20:26, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

That's not likely. However we have moved from Zulus to Inuits, and although that's not a whole lot of progress in the long run, maybe some might think so. Dr. Dan 22:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Antoni Baranowski

What's the harm in adding the Polish name, used by various sources ([8], [9], [10]) to the article? Since the Polish name seems to be used primarily by Polish works, we can add a footnote that it is used such by a (quite rich) Polish historiography or use the lang-pl template.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 22:46, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

You forgot that it's the surname he used himself :) In the reference I provided there's even his handwritten signature for all to see. //Halibutt 08:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

In what language? You see, multilingual societies tend to have different forms of the name in different languages, but his mother's tongue without a slightest doubt was Lithuanian. Hence - Antanas Baranauskas. The polonized form is not important in this case. BTW, the Polonized version was present there all the time, so i do not see the reason for such rush. And btw, Praniauskaitė mothers tongue was also Lithuanian.--Lokyz 10:24, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

So, if you yourself admit that he was using both names, then why not bold them the way you did at Karolina Proniewska, even though she did not use her Lithuanian name - or at least we have no sources to prove that? Finally, why didn't you present the source claiming Proniewska's language to be Lithuanian at the relevant talk page? I asked you to do it months ago - to no avail... //Halibutt 19:19, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Halibutt you once again forget that this is not The Great Polish Emperial Encyclopedia, this is English Encyclopedia and there is a policy called WP:ENGLISH. So far i haven't seen any English sources to support Antoni Baranowski, or Szymon Dowkont, or Jan Bassanowicz, neither even Maciej Wołonczewski so bolding those names in English Wikipedia is a simple WP:POINT, or even Polonization if you prefer. All these forms of names are used exclusively in Polish publications. So the question what language? is still valid. Ah, and I've seen Praniauskaitė in English publication - i think reference was put there by you or by Piotrus.

And yes, Praniauskaitė did use her Lithuanian name per above arguments on multilingual culture. And yes, Baranauskas in a letter written in Lithuanian language did refer to her as Praniauskaitė.

And a piece of advice: please, read sources before citing them. Not the only line higlighted by search engine, but at least the whole page. this would save a lot of time by other busy editors.--Lokyz 16:33, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Citation request

I would like to see exact citation for support this, as this is the same pdf file which I have problems with. M.K. 06:37, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Use Foxit reader, it's light and works just fine, IMO much better than Acrobat. //Halibutt 08:37, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I upgraded Acrobat to Pro v. not its fine, M.K. 13:18, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Misusing sources

On 2007-11-06T22:45:40 was added source which had to verify and prove the need to use Antoni Baranowski in the lead. However in provided source's page do not concurs initial claim and quite contrary it do not use Antoni Baranowski at all. This is very similar editing pattern which was identified here. I have request, that involved contributors rechecked all used courses for further misuse, particularly non EN. M.K. 13:26, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but you're wrong. Check the signature at page 279. It clearly reads "A. Baranowski Bp" (A. Baranowski bishop). //Halibutt 19:16, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Provided source does not use Antoni Baranowski (despite attempts to reference it with this source) and surely not A. Baranowski Bp including picture, yet another original research. M.K. 16:29, 10 November 2007 (UTC) p.s. please stop misusing (1987)Józef Jacek Roje etc. source as well.

[edit] Kurschat on Baranowski

Friedrich Kurschat was the most eminent Lithuanianist of the 19th century, Prussian-Lithuanian and head of the Lithuanian Seminar of Königsberg University. After a number of trips to Russian-Lithuania he published his "Grammatik der litauischen Sprache" in 1876. In the foreword to the grammar he mentions the persons he had contacted in Russia. He calls his informants "Nationallitauer", this is also the designation he uses for himself. It defines language and descent, not political and cultural adherence. Among the names he mentions are "Bischof von Samogizien WOLONCZIEWSKI in KOWNO", "Priester, Professor und Inspector im bischöflichen Priesterseminar zu KOWNO Herr BARANOWSKI". He adds that BARANOWSKI had worked out his own Lithuanian grammar on the basis of August Schleicher's grammar, which he used in his lectures with his students - a majority were Lithuanians. He also mentions Baranowski's Polish education: "Herrn BARANOWSKI'S Bildung ist durchaus eine polnische." This seems to have affected BARANOWSKI'S Lithuanian accent.

Other publications of German balticists also have him as Anton BARANOWSKI.

What does that prove?

1. he was Lithuanian (by descent and mother tongue)
2. he was polonized/ Polish-educated
3. he lived in Russia

If a Prussian-Lithuanian does not address him as "Herr Baranauskas", then - like in the case of Bishop Valancius - in public life at least their Polish names must have been used.

In the 19th century it was common to call this Lithuanian sub-ethnos "Russian" or "Polish Lithuanians" as can be seen in a 1918 text by the Swiss balticist Max Niedermann: http://forum.istorija.net/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=3515&posts=1#M51305