This level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors |
Sections of the article that deal with post-1939 period have clear anti-Soviet bias. Authors do their best to demean Soviet Union and all its actions towards Latvia. Molotov-Ribbentrop pact is referred to as "unlawful" (?!) Admission of Baltic republics into Soviet Union is called "occupation"; it's improper to use this word: how could there be an occupation if there was no war between Soviet Union and Latvia? 'Annexation' would be more accurate here.
There's an article on Occupation of Baltic Republics, but only one paragraph in it is relevant to the events of summer of 1940, and the use of the word 'occupation' is totally unjustified. I've attempted to expand a little bit on the subject, but I got reverted. --Itinerant1 07:21, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
Since this is the "in depth" back-up article to the history summary on the Latvia page, it seems there should be some clarification of occupation. While the Baltic pacts of mutual assistance were entered into under threat of force (as was demonstrated by the Soviet attack on the Finns, who turned down such a pact, and by Stalin's own words), those pacts were, nevertheless, legal. One could even argue that under the terms of those mutual assistance pacts, the Soviet Union was within its rights to invade Latvia and the Baltics in order to protect its interests, having interpreted acts of the Baltics as violating the terms of the pacts. What was illegal was the petitioniong by the Saeima (puppet government notwithstanding) to join the Soviet Union. That act directly violated the Latvian Constitution, which was still in effect. Accordingly, there was no legal constitutional basis for incorporation, making the Soviet presence on Latvian soil subsequent to the August 5, 1940 "incorporation" illegal, and therefore a forcible occupation. That also made any subsequent border adjustments affecting the sovreign territory of Latvia (Abrene annexation)--indeed, any and all actions by the Soviet government--illegal. Peters 05:27, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Nonetheless let us keep to the facts. Webster's Concise English Dictionary: Occupy "(c)to take posession and remain in control of". If you take Poland for example: While Poland's eastern territories are referred to as "annexed by the Soviet Union" and the western territories as "occupied by Nazi Germany" one is compelled to ask why a military annexation from the east with the pretense of protecting peoples of Soviet ethnic groups is not considered an occupation, whereas Nazi Germany who also entered by military force, was "occupying Poland". (The answer would be: the winners always write the history books. Stalin remained the hero, Hitler the evil dictator.) If one were to compare the Soviet Annexation of Poland to that of the eastern territories of Finland the main difference would be that Finland concentrated their military force in the east to defend their border from the Soviet Union, and remained independent dispite losing territory to the Soviet Union, whereas Poland had already been invaded from the west by Nazi Germany, as preagreed upon in the secret protocol of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, and gave the Soviet soldiers entering a "non-existent" nation from the east very little resistance. In conclusion, according to your argument, if a nation surrenders to military force and a mutual, is it therefore neither occupied nor annexed. According to the simplified Webster's Dictionary definition of the verb to occupy, Latvia was occupied, i.e. taken posession of, and remained in the control of the Soviet Union. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.115.83.22 (talk) 02:15, 5 April 2007 (UTC).
There is no mention of the Yalta Agreement anywhere in this article. It is significant matter in the recorded history of LATVIA post 1945 that requires mention. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.10.231.231 (talk • contribs) 04:49, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
Latvia's responsibility for its actions in World War II and the Holocaust have largely been ignored or muted in favor of arguments against the policies of the Soviet Union. I have noticed in many articles (not to mention the media) about Latvia its participation is rarely mentioned, as with the other Baltic States. However, that being said this Arcticle History of Latvia touches more on the topic than similar articles for the other two Baltic countries (that is until it is edited partially out, as has happened in the past). --RPlunk 00:19, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
"[Estonia] was occupied by USSR an Germany after 1940. It was not possible for Estonia as a state to participate in, or to be responsible for, any actions in the Holocaust."
I think the word "genocide" referring to the actions of the Soviet Union in Latvia must be removed from the article. During Stalin's rule a lot of people of a number of other nationalities suffered, were repressed and executed including Russians, Ukranians, Jews, Latvians and many others. --Shakura 22:42, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, but that is not genocide. Latvian language for example was not restricted in the Latvian SSR. Going by that broad definition one can easily say Latvians collaborating with Waffen SS perpetrated genocide against Russians —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.105.31.123 (talk • contribs) 04:51, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
Shakura, would you prefer referring to the anti-Latvian activities by Soviet Union as ethnic cleansing? Digwuren 19:35, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
It doesn't seem to me that these are proper NPOV statements, there's a strong anti-EU POV here.GhePeU 11:02, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
Do we have any kind of consensus here? I was in Latvia not that long before the EU vote and my mother "reported" on goings on leading up to and including the vote. Certainly it can be said there was plenty of debate and polemics—from "the last step in Latvia rejoining Europe" to "the EU central government is no better than the Soviets dictating from afar." For example, there was much wailing and gnashing of teeth about scenic road-overhanging trees which would need to be cut down in order to fulfill EU road improvement funding norms (required for safety for passage of taller trucks). Shall someone take it upon themselves to update? —Pēters J. Vecrumba 12:50, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
The sentence in question has been removed on 30 August 2007. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.110.162.148 (talk) 11:41, August 30, 2007 (UTC)
The first to recognise Latvia's independence was the Russian SFSR (on August 11, 1920), which relinquished authority over the Latvian nation and claims to Latvian territory once and for all times. I'd have thought that Poles who helped Latvians during the Battle of Daugavpils would be the first to recognize their independence? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 18:13, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
The description of the sequence of events of the first Soviet invasion was a complete mess. Corrected. Also changed Ezergailis to a real inline ref and added total Holocaust deaths, which was missing from the discussion. — Pēters J. Vecrumba 05:01, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps You might find this usefull http://www.apollo.lv/portal/life/2135 ---- Xil/talk 11:55, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Just adjusted the content tree to make the different periods appear more evident and ready for expansions.
I was actually quite surprised how little Latvian independence is covered with this article - not mentioning a main standalone article on the years inbetween the world wars, which is certainly missing. The 200 years of Russian Empire has a very lean section, I have added some headers of topics that would be of significance to Latvian history as well. Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\Work 23:00, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
\bhistoryofnations\.net\b
on the local blacklistIf you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 15:32, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
Elevatorrailfan (talk · contribs), your change has been reverted so therefore please discuss your proposed change on talk per WP:BRD. An inbox is intended as a summary overview of the entire article. Adding a former country inbox into subsections of this article makes no sense, since Latvia has gone through numerous states since History of Latvia#German period (1207–1561) and placing a dozen former country inboxes into the article would clutter it up. --Nug (talk) 20:08, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
The Former Country infobox that I created was for Republic of Latvia before it became part of the Soviet Union. It is under the section Independence because that section has information of the history of the Republic of Latvia (before it became part of the Soviet) in the section. Elevatorrailfan (talk) 02:13, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
The infobox is for the Republic of Latvia from 1918–1940 which is relevant to the section independence. Elevatorrailfan (talk) 23:50, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:History of Latvia/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
According to the six B-class criterias, I have downgraded this article to a C-class article with the following reasoning:
|
Last edited at 23:34, 1 May 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 18:00, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on History of 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).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:11, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on History of 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).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:04, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
The paragraph was extremely confused, e.g., contained mistakenly overlapping times. Also, the linguistic sentence had been complete nonsense, copied from Mallory, who had misunderstood the late Prof. Schmid (whom I knew personally).HJJHolm (talk) 08:30, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:52, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:07, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:10, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:54, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
Noted Albert didn't actually found it. Sorry about edit summary cut short, didn't have Latvian keyboard anabled (alt-S saved). Bishopric was transferred to Riga from Ikšķile. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 00:17, 1 December 2022 (UTC)