| Revision as of 16:03, 15 January 2007 editConstanz (talk | contribs)4,319 edits →Block this guy!← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 13:02, 26 October 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,303,657 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Continuation War/Archive 16) (bot |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
{{Skip to talk}} |
|
{{Sprotect-banneduser}} |
|
|
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
{{FailedGA|3 October 2006}} |
|
|
|
{{Controversial}} |
|
{{WPMILHIST |
|
|
|
{{British English|date=January 2017}} |
|
|class = B |
|
|
|
{{Article history |
|
}} |
|
|
|
|action1=GAN |
|
{{WikiProject Russian History}} |
|
|
|
|action1date=3 October 2006 |
|
* ] |
|
|
|
|action1result=not listed |
|
* ] |
|
|
|
|action1oldid=79209600 |
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] The Puppet War of December 2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|action2=WPR |
|
|
|action2date=17 March 2018 |
|
|
|action2link=Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Guild_of_Copy_Editors |
|
|
|action2result=copyedited |
|
|
|action2oldid=830880660 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|action3=GAN |
|
|
|action3date=22:28, 22 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|action3link=Talk:Continuation War/GA1 |
|
|
|action3result=listed |
|
|
|action3oldid=831930890 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|action4=PR |
|
== Introduction Query == |
|
|
|
|action4date=8 April 2023 |
|
|
|action4link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Continuation War/archive1 |
|
|
|action4result=Reviewed |
|
|
|action4oldid=1148537882 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|action5 = WAR |
|
I'd like the author to give me the source of their contention that Finnish public opinion views the Continuation War as inevitable. I can find plenty of evidence for this view about the Winter War but none from Turku's Library of Political Sciences for this view about the Continuation War, even from contemporaneous sources. |
|
|
|
|action5date = 2024-01-04 |
|
|
|
|
|
|action5link = Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Continuation War |
|
: I'm not the author, but have you checked Ryti's and Paasikivi's diaries, Paasikivi's biography (sorry, don't remember the writer right away), Mannerheim's memoirs and Jokipii's "Jatkosodan synty"? All points out, that right after the Winter War there was no such feel of inevitability, but during the summer when Soviet Union pressured additional concessions and prevented closer co-operation with Sweden, the feeling of being on the Baltic road increased (Paasikivi,Mannerheim,Jokipii). According to Jokipii, it was the Petsamo crisis which made Mannerheim's and Ryti's mind that the second round is inevitable. |
|
|
|
|action5result = not approved |
|
: By default, the Continuation War is considered a war of choise, if we consider the situation from the end of the Winter War. But if we roll forward to June 22, then the war was already inevitable. It is interesting to look what happened between those two dates, so see ]. (Ok, its not a perfect name, but hopefully we find something better...) |
|
|
|
|action5oldid = 1193525475 |
|
I do believe that the articles are slightly skewed to an unflinchingly Finnish Nationalist pov and I say that as a long-term foreign resident of the country, which I hope qualifies me to pronounce on such things without fear of being insensitively blind to cultural pressures to conform to the state's view of history. |
|
|
|
|currentstatus=GA |
|
|
|
|
|
|topic=warfare |
|
: You are free to balance it, and I appreciate it greatly. |
|
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=GA|collapsed=yes|vital=yes|1= |
|
Can whoever wrote the article's introduction please insert some definite articles (THEs to English speakers) but that is a minor point. |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Military history|class=GA |
|
|
|
|
|
|A-Class=fail |
|
As regards Nazism, there is a synagogue in Turku, which was closed down in 1943. A friend Antti has told me of a similar event in Naantali, but I have no dates for that. Also, the article skates around the thousands of Finns who joined the Viking Division of the SS to fight under the colours of Nazi Germany. |
|
|
|
|B-Class-1=yes |
|
|
|
|
|
<!--2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies.--> |
|
: Thousands of Finns? 1,400 (1200 before Barbarossa and 200 replacements 1942)? At Naantali there wasn't Jewish parish, unlike at Helsinki, Turku, Viipuri and Tampere. If you have more sources on the issue, please insert those to the article. |
|
|
|
|B-Class-2=yes |
|
|
|
|
|
<!--3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content.--> |
|
] 08:35, ] ] (UTC) |
|
|
|
|B-Class-3=yes |
|
|
|
|
|
<!--4. It is free from major grammatical errors.--> |
|
I've refrained from editing until there may be a deeper consensus arrived at on the issue of inevitability. |
|
|
|
|B-Class-4=yes |
|
|
|
|
|
<!--5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams.--> |
|
: The introduction needs rewriting, I agree. --] 21:03, ] ] (UTC) |
|
|
|
|B-Class-5=yes |
|
|
|
|
|
|Russian=y |
|
==I question the following statement== |
|
|
|
|Nordic=y |
|
|
|
|
|
|WWII=y |
|
"Sweden's leading cabinet members had hoped to improve the relations with Nazi Germany through indirect support of Operation Barbarossa, mainly channelled through Finland." |
|
|
|
|German=y |
|
|
|
|
|
|Italian=y |
|
Sweden's involvement with Finland was not simply to gain favor with Germany, but also due to the deep cultural connections that the two nations shared, much closer than Sweden had with Norway for example. The common phrase was "Finlands sak är vår", ("Finland's cause is ours") and for many Swedes who helped in the Finnish effort it was for this feeling of brotherhood that they gave aid, although there were some ultra conservatives who would for other reasons. Most of political Sweden was dismayed that Finland was fighting along with Germany, but wanted to give some support anyway. Surely there was an element of appeasing Germany involved as well, as Sweden was forced to do this all along, but this was not the sole reason for helping Finland.] 00:22, ] ] (UTC) |
|
|
|
|British=y |
|
|
|
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Russia|importance=mid|mil=yes|hist=yes}} |
|
==''...forming an ambulance unit with direct personal influence by Marshal Mannerheim.''== |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Soviet Union|importance=Mid}} |
|
: What does this mean? Was he the leader of the unit or did he use his influence to create it? Or what? --] 11:25, 23 December 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Finland|importance=Top}} |
|
|
|
|
|
{{WikiProject European history|importance=Mid}} |
|
|
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Germany|importance=Mid}} |
|
|
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors|user=Blackmane|date=17 March 2018}} |
|
== Photo == |
|
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
{{YesAutosign}} |
|
This is not good to put photo of slayed Russian soldiers in the beginning of the article. Then why not to show the truck full of Finnish dead soldiers? It was also available earlier in references. Right know I can`t put the link although I`ve scoured all this material from stem to stern, but you should know what I am speaking about. |
|
|
|
{{Annual readership}} |
|
:Hello there. There is absolutely no problem in that kind of images from the real front. However, usually the victims eyes (atleast) are not shown in this context, and in that image it's almost too privately focused on the face. From this POV it might be considered to be removed from the template. We all know there are casualties in a conflict called war.. The reason that image is chosen is probably that it is from front, has bicycle troops and a battleground. These make a classical image for Continuation War. What other image do you suggest? --] (]) 19:15, 5 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|
|
|
|
|archiveheader = {{Aan}} |
|
== Protection to be lifted? == |
|
|
|
|maxarchivesize = 200K |
|
|
|
|
|
|counter = 16 |
|
I've been requested to unprotect this article . Could the editors here report on the status of the disputes that led to its protection? Are they over by now? There's no point in unprotecting an article if a new edit war will start immediately afterwards.--<strong><font style="color: #082567">]</font>]<font style="color: #082567">]</font></strong> 12:36, 7 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|minthreadsleft = 4 |
|
:{{RFPP|u}}--<strong><font style="color: #082567">]</font>]<font style="color: #082567">]</font></strong> 00:08, 8 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|algo = old(180d) |
|
== Cleaning the Talk page == |
|
|
|
|archive = Talk:Continuation War/Archive %(counter)d}} |
|
|
|
|
|
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn |
|
Part of the process against sock puppets is removing their contributions from articles and talk pages. I have done it here. However, due to length of the edit war, the sock puppets managed to infest many useful contributions, so I apologize about the childs thrown away with the washing water. I try to bring sanitated versions of some of them back shortly. --] 08:03, 8 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|target=/Archive index |mask=/Archive <#> |leading_zeros=0 |indexhere=yes}} |
|
|
|
|
==Also removed== |
|
|
''The break up of the Soviet Union appeared to have brought a significant change in the policies and attitudes acquired by the new Russian leadership in this respect, when in 1991 President Boris Yeltsin publicly admitted that the Soviet Union had started the Continuation War. When confronted with the question, President Vladimir Putin referred to President Yeltsin's earlier statements, saying that there was no reason for the Russian leaders to further apologize about the matter.'' |
|
|
: The Yeltsin's quote on the Continuation war was in fact on the Winter war. Should some part of this passage stay in the article? |
|
|
|
|
|
''The ''Continuation War'' is widely perceived as a continuation for the Finnish-Soviet Winter War (1939–1940), Stalin's attempt to occupy Finland, based on the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, signed between Stalin and Hitler in 1939. '' |
|
|
: This sentence is redundant, as the info is given just two paragraphs below. --] 00:37, 8 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Article protected again == |
|
|
|
|
|
I've protected this article again and it's unlikely that it shall be unprotected before the dispute is clearly over. I shall not directly involve myself in the dispute so please don't contact me to mediate or to fish for sockpuppets, just to report that the dispute is over. Meanwhile I once again recommend the following sections for resolving this once and for all: ] to attract input from other users; ] for checkuser against sockpuppetry; ] for investigating users' disruptive activities, can also be used to determine sockpuppets.--<strong><font style="color: #082567">]</font>]<font style="color: #082567">]</font></strong> 20:05, 8 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:I think something might be learned from the article ] and more spesificly from the "Assessment" section of the article, which deals with numerous controversial issues in a manner which has survived numerous edits and has not caused an edit war. IMHO in represents one side of the argument, the other side of the argument, the facts and nothing else. --] 10:46, 9 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Lies, sock accusations, and other BS by the ] == |
|
|
|
|
|
The article ] was protected after an edit war on the inclusion of long section of ] by "]", one of many usernames used by a multiuser contributing from IP address ] The article was protected, and a long discussion continued on this talk page between some regular contributors and an army of ]. ''(Archived ])'' The sock army failed to gain any support for its possition. After the issue of sock puppetry was raised, the sock master responded by voicing accusations of sock puppetry against established users here and on talk pages of some administrators. After two weeks some administrator lost his patience and took the issue to ], it was confermed that the user accounts were sock puppets of the banned user ], also known as the "Kven user". |
|
|
|
|
|
The Kven user has a good command of the English language. His arguments and accusations can be convincing to the casual reader. The content of his comments is however 100% ''<] deleted>. See: |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
=== Rebuttal of the false and absurd accusation of sock puppetry === |
|
|
|
|
|
The Kven user has accused several established users of sock puppetry, (first stated ]). The accusation states, that ], ], ] and ] are the ''same person''. The accusation is totally absurd. The users accused of being the same person have expressed very different points-of-view on contested issues. They also have long edit histories. The only reason for the accusation can be to spread ] and lies. |
|
|
|
|
|
* {{vandal|Illythr}} is a native Russian from ]. He is a regular contributor to ]. His first edit is from 28 January 2006. He also ] to the Russian Misplaced Pages. |
|
|
* {{vandal|Whiskey}} from ], ] is a physics major from the ]. His first edit is from 9 January 2004 One of his first contributions was starting the article ] (a title with an anti-Russian POV). His contributions to commons also include his real name in the copyright information. |
|
|
* {{vandal|Roobit}} Is a native Russian from Estonia. He has expressed some extremely anti-Estonian points-of view. He may be one of the 1 million citizens of ] and ], that were deprived of their citizenship by ] in 1992. His first edit is from 25 November 2006. His contributions to commons also include his real name in the copyright information. |
|
|
* {{vandal|Petri Krohn}} - is me, using my real name. As far as I know, I am the only person in the world with this combination of a ] and a ]. My ] contains links to personal information, including my home address, telephone numbers and my entry on ]. I have almost 15000 edits on the English Misplaced Pages, my first edit is from 14 August 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
-- ] 05:33, 11 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
: Well, I guess I, or rather, Whiskey is one multi-faceted genius, then. ;-) Hey, you used the <nowiki>{{vandal}}</nowiki> template! Awww... :D PS: The Saint Peter article doesn't help you assert the Finnishness of your name. ;-) --] 15:40, 11 January 2007 (UTC)´ |
|
|
|
|
|
==Too fast archiving here== |
|
|
|
|
|
Why the most fresh discussions needs to be archived totally (including my short but fresh), user ]??. I'll propose that that at least part of the most fresh discussions is left on the page. Othervise random walker as me don't even realize that discussions are ongoing and some good contributors can be missed. Instead the old and quite radical USSR style manifest on the top of the talk page is left, and some other outdated comments. |
|
|
|
|
|
The sockpuppetry as we have seen to happen here quite much is not the way we should write. Ofcourse it is acceptable to use different name on the other article but not on the same. (This is just my opinion, and I think it is in line with Wiki rules) |
|
|
I found that user "Ahven is a fish" was accused of the sockpuppetry and revealed later as well. But user "Ahven is a fish" found also some things that more or less connects users Illythr, Whiskey and Roobit together (ref. discussion in ]. Somebody could initiate the checkuser on these users to reveal possible SB. This would at least close the debate on that. |
|
|
: Er, what's "SB"? You are welcome to initiate a Checkuser for us, I will submit to it voluntarily. --] 23:34, 12 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
::Me too. --] 00:22, 13 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
When looking the debate it seems that besides Illythr there were no other accounts opposing parts of the contested text, and after the debate even the user account ] '''agreed''' ,(really!!!) to the saving of the text: (Please find the ref.). Only the user Whiskey provided any counterarguments in the entire debate. The account "Petri Krohn" only had small contributions and used some wording not in line with Wiki like the term "crap". |
|
|
: You forgot to mention that Whiskey demanded sources for all disputed statements. One one was provided (about Yeltsyn commenting on the Winter War), and it was off the mark. Huh, only Whiskey? What was I doing, then, pushing Stalinist POV? ;-) --] 23:34, 12 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
::Please, Hugo, be much more careful what you write and especially what you quote. For those who didn't bother to check the link Hugo provided, I didn't agree to the saving of the text, but to resolve the deadlock I compromised to allow the insertion of the '''text, which have to fulfill the Misplaced Pages quality standard by being a)NPOV, b)not original research and c)sourced.''' The proposed text failed in all three accounts, and regardless of numerous demands, puppets failed to address the deficiencies. Don't try to claim I advocated adding that text ''as is'', you would be lying in doing that. --] 00:34, 13 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Thanks for warning. You are rigth, you did not accept unconditionally. I'm sorry of wording I used. Yes, I just wanted to point out that you reach somekind of consensus with conditions. Text must meet the Wiki quality requirements. I stronly agree on that. We cannot write here into encyclopedia what we feel but what we know and is backed with reference. ] 22:42, 13 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Length of Lead == |
|
Well. I hope the discussion here is done more sivilized way. If we have two or more truth of the same thing those should be both left untouched until another/or both is referred. If both are referred then authors of the references have to be evaluated. This is if the final truth has to be dig out.;) In general, stop the nonsense, its not the quantity of edits (reverts), but the quality of edits that counts in Wiki. |
|
|
:Nah, you can insert something only if you can ] it, as Misplaced Pages is a strictly "second-hand" source of information. The source must also be reliable, etc. --] |
|
|
:: Illythr, may I ask first. What means Nah?. I checked that in english it is synonym for word "no". Othervise I agree above. Misplaced Pages is source for second-hand information and reader has to be carefull. ] 23:03, 13 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
::: "Nah" is the ] of "Yeah". ;-) Anyhow, why do you ask, if you already know? --] 00:56, 14 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:::: Just doublecheck after my check. ] 10:54, 14 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The current lead is too long and needs to be shortened substanially. According to ], the lead should be compressed to about 10 to 15 sentences of 3 paragraphs, or about 300 words total. Currently, it has 607 words total and 6 paragraphs. I will be dramatically reducing the length with accordance to ] throughout the process. ] (]) 03:15, 22 October 2023 (UTC) |
|
Everybody knows that the information of these finnish war things is more or less finlandized by the Russian propaganda which was practiced until '80s. I got personal wake after reading Taisto Huuskonen's "Laps Suomen" book. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Too vague reference to the beginning of Continuation war == |
|
What comes to the user "Ahven is a fish", he/she have lots of contributions in this article. Everybody can see that his/her main target is to write positively of Finland. That is desirable, instead of accusing Finland of the crimes that big powers are quilty of. |
|
|
: Unfortunately, "writing positively" or negatively in a neutral encyclopedia is not desired. Verifiable information from reliable sources in a neutral tone and from a NPOV - that's what is desired. --] 23:34, 12 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
::That is clear. But if somebody treats Finland as a criminal for the illegal WW2 in these pages the text gets easily negative from Finland POV. Then the text must be corrected. We can say positive things of Finland. Like, Finland tried to bring as much as possible fallen soldiers from battlefield to be graven in their home villages and did not grave them to battlefield. I think this sounds positive, at least to me. ] 23:03, 13 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the " It began with a Finnish declaration of war and invasion on 25 June 1941 and ended on 19 September 1944 with the Moscow Armistice. " is too vague and does not take in consideration what caused the reaction on 25th June 1941. Documented finnish side saw that the 25th started with USSR 27 SB 2 bomber attack to small city of Heinola and 18 other locations in southern-Finland. |
|
Please do not remove "Ahven is a fish" article contributions unintentionally, otherwise what leaves left, half, not even that;) |
|
|
We see that nearly all the contributions have dried out, why? Nothing to say or nothing wanted to say? I hope you continue. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 22nd of June Germany had declared war against USSR and Göbbels declared in radio that Finland fought "Im Verein und im Bunde". This was translated in Ministry of foreign affairs as Im Verein "together" and im bunde "in union", however the latter was considered to mean "side by side". After Göbbels radio release, Finnish ministry of foreign affairs stated that Finland would stay outside of the war between Germany and USSR. There was no official documentation written for this co-operation, but Germany had stated later afterwards that the missing official documentation was replaced by previous letter sent by Adolf Hitler to Ryti in 21st of June 1941 which Ryti then replied 28th of June 1941 with his own letter. |
|
] 22:45, 12 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
: Ahven, i.e. Kven and his army of socks contributions were mainly a lame attempt at rewriting history. That he had created a sockpuppet farm to support himself and resorted to personally attacking his opposition (in a very self-discreditive manner, I might add) demonstrates the quality of his edits quite clearly. As for the sockpuppet war - it's over for now. The huge walls of text that consisted mosly of repetitive wild claims and funny accusations may be an amusing read, but is no longer an issue. --] 23:34, 12 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:::The talk texts gets easily difficult to read. Personal attacks does not belong to Wiki, I stronly agree on you. Ahven should leave that out right away. What comes to edits it can be seen that Ahven have lots of information but sometimes without sources. It is maybe better to add information in small portions but with sources to quarantee quality. ] 23:24, 13 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As the attack happened on 25th of June and basically the letter was sent back to Adolf Hitler that was considered official document on 28th, the disrepancy on using Finnish declaration of war in this type of context should be reconsidered. (Radio speech on 26th of June 1941 https://en.wikipedia.org/Risto_Ryti translated to english describing situation after bombing".) ] (]) 10:54, 1 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
::In fact I was more lenient than Misplaced Pages policy, which demands removal of puppet contributions from articles and their talk pages: I just archived them. Puppets managed to infest almost all open discussions before they were banned, so many interesting issues were thrown away with archiving. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:"On 22 June 1941, the Germans launched their massive invasion of the Soviet Union. Finland had already secretly mobilized its forces and declared war on 25 June..." (p. 442) . ] (]) 07:03, 26 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
::The issues puppets handled are beyond repair and incomprehensible due to walls-of-text method puppets used: It is impossible to follow discussion through the rhetoric which have no factual contents, only content provided was emotional. |
|
|
|
::https://helda.helsinki.fi/server/api/core/bitstreams/ebace8ed-51f2-4158-9bb8-105e69a000f1/content |
|
|
::Page 31 - 3.4.3 Did the Soviet Union Start Aggressive War on 25 July ] (]) 17:57, 27 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::I am not sure what you are arguing. From what I can see, the source mentions the Finnish position, then the analysis says: "Hitler’s declaration in itself could serve as a sufficient reason for the Soviet Union to take military measures against Finland... It is the inherent right of every State to defend itself against an attack endangering its existence. For Finland to avoid Soviet attack it would have been important to 1) contest Hitler’s declaration 2) declare neutrality according to its law, 3) emphasize to the Soviets that the German forces in Finland were meant only for Finland’s defensive purposes, and 4) assure that no military action would be taken across the border... I conclude that the Soviet Union had weighty reasons to argue that it had the right to use armed force in self-defence against Finland starting on 25 June. Finland was playing a double game." ] (]) 18:13, 27 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Then in the conclusion: "After Germany attacked against the Soviet Union, Finland reoccupied the territories lost in the Winter War. The Finnish forces did not stop at the old border but attacked to the Eastern (Soviet) Karelia and occupied it with a wish eventually to annex it. By that measure, Finland joined as Germany’s ally in its war of aggression against the Soviet Union..." ] (]) 18:15, 27 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::::For future reference, I think the vast majority of historians believe that the Winter War was an aggressive war against Finland, while the Continuation War was an aggressive war against the USSR. This is almost as pointless as arguing that Finland were the aggressors in the Winter War for supposedly attacking the USSR, when it is known that the USSR had already planned for a war against Finland and to install a puppet communist government. ] (]) 05:13, 29 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Unclear date of the invasion in the lead == |
|
::: Yes, that what I was worried about. If that is the case that puppetshow is totally forbidden. Then I'm getting angry because that show stole the whole show in this discussion and all the good contributions are now archived. I'm sure that Ahven can write without puppetry as well. (Actually lately he used mainly "Ahven is a fish" account.) Because the facts are the clue here not puppetry. ] 00:23, 14 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"It began with a Finnish declaration of war and invasion on 25 June 1941". |
|
::I made the offer to leave the section in the article as a compromise; I still do not believe it is useful to be there. The only condition I made was to follow Misplaced Pages policies, for example a demand for sourcing the contested content. I even marked the contested sentences to the text to make his task easier. He had ten days to provide those sources, but no. Only sources he provided was a conspiracy theory without any evidence and a newspaper column. Instead he chose to turn back to his rhetoric and started demanding copying the sources to the talk pages. In addition being a violation of a copyright, it turned out that he himself chose to use same method with a twist: By cherrypicking sentences from the sources he changed the meaning of their message. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The article states that the joint Finnish–German invasion of Murmansk oblast started on 29 June, and that the Finnish invasion of Karelia started on 10 July. Am I missing something or should that part be clarified? |
|
::In his behaviour on the question about sources, he lost all credibility in my eyes: He was not interested in developing a good, informative, encyclopedic article, but all he was interested in was pure and simple vandalism. |
|
|
:::I think in this edit war there was two sides as well;) I think that your recommendations to remove nearly all opposites the contributions were hard. At least to my eys. Didn't you propose to handle one chapter at a time? Sources are required and after the chapter is finished it would be moved to real article. This can be still done. Ok, you are proposing this below;). ] 00:23, 14 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I understand the Finnish declaration of war was on 25 June, though, I didn't find any citation in the article text that Finland declared war on that date, only "the Finnish Parliament used the attacks as justification for the approval of a "defensive war"", but I don't see in the article how the invasion began on 25 June. ] (]) 10:27, 8 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
::If you think there is something worth to salvage in his text, you are free to edit it to the article, but remember: Add the proper sources immediately! Also remember, that you cannot cherrypick sources: If you deem one source so reliable, that you quote it, you cannot blame if someone quotes the same source against your interpretation. |
|
|
:::I'm not sure I'm able to do that as I'm quite newcomer here. But maybe later I can do some small contribution, with source. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:Perhaps it could be clarified, as there was still wartime cooperation with Germany before the Finnish offensive began. ] (]) 04:48, 11 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
::As tensions are still riding high, I recommend moving first by piecemal, adding one sentence or paragraph at time, and proposing them first here in talk page so we can provide comments without disrupting the article itself. --] 00:22, 13 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Yes, this is the way. Small pieces are more easy to eat. ] 00:23, 14 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Small addition to "In film and literature" == |
|
=== Block this guy! === |
|
|
Why do you engage in discussion with this sock puppet? If his puppetry was not evident from his previous edits, it is clear from his support of the Illythr - Whiskey - Roobit sock puppet fallacy. He should be blocked immediately. Besides his sock master should be perma-banned, if he is not already. |
|
|
: Hmmm, global warming, bears wake up from winter sleep;), lets calm down. We can discuss with guys if we want. Above fallacy is just what is spread here. I have not accused anything, just commenting Ahven's discussion and proposing checkuser. This can clean guys reputation. ] 00:23, 14 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I recall a nice film from the time of this war: https://en.wikipedia.org/The_Cuckoo_(film) ] (]) 22:20, 25 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
It seems that we need to start a new action against the Kven user, based partly on the false accusations of sock puppetry. He may not be perma-banned yet. (Or should we just ask Jimbo to ban him?) -- ] 09:50, 13 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
: It appears that the Checkuser failed to produce conclusive evidence against him. I think we can wait out until he becomes disruptive and obvious to more than just to you and me. Walls of text, introducing that section, silly accusations - all that stuff. ;-) --] 11:39, 13 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Well, sockpuppetry must not be tolerated, but the same goes for Soviet POV pushing. I wouldn't be surprised, if Petri would declare here as well, that those who dear to refer to Soviet crimes are . ] - ] 16:03, 15 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
The current lead is too long and needs to be shortened substanially. According to MOS:LEADLENGTH, the lead should be compressed to about 10 to 15 sentences of 3 paragraphs, or about 300 words total. Currently, it has 607 words total and 6 paragraphs. I will be dramatically reducing the length with accordance to WP:SS throughout the process. JumbledPasta (talk) 03:15, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
In the " It began with a Finnish declaration of war and invasion on 25 June 1941 and ended on 19 September 1944 with the Moscow Armistice. " is too vague and does not take in consideration what caused the reaction on 25th June 1941. Documented finnish side saw that the 25th started with USSR 27 SB 2 bomber attack to small city of Heinola and 18 other locations in southern-Finland.
On 22nd of June Germany had declared war against USSR and Göbbels declared in radio that Finland fought "Im Verein und im Bunde". This was translated in Ministry of foreign affairs as Im Verein "together" and im bunde "in union", however the latter was considered to mean "side by side". After Göbbels radio release, Finnish ministry of foreign affairs stated that Finland would stay outside of the war between Germany and USSR. There was no official documentation written for this co-operation, but Germany had stated later afterwards that the missing official documentation was replaced by previous letter sent by Adolf Hitler to Ryti in 21st of June 1941 which Ryti then replied 28th of June 1941 with his own letter.
As the attack happened on 25th of June and basically the letter was sent back to Adolf Hitler that was considered official document on 28th, the disrepancy on using Finnish declaration of war in this type of context should be reconsidered. (Radio speech on 26th of June 1941 https://en.wikipedia.org/Risto_Ryti translated to english describing situation after bombing".) 87.94.108.199 (talk) 10:54, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
The article states that the joint Finnish–German invasion of Murmansk oblast started on 29 June, and that the Finnish invasion of Karelia started on 10 July. Am I missing something or should that part be clarified?
I understand the Finnish declaration of war was on 25 June, though, I didn't find any citation in the article text that Finland declared war on that date, only "the Finnish Parliament used the attacks as justification for the approval of a "defensive war"", but I don't see in the article how the invasion began on 25 June. Leverpastej18 (talk) 10:27, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
level-5 vital article is rated GA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
.svg)
.svg)
.svg){kind=small}
