Talk:Estland

Old talk

This article was quite problematic, and full of dubious historical claims.

First, it said that Estonia before February 1918 was an independent state. This is quite an unusual claim. After the February Revolution, the Russian provinces of Estonia (Estland) and the Estonian-speaking northern half of Livonia were united into one province, and Estonia was given certain autonomy, but it was not independent. I removed everything about that.

I have also never heard that Estonia was ever a "principality". This might be a term from the Livonian war in the 16th century, which would be a completely different topic.

Of course we need an article about the Swedish and later Russian governorate of Estonia (Eestimaa kubermang), which this is trying to be. But the naming is problematic, too. I haven't heard that "Estland" is the standard English name for this, I know it's been called Estonia of Esthonia. Estland might do better as a redirect to Estonia.

Rain74 08:53, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

• "On 28 November 1917, the Land council proclaimed itself the highest power in Estonia..." 1850–1918. National awakening
• "Estonia declares itself independent." On This Day - 28 November 1917
• "On 28 November 1917, the Estonian Diet (the Maapaev) declared itself fee supreme power in Estonia." REPORT SUBMITTED BY ESTONIA PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 25 PARAGRAPH 1 OF THE FRAMEWORK CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF NATIONAL MINORITIES
• "Though the popularly elected Provisional National Council, had proclaimed itself the highest authority in Estonia as early as 28 November 1917..." Judicial Reform in Estonia
• "...1561. aastal said Eestimaa vürstiriik ja Tallinna linn kõrge Rootsi krooni kaitse alla." Eerikupäev

--Estland 21:51, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I suspect this article is a part of the WP:POVFORK series that included Republic of Estonia (1990-1991) and Estonian SSR (independent), both deleted by now. It should probably also be deleted, but this one appears to contain actually useful information that should probably be merged into History of Estonia first. Digwuren 18:48, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I second to that motion. --Klamber 19:40, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Soviet Republic of Naissaar is also a likely member of the same series. Digwuren 19:15, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Disambiguation

As of now, this article "disambiguates" between a number of old administrative territorialities that once existed. I believe most of them shouldn't have their own articles, and should be merged into History of Estonia instead. Digwuren 08:30, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Estland (disambiguation)

Guys, please discuss the way you want to organize the page: reserve Eastland for the province and have Estland (disambiguation) for other meaning or have Eastland as a disambig and short articles about the provinces at each country.

I currently do not see killer arguments for one way or another Alex Bakharev 00:08, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Here's one: there is no "Eastland" distinct from "Estland". "Eastland", along with "Ehstland", "Esthland", "Aestland" and a number of other weird spellings is an alternative spelling of "Estland". Spelling of Germanic languages wasn't very stable in the Olden Days.

Furthermore, "Estland" and "Estonia" have the same semantic content. Digwuren 17:59, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

In principle I am open to the suggestion, that Estland would be a dab page. This is however what needs to happen first:

1. Someone must propose another name for the existing old article.
2. A consensus must be reached
3. The page must be moved to make page for the dab page.

Until this happens, the page should stay with its old content, and the dab page should stay at Estland (disambiguation). -- Petri Krohn 00:26, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

the old content was a replica of whats under the links. There is absolutely on reason for keeping ANY of it on this or any other page. There were only links that are here, the intro that is also here. The only thing not here is the uncited and AFAIK untrue claim that it was a short lived country. Feel free to add anything that you feel needs added to the linked pages if found acceptable there. I will fully support this being disambiguation page.--Alexia Death 05:14, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

P.S This being a disambiguation page is a consensus witch you allone are resisting.--Alexia Death 05:16, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

This article does not have any really importnant content as it consist only of short summaries of other articles. Considering its relatively little importance, everything that needs to be preserved and is not yet at History of Estonia should be moved there, article itsselfly should stay as disambiguation page(or it should be redirect to disambiguation page).--Staberinde 08:45, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Petri Krohns continued attempts of reverting

Petri Krohn is still regularly attempting to vandalize this page in spite the consensus on talk page. He refers to AfD in witch the consensus was the same, this should serve as disambiguation page and AfD was closed per request of the starter after reaching this consensus. Is some form of administrative action needed to get this to stop?--Alexia Death 15:59, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Is there anything in those old pages he tries to push other than what had been handled under linked pages? Because I sure cant see anything.--Alexia Death 16:08, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

My understanding is that keeping "Estland" as a concept separate from "Estonia" is what he wants to achieve. Thus, it's not about content per se; it's about WP:WEIGHT. Digwuren 18:03, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't even think it's that, it's just a power struggle for the sake of it, and it is getting distruptive. I can't see any substantive issue here. There is already an article that covers this historical region Danish Estonia and Revel Governorate. Where is the need for another article that covers the same region in time and space? I think we have been hoodwinked into withdrawing the AfD believing there was a consensus to make Estland a disambiguation page. Clearly there isn't and some intend to make this article a POV fork to Danish Estonia and Revel Governorate. Martintg 04:58, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

IF this form of page is being forced on us then the withrawal of AfD was premature and based on false assurance of consensus. Its VERY unfortunate that the current protected form is the false one. I say we start the Afd process again.--Alexia Death 05:27, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Irredentism?

I really do not understand what is the point in the attacks against this page. If it was a question of the name, this could be solved. Someone just needs to propose a new name.

The issue seems to be something else, "time travel" irredentism. It seems like Estonian editors want to deny do not want it to be known, that most of Estonia in fact belonged to Livonia. The claim here is Estonia irredenta - Estonia has always existed and will always exist in its present borders. -- Petri Krohn 04:28, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Do not be ridiculous, we already have articles: Danish Estonia, Principality of Estland, Swedish Estonia, and Reval Governorate which explain that point. Nobody wants to delete those articles. Currently this article has minimal useful information, Demographics section belongs to Reval Governorate and the rest is simply very short overview and should be merged with History of Estonia.--Staberinde 10:23, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Lunacy?

There is an article called Danish Estonia which covers the historical part of contemporary Estonia that was not Livonia, this is english Wikipedia, Estland is Danish for Estonia. Get a grip. Your reverting of this article seems totally pointless. BTW I'm Australian, your ethnic slur against Estonian editors is noted. Martintg 04:43, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I second that. This page has no content besides links to other articles. It is already by essence a dab page with replicated material from respective articles.--Alexia Death 05:48, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

And no estonian denies that once upon a time the land was split in two. However this topic has nothing to do with dening that. Its all about the small oddity in language develpment resulting contemporary english use Estonia and not archaic Estland. In estonian, there is no such difference. Both Eesti and Eestimaa are used in the same meaning. Eesti being the shortened, contemporary and official form.--Alexia Death 05:48, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Clarification of the AfD process

Anybody saying that AfD on this page failed havent clearly read the archive. AfD request was withrawin after what seemed like an agreement had been reached that this page needs to be a dab page. Nobody exept one user resists this and he does this by not giving any reasons, just reverting...--Alexia Death 05:39, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

The AfD ended because the nominator withdrew the nomination, thus changing his vote from delete to keep (or dont care). The AfD did not reach the required proportion of votes or qualified votes to delete the article. It failed even more miserably on the arguments. Any administrator with balls would have closed this AfD early as baseless. -- Petri Krohn 12:41, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

We are still waiting for your sources to support your argument, do you have any? Martintg 12:45, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Protection

Guys, please drop me a note when you would have some consensus over the article and I would be happy to unprotect. Alternatively you could request unprotection on WP:RPP. Protection is not an enforcement of any particular version of the article Alex Bakharev 05:12, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

{{editprotected}} The article should be reverted into disambiguation page, as per the consensus reached in the AfD. Digwuren 07:47, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

There must be consensus before any major changes can take place on this page. You withdrew the AfD, however, there was not consensus (as far as I can see) for the page to be repurposed as a disambiguation page. The closing admin said that consensus should first be reached on this talk page. Cheers. --MZMcBride 19:51, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

So basically we, all others but one person, are hostages to that persons unsubstantiated refusal?--Alexia Death 20:14, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Where are you Irpen and Krohn?

You revert the article multiple times from what was agreed by consensus in the AfD talk, then go silent and offer no justification, explanation, debate or discussion on this talk page. No cites, no references, nothing to support the existance of "Estland" as defined in this article. Just silence. What's up guys? Martintg 06:04, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, simplest explanation is that they don't have any sources - which seems to be the case, indeed. DLX 10:06, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Mahtra War

The phrase "rose in open revolt in 1859" in section Demographics should be linked to Mahtra War. I cannot do it now, as the page is locked. -- Petri Krohn 17:41, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

what about questions raised above? are you going to obstnately ignore them?--Alexia Death 19:00, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

It appears that rather than provide sources Petri Krohn prefers to begin checkuser proceeding against people he knows full well not to be sock puppets [1], [2]. Martintg 21:19, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Is this relevant? Is this the place to discuss this? Or is this just a personal attack?

For the record: I knew Digwuren and Alexia were real people. My suspicion was, that they were contributing from the same IP address or network. I only researched the others, after checkuser had shown all of the suspects to be the same user. -- Petri Krohn 22:30, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

The issue is your apparent inability to provide considered argument, with supporting sources, that "Estland" is anything beyond the Danish word for "Estonia". You haven't done it here, nor in the AfD discussion either. While this page is protected, you have a perfect opportunity to provide sources that support your synthesis. We are all waiting here patiently for you to respond in this regard. Martintg 23:42, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Do we want to keep the article together or make it a disambig?

The province was a part of different countries but had some sort of continuity of borders and customs. Should we have an article on the history of the province as the whole or we should make it just a disambig? Please provide arguments one way or another. Alex Bakharev 00:32, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I have registerd the issue under Wikipedia:Requests for comment/History and geography Alex Bakharev 00:47, 31 May 2007 (UTC) See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Estland, Estland (disambiguation)

Keep as an article

Esthland was a feodal state ruled by the Baltic German nobility, organized as the Estländische Ritterschaft. (See [3]) It maintained its separate identity from its southern neighbour Livonia (Livland) for a total of 698 years. Both Livonia and Esthland were ruled as possessions by a number of foreign powers. These rulers never changed the feodal nature of Esthland or changed its borders.

Esthland is not the same as modern Estonia. Estonia in its modern borders was only created as the Autonomous Governorate of Estonia, after the Russian February Revolution of 1917, by joining northern Livonia to the Esthonia (then called the Reval Governorate). In 1917 most Estonians lived in Livonia.

The name seems to be an issue. Some pre-1917 English language sources refer to this entity as Esthonia, while others call it Esthland, Estland or Eastland. I am open to suggestions on a better name. I was considering the name Estonia proper along the lines of Finland proper, but a Google search reveals that it mostly is used to refer to fixed line telephone service in Estonia.

-- Petri Krohn 01:52, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Con

No sources to support synthesis, other pages Danish Estonia, Swedish Estonia and Revel Governorate already exist covering the same region. Martintg 01:39, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Make it disambig

Pro

Estland is Danish/German [4],[5] for Estonia, just like Russland is Danish/German [6],[7] for Russia. Martintg 01:39, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Other suggestions

Make it a redirect to Estonia. Martintg 01:39, 31 May 2007 (UTC)