Talk:Baltic Sea campaigns (1939–1945)
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Baltic Sea campaigns (1939–1945) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg)
Untitled
editIs such a name used in historiography? This substub needs expansion.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 19:20, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
not liberation
editNo it wasn't "liberation". Replacing one occupation with another occupation is not liberation. But as I am not really feeling like having long edit war over such issue I didn't use term "re-occupied" and inserted as NPOV term as possible. I dont see anything wrong with term "captured". But if you dont like it, use whatever neutral military term(captured, conquered, took) there, but not "liberation".--Staberinde (talk) 10:12, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
- The territory at the time of the invasion was part of the Soviet Union. The occupation of it by the Soviet Union was not a matter for Germany to resolve, nor were the Baltic republics invaded to be liberated by Germany, they were occupied. So, during the war as far as planning of Red Army was concerned they were liberating the territory and not capturing it. In any case, capture is used for people, and occupation and liberation for territory. You think conquered is neutral?! Conquest is only possible as a means of initial offensive action. Where the action is undoing the effects of the offensive, what do you call that? All the Baltic states were incorporated into the Soviet Union. You may not like that, but that is how it was.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 13:39, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
- Aww, not this s??t again.(no offence) This occupation thing has been argued to death in Talk:Occupation of the Baltic states, and probably will be argued there in the future too. Soviet POV is that it was "liberation", Baltic POV is that it was "re-occupation". Easiest and most logical solution is to pick apolitical term and let that subject to be discussed in detail in appropriate articles. I have seen "captured" being used for towns, territories and stuff too, so I dont agree with it being limited to personel.--Staberinde (talk) 14:10, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Viipuri/Vyborg naming RfC
editFor editors who are interested, there is an RfC over at Talk:Continuation War about which name we should use for the town of Vyborg/Viipuri during World War II. This will affect this article, as well as quite a others on the Finnish/Soviet conflict. Some of the other articles affected include Winter War Continuation War, Battle of Tali-Ihantala, Battle of Tienhaara, Battle of Vyborg Bay (1944), and Vyborg–Petrozavodsk Offensive. If you could comment, it would be very much appreciated. The RfC thread can be found here. Regards — Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 15:01, 14 November 2011 (UTC)