Should give a reason for the original research tag. The reason is to be found on talk:Kven wherefrom this text originally came. / Fred-Chess 20:47, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
not very historical
edit"historical" seems a slightly wrong attribute. Generally, historical means something which is documented in written sources. Its counterpart is pre-historical. Much about these early Kvens is actually pre-historical. I would suggest a more correct attribute, such as "ancient", (not so good) "medieval", "past". Suedois 11:57, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Mostly nonsense
editThe whole article is mostly nonsense. It needs to be rewritten critically. Kvenland has only been mentioned a few times in a couple of Norwegian sagas, and nothing more. Rest is pure fantasy by nationalist Finnish historians.
- I'm not crazy about it either, but my first priority was to get this topic away from the very real and mostly non-controversial topic about contemporary Kvens. If we redirect it back to Kven, we're starting the whole argument over again. I am all for changing the name of the article, or even merging it with Kvenland. --Leifern 13:01, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Merged
editThe contents are now merged to the article presently at Kvens of the past. These talks should continue at its talkpage, Talk:Kvens of the past, since probably no one checks THIS talkpage any longer. Suedois 16:59, 4 July 2006 (UTC)