Revision as of 11:03, 27 June 2014

Welcome!

Hello, Jaakko Sivonen, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  —A.S. Damick 00:14, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: 5.5 % speak Swedish in Finland

No you have understood the intention of my reverts quite wrong. I reverted them because when you present statistical data you, in a mathematical sence and therefor as a rule of statistics, have to keep all data at the same precision in case it is data that eliminates the other data. You can't eg. say. 92,76 % of the people in some group wear a hat and 9% don't.

So if you want to change 6% to 5,5 you also have to change 92% to the correct value at the precision of one decimal.

Also when it comes to such large figures it is usually customary to keep to a zero decimal precision, but this is neither what i primarily objected to.

Have a nice day

Gillis 15:54, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Finnish People

Misplaced Pages is meant to be a neutral encyclopedia. Based on your history of edits, you seem to use it for a personal crusade against everything Swedish. You have to conform to NPOV and stop inserting bold claims without sources. If you disagree with what other people write, that's fine. In that case, use the talk page to argue your case and use sources to back up the claims you make. To accuse others of vandalism, as you did to Epf, just because you don't agree with their views is not in accordance with Misplaced Pages policies. JdeJ 11:58, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Epf was trying to bring in his own opinions of Finnish origin, claiming that we are not the original people of Finland. I would say that that is non-NPOV and as such, vandalism. --Jaakko Sivonen 15:10, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

You have taken to an unpleasant tactic of accusing anyone who disagrees with you of vandalism. You accused Epf when he disagreed with you. What he in fact did was to change a paragraph lacking any sources to another one that was backed up with sources. Regardless of whether you disagree with him or not, you cannot possibly call that vandalism. In the past few days, you have issued warnings of vandalism to a number of users. What these users have done is to restore the information box at Finnish people to the template used in every other article on different peoples. Let me be very clear here, editing out your own edits so that the information box looks as it previously did is not vandalism. Please try to engage in discussions in a constructive way in the future and argue for your views on the talk pages. JdeJ 08:55, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Final warning

One more personal attack, or an abusive edit summary will result in a report which will likely lead to a block. Please reconsider your attitude. --Irpen 17:35, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I wouldn't have to call people idiots if they would read the arguments, but no: you just reverted without any counter-argument and without any knowledge of Finnish history. That is called vandalism and consider this your final warning. --Jaakko Sivonen 17:46, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Blocked

I have blocked you for persistant incivility. See:--MONGO 20:05, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Image

Sinä kun näistä asioista olet sotvannut niin katso mitä Russophobiassa on.--Pudeo (Talk) 11:41, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Kiitos, poistin kuvan. --Jaakko Sivonen 11:48, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

It is not considered polite to use foreign languages in this Anglophone project. Please translate or you will be reported. --Ghirla 12:46, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Hehe, says Mr. who has several cyrillic Russian messages in his talk page. :) Anyway, I was just saying that he might want to check it out as he has valid source and point for that image. I'm just tired of edit warring so I don't bother really much.. --Pudeo (Talk) 14:17, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

WP:TE

Jaakko, I see that you engage in tendentious editing. Please reconsider. This edit is particularly disturbing. Could you explain why you insist on adding Vyborg Castle to Category:History of Finland, when it is already part of Category:Medieval Finland? It is easy to see that the latter category is part of the former; and WP:CAT deprecates double categorization. As for the rest of your edits, they are in violation of WP:NC. There have been many discussions on naming issues. You may want to check Talk:Gdansk/Vote to get some idea of it. The consensus is to use, in historical contexts, those names that were official at the period. For instance, we don't say that Kant lived in Kaliningrad. To talk about the Siege of Saint Petersburg during WWII is also misleading. If the castle was built by the Swedes and was used by the Swedish government, its name should be rendered in Swedish. Another option is to use Russian, because the castle has been part of Russia during the last three centuries. I don't see any basis for forcing Misplaced Pages to prefer Finnish spellings there. If you don't reconsider you activities, more blocks may ensue. Take care, Ghirla 12:46, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

About the category - OK. About Finnish/Swedish names: it is the policy to use the name of the city's majority's language (cities grew around all castles mentioned) which was Finnish. I at least demand that both names be used: Turku/Åbo etc.. It doesn't matter that it was built on the orders of Swedish crown: the Isthmus' population was Finnish. You on the other hand insist calling the Grand Duchy of Finland a puppet state and Russian-controlled. It had major privileges and autonomy compared to other areas in the Russian Empire. --Jaakko Sivonen 12:58, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't insist on calling a part of the Russian Empire its puppet state, because its status is evident without my opinions. As for your assertion that "it is the policy to use the name of the city's majority's language" (we talk about Middle Ages here), I would appreciate a detailed quotation and link to the policy you have in mind. Thanks, Ghirla 13:00, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, Vaasa has a Finnish speaking majority, thus it's primary name in en.wiki is the Finnish form Vaasa, not the Swedish Vasa. Vaasa is also used in the city's history part in the article in the time of the Swedish rule in Finland. And as you can see the same applies to Turku (look at history). --Jaakko Sivonen 14:30, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Russophobia

My dear friend AN/I is not the place to tattle. First of all if you believe the image is dubious the first place to go is the talk page of the article and explain why you think, then modify the caption with something like this image is believed to be forged(ref). Partisan blanking IS vandalism. Please re WP:VAND. Oh and btw I am not a nationalist. --Kuban Cossack 13:09, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Now you can see it in the talk page - and I gave the source initially also. --Jaakko Sivonen 13:10, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

That is not the correct way to approach wikipedia, please stop edit warring promprtly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kuban kazak (talk • contribs)

Relax

I know little about the content issues you are dealing with, but you just came off a block and are now engaging in issues that are obviously heated for you and others. I have been requested to ask you to calm down please and try to not let the arguments get too heated. If you remain civil, and ensure your arguments are backed up by reliable references, then no one will be able to argue with you. Thanks.--MONGO 14:21, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

What's this nonsense

Crucial, basic information like this must be presented right in the beginning, in the box. I don't want people to think the situation like it is in Wales where the invader's language is the bigger

I'd like to know why you think that English is dominant in Wales because it is an invaders language. This displays a beathtaking lack of knowledge of Welsh history. Please don't make incorrect statements like this. English became the dominant language in Wales less than 100 years ago, without anyone forcing the change on the population. To express it in terms of invaders is to show that you know all about the subject. Alun 18:19, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I admit that I do not know that much about Welsh history, but the point is that English was not the original language of the Welsh people but nowadays it is dominant. I was comparing this to Finland where the people were able to keep their native language dominant. Main point is that the English were initially invaders and the Welsh didn't speak English before the English arrived and most probably wouldn't speak nowadays if they would not have arrived when they did. --Jaakko Sivonen 21:31, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

• English were initially invaders

No they weren't. This is the whole point. The Normans were the invaders and they spoke French. The fact that Welsh people speak English and not French shows that they did not take up the language of the invaders. Welsh remained the dominant language in Wales for another 850 years. Welsh people started to speak English for social reasons not political/racial or ethnic ones. Alun 05:18, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Blocked 24 hours

I have blocked you 24 hours, as described on Talk:Treaty of Fredrikshamn. / Fred-Chess 21:45, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

To anyone reviewing the block, I have mentioned the block on the WP:AN, so please see that page first. / Fred-Chess 22:02, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

This user is trying to spread non-NPOV propaganda . --Jaakko Sivonen 16:00, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

I have replaced this block with a fresh block of 24 hours duration for move warring. See Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard#Jaakko Sivonen (talk · contribs). --bainer (talk) 00:45, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

You did not answer any of my arguments. The facts are: 1) Hamina is and was then too unilingually Finnish speaking city. Hamina is the title of the article of the city, as it should be, why not then also the title of the treaty that was signed in the city? 2) Hamina was not a part of Sweden in 1809, it had not been since 1743. 3) This treaty ended the Swedish reign in Finland for good and it's more important in Finnish history than in Swedish. I have heard no counter-arguments to these, none. Instead I have heard PAs directed at me. --Jaakko Sivonen 15:20, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Jaakko, you have been repeatedly advised to consult our naming policies. We use that placename which was considered official in the given historical period. Not Siege of St. Petersburg, but Siege of Leningrad. Not Battle of Kaliningrad, but Battle of Konigsberg. Not Siege of Gdansk but Siege of Danzig. The official name of Hamina (both in Sweden and in Russia) in 1809 was Frederikshamn. Case closed. --Ghirla 15:28, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

As far as I know the Russian name was Friedrichshame (someone said that in the article's talk page). The title should be in the language of the majority and the original population, not in the language of invaders (Russians and Swedes alike). Anything else is racism. Also note that the article Diet of Porvoo (in the same year) uses the Finnish name. --Jaakko Sivonen 15:35, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

BTW I would appreciate it if you would refrain from personal attacks against me. --Jaakko Sivonen 15:38, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

That goes for you too, fellow compatriot ;) Profanity and calling people "fucking this & that" isn't really considered constructive behaviour here. Please check WP:CIVIL. Cheers, Scoo 08:57, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Violation of NPOV

Just to remind you once again, this in an encyclopedia and it should be NPOV. At the moment, you're lacking NPOV in your edits of historical names of places. The pattern is this: 1. If the city has a Finnish majority today (such as Helsinki/Helsingfors or Turku/Åbo), you edit out the Swedish name even when refering to the cities at the time when Swedish dominated in them. 2. If the city doesn't have a Finnish majority today (such as Vyborg/Viipuri) but once did, you edit out the Russian name when refering to the city during its time as a Finnish city. Now it's time to make up your mind. You could go for the principle to follow present-day majorities or for the principle to follow historical majorities. Both of those options would be NPOV if you used them consistently. To do as you do now, apply different criterias just so you can use the Finnish name all the time, is nationalistic POV. JdeJ 17:42, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I will never call Viipuri by its Russian name because the Russkies took it illegally by war and there is no justification for it being a part of Russia. See Karelian question in Finnish politics. Btw, Turku had always a Finnish speaking majority, during the Swedish reign too. And all of Finland was unilingually Finnish before the Middle Ages. Have you seen this? --Jaakko Sivonen 23:41, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Sure, occupation is illegal in a way. Just a shame that most countries in Europe have had their borders defined by wars, Viipuri is not different from tons of other towns and cities. The Finnish city Viipuri was taken from Finland by force and today is the Russian city of Vyborg. Swedish cities like Helsingfors and Åbo were taken from Sweden by force and today are the Finnish cities Turku and Helsinki. So once again, you follow principles of nationalism and bias, not NPOV.

(As for the claims that Turku has always been Finnish speaking and Finland was monolingual, lol. To funny to merit a discussion.) JdeJ 12:06, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, Turku had always a majority of Finnish speakers and there were no Swedish speakers in Finland prior to Swedish invasion. You must provide a source if you claim otherwise. Helsinki and Turku were not Swedish cities. And I will always refer to Finnish cities by Finnish names, including Maarianhamina and Närpiö etc. (and also Haaparanta). --Jaakko Sivonen 16:28, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Of course Helsinki and Turku were Swedish cities before 1809 just as much as Viipuri was Finnish in 1939. If a city is founded by Swedes, inhabited by Swedes and situated in the Kingdom of Sweden, well, to most of us it's a Swedish city. And nobody cares even if you use Swahili names for towns in Finland. Just not here. This is an encyclopedia. People who read articles here are interested in knowing the NPOV facts. You try to force your own nationalistic bias on them, even when you know it's wrong. You know very well that Vyborg, Mariehamh, Närpes etc are the official names in English for those cities. That you don't like it doesn't change the fact.

When the first Swedish speakers came to Finland is an open discussion among historians, most of them giving a date between 100BC and 1250AD. As long as even the historians cannot know for sure, neither you nor I know either. We all know what you want to believe, but that's something different. And just because there might have been no Swedish speakers in the territory now known as Finland, it does not mean that the area was monolingually Finnish as Sámi was spoken over a much larger area than today in all Nordic countries. JdeJ 09:12, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

All Finnish cities were always Finnish cities, not Swedish - ever. Turku never had a Swedish speaking majority and the area was also inhabited for a very long time so it is uncertain whether the city was "founded" at a certain year in the Middle Ages or was it only the castle that was founded. Vyborg, Närpes and Mariehamn are not official English names according to anyone, they are merely the Russian (Vyborg) and Swedish names, in Finnish those names are never used. --Jaakko Sivonen 17:14, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Dear Jaakko, the reason the names Närpes, Mariehamn and Vyborg appear in all international atlases and that those names are used in all Wikipedias except the Finnish is that they are the official names of those places. That you don't like it and that you think that everything has to be in Finnish is, frankly, of no relevance. This is an encyclopedia, not Jaakko's personal propaganda site. I admit that you do everything you can to turn Misplaced Pages into that by constant racist attacks on Swedes and by trying to claim places that aren't Finnish as Finnish. You seem to confuse this site with nationalist discussion forums. JdeJ 18:48, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Närpiö is the official name in Finnish. And Viipuri is located in an area always inhabited by Finns. The Russians are nothing but imperialist invaders, not only in Finnish Karelia but also in East-Karelia, the Baltic, Siberia, Chechnya and elsewhere in the Caucasus and nearly everywhere in the area of the Federation of Russia and thus all those lands are to be returned to the original peoples of those areas. It's the same thing with Ahvenanmaa which used to be Finnish speaking (clearly Finnish place names such as Jomala) but which was invaded by Swedes and now inhabited by Anti-Finnish racists (Ahvenanmaa has the same amount of Finnish speakers in percentages as Finland has Swedish speakers, still their rights are not nearly the same). All of Ostrobothnia was once unilingually Finnish as well. The Swedish speakers came across the Gulf of Bothnia in the Middle Ages. I have nowhere made "racist attacks", I have merely supported the Finns' right to their own, rightful land with own names (Ayers Rock is called Uluru nowadays, did you know that?). Do you believe in the right of the invader or to that of the original population? How would you like it if Swedish municipalities would have only Arabic names in 50 years? Would you call them by the Arabic or Swedish names? --Jaakko Sivonen 16:53, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Sure, Närpiö is the official name in Finnish. That's why that name is used in the Finnish Misplaced Pages. This is the English Misplaced Pages. As for Ostrobothnia ever being monolingually Finnish, that's just propaganda. Do you have any evidence for that? And yes, you're whole attitude is racist. You talk of Finn's 'right to their own, rightful land' and you accuse Swedes and Russians of being invaders. That is pure racism vocabulary. And Swedish has been spoken in these areas for hundreds of years before Mayflower, possibly even before the English came to England and certainly long before Finnish arrived in Lapland. But you think that Finnish names should be used for all municipalities in Finland, even when Swedes make up over 90% of the population. You think that Finnish names should be used for all areas that once were Finnish, even if almost no Finns live their today. You even think that Finnish names should be used for areas that never were apart of Finland. As I've already said, it's POV bias taken to its extreme.JdeJ 17:20, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

It is a commonly accepted fact that some Swedish speakers migrated to Finland circa 1250, when Finland became part of Sweden, as stated in articles here as well, thus not before. This is also supported by originally Finnish place names in Pohjanmaa (Maalahti -> Malax). Hundreds of years before Mayflower is exactly what I said: the Middle Ages... Finnish has been spoken in Finland as long as it is possible. "You even think that Finnish names should be used for areas that never were apart of Finland." Northern Sweden used to be Finnish speaking which can be seen f.ex. from place names: Haaparanta, Pajala, Antinrova, Isokylä... The area was Finnish when Swedes came there. The border defined in 1809 was not defined by the language of the population, it cut through the Finnish speaking area. Take a look at this map for example. Finnish tribes lived in what is nowadays Northern Sweden. Other maps. --Jaakko Sivonen 17:56, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Academics hold different views on the topic whether parts of what is now Finland was inhabited by Swedish speakers before 1250 or not. The academics currently fail to agree. That means that for you or me to say that it definitely is one way or the other is rather bold. I know that parts of Northern Sweden have been and still are populated by Finnish speakers. They were never part of Finland. And it's true that the border of 1809 did not follow the language of the population. In that case much of what is now Finland would have remained a part of Sweden, such as the coast between Kokkola and Ulvila, the Finnish archipelago and the coast between Hanko and Loviisa.JdeJ 18:14, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

User notice: temporary 3RR block

Regarding reversions made on November 3 2006 to Karelia_Suite

Did you block user: Khoikhoi as well? --Jaakko Sivonen 22:04, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10

Try to count to ten before you answer and keep a civilized discussion tone. Your edit comments do reveal a lot about your intentions and your hatred towards Swedes. MoRsE 02:13, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Because of Swedish vandalism in the article. --Jaakko Sivonen 17:15, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

That's a mouthful coming from someone who is constantly vandalising pages here. Just because you don't like NPOV facts and want everything to be according to your nationalist bias doesn't make everybody else vandals. And isn't it strange that Misplaced Pages users all across the globe are practicing Swedish vandalism?? JdeJ 18:51, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Claiming that a Finnish speaking town in Finland that wasn't even a part of the state of Sweden at the given year was a "Swedish town" is a gross lie. Now the Finn-hater racist russophile "Ghirlandajo" is claiming that in the article. --Jaakko Sivonen 16:35, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm not that user, you can take that discussion with him.JdeJ 17:20, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I know had a look at that user, and just as I expected he does not appear to racist or a Finn-hater at all. Once again, you direct personal attacks against a fellow user just because you don't agree with his edits. I'm issuing a warning.JdeJ 17:29, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

User notice: temporary 3RR block

Regarding reversions made on November 5 2006 to Treaty_of_Nöteborg

The duration of the block is 48 hours. 

Clearly you feel strongly about some naming issues. But it must be obvious that just reverting them in will not help you. Discuss more, revert less; perhaps stick to WP:1RR

So why didn't you block Khoikhoi? --Jaakko Sivonen 16:46, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Personal Attacks

You repeatedly accuse people who disagree with your edits for being Svecomans, Swedish vandals or Russophiles. Whily mostly tiresome, your latest accusation was way over the top, describing Ghirlandajo as a 'the Finn-hater racist russophile "Ghirlandajo"'. I'm issuing this warning to you. Please stop. If you continue to make personal attacks on other people, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Thank you. JdeJ 17:29, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

That user has been following my every edit and taken away Finnish names where they belong and for example called the autonomous Finland of 1809-1917 a "Russian puppet state" etc.. I also hereby issue a warning to you for incorrect accusations and non-neutral approach to articles. --Jaakko Sivonen 17:47, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

That he has changed edits you have made gives you no right to insult him. And when have I shown a 'non-neutral' approach to articles. Just because a user disagrees with you, and most users on the pages you edit disagrees with you, doesn't make him/her 'non-neutral'. So once again, you label a user for holding opinions different to your own.JdeJ 18:14, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

In Ostrobothnia disambiguation page, Porvoo article etc.. You too have accused me of propaganda, thats PA. Btw take a look at this. --Jaakko Sivonen 18:18, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I have accused you of being POV and biased against Swedes, that is correct. I have outlined, in detail, why I accuse you of that. There's a difference between stating that somebody appears to be POV and to make personal attacks on them. I showed that you apply double standards in your edits, so that the outcome always agree with your nationalist agenda. Saying that you are a nationalist can hardly be an insult when you state so yourself in your user page, can it? You, on the other hand, accuse a lot of users for being this or that just because you don't agree with their edits and without giving any evidence. There's quite a difference here.JdeJ 18:39, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

JdeJ is right. No matter what mistakes Ghirla made, it gives you no right to ignore civility and other policies. If he breaks a wiki policy, report him at WP:ANI, if he is incivl, at WP:PAIN, but by being incivil yourself you are only undermining whatever good arguments you have yourself.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  18:19, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

The last time I saw such tender care for my opponents from Piotrus was when he instructed User:Molobo to persist in revert warring. Back to old ways, eh? --Ghirla 18:27, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

This proves me correct: you were here within minutes. --Jaakko Sivonen 18:30, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Ghirla, the above comment was not addressed to you. Your uncivl reply seems uncomfortaby close to WP:STALK, I am afraid.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  19:27, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Piotrus, who is stalking here? Please take your anti-Ghirla campaign off-wiki at last (since you just can't abandon it) rather than spreading it further, even to the talk pages of known problem users. Don't hope to find a "useful ally" here . And by encouraging the user like in their activity, you only damage Misplaced Pages further promoting those disruptions. Check his "cotnributions" and logs. --Irpen 22:21, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

User notice: temporary 3RR block

Regarding reversions made on November 8 2006 to Porvoo

The duration of the block is 48 hours. 

Please find some other way to solve your disputes, or you'll get longer blocks...

Why are my opponents not blocked? There can't be any discussion since most of them merely revert in a vandalic fashion without even giving a reason. --Jaakko Sivonen 19:39, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

First of all, we don't break the rules. And we don't revert 'in a vandalic fashion', we follow NPOV and Misplaced Pages guidelines. It is you who edit out Russian and Swedish names of articles. As I have already explained, you don't follow any other logic than your own nationalism. You think that places that once were Finnish should be refered to by their Finnish names even if they are now Russian. In total contrast, you also think that places that once were Swedish but now are Finnish should be refered to by their Finnish name. So you don't follow any NPOV principle, you only want to maximise the number of places looking Finnish. That is perhaps why you are alone in making those edits and why we are many who revert them. That is why you are completely misguided in calling all of us vandals when you behave in a fashion that is proven to be POV. And those are perhaps the reasons it is you who end up being blocked? Or then it might just be that every moderator is a 'russophile' and a 'Swedish vandalist', the two names you use against anyone who disagrees with you bias.JdeJ 21:34, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Personal attacks

This is the only warning you will receive. Your recent personal attacks will not be tolerated. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages.Húsönd 02:55, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

You've been asked many times to be more civil and specifically told that edits like these violate Misplaced Pages's policy on no personal attacks. Because of your long history with these issues, I've temporarily blocked you. Please think about walking away next time something on Misplaced Pages gets you frustrated; you can always come back later when you've cooled down. Shell 17:15, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Do not attack me again, as you did here. If you do it again, you will be blocked. Khoikhoi 23:13, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Do not vandalize Misplaced Pages anymore, if you do it you will be blocked. I don't care about being blocked that much, I'll just operate in the Finnish Misplaced Pages more, you obiously do not have a life outside en.wiki, since you have time to stalk my every edit. So: go to Hell. And yeah, you are free to go cry to the admins about me now, I'm sure you will... --Jaakko Sivonen 23:18, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I've never seen Khoikhoi vandalise any page, but Jaakko's vandalism is unfortunately all over the place.JdeJ 23:25, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Alex Bakharev 08:51, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

This is a lie, I have nothing to do with that user. Adminstrators are more than welcome to use the IP-detector to prove me correct, I hope they do use it. That is a PA against me. I too could claim that you are Ghirla's sock puppet and so is Grafkm_fr and Kuban Kazak since you are all non-NPOV pushing Russophiles. --Jaakko Sivonen 21:29, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm prepared to give the benefit of doubt, it's very possible that Jaakko isn't that user. But even if he is not, he does not have the right to remove varnings or information from his talk page, it's considered vandalism. If you feel that Alex's comment was a personal attack (and it certainly was not) you should report it and have a moderator removing it instead. JdeJ 09:22, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

I cannot report it anywhere since I am blocked at the moment. Bakharev's accusation was based on the fact that the user returned my edits on one article, nothing else. There is nothing strange about it since almost any Finn would replace those Swedish names with Finnish ones when talking about Finnish speaking cities in Finland. A Svecoman accused me of being a sock in fi.wiki too but I requested that IP-detector be used and I was proven innocent , it could be done here too if some people are really so paranoid. --Jaakko Sivonen 16:50, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, the one whose sock puppet you were claimed to be, is known to use many IPs. And then, you both wrote in Suomi24 language politics message board after 3AM, after long absence (blocked?). --Lalli 17:56, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

No, you don't get blocks in Suomi24 as far as I am aware of. And if I'm awake at 3 am I might as well check new messages at various forums. --Jaakko Sivonen 06:38, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

You can be sure that I will always disrespect those vandal users who racistically use Swedish and Russkie names of Finnish places. That is extremely non-NPOV. --Jaakko Sivonen 09:33, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

You mean those of us who revert your edits back to the official names that you try to replace. The name of the former city of Viipuri is now Vyborg. The official names of Finnish towns and cities go according to the majority of the population. Face it and stop your one-man crusade. That you accuse others for vandalism and racism when following the official names in use says a lot about you and your agenda.JdeJ 15:38, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Regarding edits made during December 2 2006 (UTC) to Porvoo

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. Thank you. Simonkoldyk 07:00, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

So I can't revert Swedish nationalist vandalism? --Jaakko Sivonen 07:02, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Warning

This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. You continue to erase Den Fjättrade ankan's user page and revert edits that others have agreed upon. MoRsE 07:57, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

...Or what? --Jaakko Sivonen 04:06, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

You have been blocked for a 3RR violation

You have been blocked for 96 hours for a 3 revert rule violation on Treaty of Nöteborg. You have been blocked several times for 3RR in the past. This is why the block is for 96 hours. --Woohookitty 12:16, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Jaakko Sivonen, I'm extenting the block for this personal attack: "I really think you should get a life and seek professional help. --Jaakko Sivonen 07:10, 2 December 2006 (UTC)" to one week. If this type of PA and pattern of disruptive editing continues after these warning and blocks than a much longer block is needed. I do not want this to happen. Please review the Misplaced Pages policies on personal attacks, assume good faith, and civility. --FloNight 14:05, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I am already convinced that in reality Misplaced Pages is not the neutral encyclopedia it was founded as. It is rather run by vandals like KhoiKhoi who don't care about neutrality. They are supported by similar users who might not all be vandals but are still convinced that KhoiKhoi has it right (they don't even look into the thing) and thus the biased line continues. Well, the good thing is that no one takes Misplaced Pages seriously, thanks to KhoiKhoi & Co.. --Jaakko Sivonen 00:50, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Stalinistic view is strongly been pushed in the Continuation War's talk page

It is really sad, how a Soviet period propaganda is pushed all over by someone using several user accounts. In this case by someone calling himself Illythr and Whiskey + at least one or two other names. On that site the missuse and violations against Misplaced Pages's rules is so obvious by this user. Leena Virtanen 16:07, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

My vandalism

1. Regarding Fennomans: you should probably provide reliable sources for your claims.
2. As for Pähkinäsaaren rauha, were there any Finns signing this treaty? Did Finland even exist back then?

BTW, when are you going to apologize for calling me a "Russophile vandal" and calling Drieakko an "asshole"? Khoikhoi 03:03, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

1) What I corrected is common knowledge. How about you providing some sources for "your" claims? Then I can give you some sources in Finnish. 2) The treaty concerned Finland's territory and the Finns living there. The treaty is important in the history of Finland. Because of all this it is reasonable that the Finnish name is mentioned in italics. Does it hurt you? Or anyone else? I see no reason to apologize to vandals. --Jaakko Sivonen 03:20, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Blocked for personal attacks

You have been temporarily blocked for two weeks from editing for disrupting Misplaced Pages by making personal attacks. If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires. (If you don't wish to be blocked, don't refer to another user as an "asshole" in an edit summary.) | Mr. Darcy talk 03:16, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

If you continue to make personal attacks, you will lose your privilege to edit this page, as well. --InShaneee 03:30, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Just stating things as they are. You are welcome to check the mentioned articles. In the disputed part of the article Fennoman KhoiKhoi knows nothing about the subject (discussion about language politics in modern day Finland) but still he reverts. --Jaakko Sivonen 03:34, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

You don't have the right to insult people on Misplaced Pages regardless of the circumstances, nor does anyone on Misplaced Pages need to have any sort of qualifications to edit any articles. --InShaneee 03:35, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

The point is that KhoiKhoi harasses me by reverting nearly everything I write - without explanation. That is wrong. --Jaakko Sivonen 03:38, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

There is no excuse for making personal attacks. If you have a complaint, there are channels to address them, and a tone in which they must be made. --InShaneee 03:42, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I did complain about this on the Administrators' noticeboard and I used correct tone, my points were not proven wrong - one user said that a compromise with all three names should do, that is exactly what I had proposed - yet nothing happens. No one cares that KhoiKhoi terrorizes articles and users daily - thanks a lot to the good old Misplaced Pages administrators (sarcasm)! --Jaakko Sivonen 03:46, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I won't warn you again. Accusing someone of 'terrorizing' articles and being disrespectful to other users in general is not tolerated here. --InShaneee 03:48, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

What's the better word for his action then? Why was he not blocked for the biased and wrong reverts I pointed out? --Jaakko Sivonen 03:51, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Firstly, you don't get to post insults in Finnish, either, so knock that off. Secondly, whether his edits were biased or not is open to debate, one you may participate in if you wish once your block expires. --InShaneee 03:52, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

You don't know what I wrote. And secondly, I cannot do a thing in two weeks. You should look into the matter and at least give KhoiKhoi a warning for reverting without explanation. --Jaakko Sivonen 03:55, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I do know what you wrote; Finnish is not a 'secret code'. Secondly, Khoikhoi made a judgment call and followed procedure. If you have a problem with a reversion, in the future, you will need to take it up in a civil manner. --InShaneee 03:58, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I did try - you can find my post on the subject from KhoiKhoi's talk and I have earlier discussed it on the article's talk too and in the edit summaries - without any result. KhoiKhoi doesn't like explaining his edits. In a few months I have received maybe two answers. Did you use BabelFish or something? --Jaakko Sivonen 04:01, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

As I said, there are always official avenues to deal with disputes; there is never a time when resorting to insults is acceptable. --InShaneee 04:03, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

User: InShaneee

You do not have the right to remove content from other users user pages, it is considered vandalism, especially since you removed a whole chapter. I will restore everything as soon as I can. --Jaakko Sivonen 16:40, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

• See WP:OWN. We do indeed have the right. And per WP:RPA we also have the duty to remove personal attacks.

You seem set on a path of escalating incivility. Please be aware that this will have only one consequence: you will be banned from Misplaced Pages. It has happened before often enough.

If you want to continue editing Misplaced Pages, you would be well advised to calm down. You will not get very far by accusing long-standing contributors of "vandalism" whenever you have a difference of opinion. The Talk pages of articles exist for discussing content and resolving disputes. People who can't engage in civil debate are not considered of much value to the project, so it would be worth your while establishing that you can do so. Guy (Help!) 17:41, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry, because of users like KhoiKhoi I might as well stop contributing to the English language Misplaced Pages. He'll follow my every edit and revert it, no matter what it is, he doesn't care even about the fact that he doesn't know anything about the subject of which context he is radically changing back to worse. That if anything is harassment. And my statements were not PA. --Jaakko Sivonen 22:15, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

A warning

You really long for a blocking again, right? Your provokment towards another user has earned you another warning MoRsE 20:50, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

What "provokment" ? I gave a link to the article. OMG, now I got a warning from "MoRsE"! I'm so scared! --Jaakko Sivonen 22:13, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Then take this one: continue putting personal attacks on your userpage and you will be blocked from editing. --InShaneee 02:56, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

If you again call someone a racist, especially when your only reason seems to be that they disagree with you, you will be blocked for making personal attacks. I have no idea who is right in this dispute, and I don't intend to get involved, but we have clear policies regarding this sort of thing. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 15:18, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

All the time I have been the one willing to discuss, but KhoiKhoi has not had that interest. InShaneee neither, since s/he automatically took the stance against me. --Jaakko Sivonen 15:21, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Non sequitur. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 15:30, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Well guess why? I'll tell you one thing, I am actually suprised why you are not yet permabanned from wikipedia...--Kuban Cossack 17:12, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

No one should have even let people like you on Misplaced Pages in the first place. --Jaakko Sivonen 21:18, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

"All the time I have been the one willing to discuss". No, far from it. It's true that you sometimes use talk pages to discuss, but then you continue reverting to your nationalist versions even if everybody else disagrees. That's not what I call discussing. After all the nationalist bias, vandalism and personal attacks you have engaged in, I don't think there are many buying this idea that you're the one willing to discussJdeJ 17:19, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, it's not my fault if people such as KhoiKhoi do not listen. By the way, the following quote by you is just crap: "The first language known to have been spoken in Southern Finland and further south in the region was a Indo-European Baltic language." Oh yeah? How about giving some proof? You also wrote that "Finnish came from the east". That's the old traditional view, not the modern, since there are no evidence to support a Finnish migration to Finland. It must be assumed that a Finno-Ugrian language was spoken in the entire East and North Europe since ancient times, and thus Finnish or its ancient form was spoken in Finland thousands of years ago. --Jaakko Sivonen 20:59, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

"It's true that you sometimes use talk pages to discuss, but then you continue reverting " So tell me: exactly how do I differ from KhoiKhoi then? Except that he rarely gives any comments for his vandal like edits and reverts? Many of my questions on talk pages have gone unanswered, what can I do when the enemy does not reply in any way? And what bothers you so much with Finnish names being shortly mentioned in an article that directly concerns Finland? Pähkinäsaari did. The effect of Versailles was wider, that of Pähkinäsaari was more regional, only in Finland. And what's wrong with Nationalism? --Jaakko Sivonen 21:21, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

There is both good nationalism and bad nationalism. If you salute your country's flag and join up in the national anthem, that is good nationalism. But if you tear down the flag of another nation and smears its citizens - that is bad nationalism. MoRsE 22:40, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I retaliate only if there's a reason. Russia should be hated because of its imperialistic policy towards Finland throughout history, many attacks, stealing Finnish land and attempted russification for example, and for the oppression of the Finnic peoples of Russia. Sweden should be hated because of its imperialistic attitude against Finland, trying to swedify Finland for example, and because of its oppression of the Finnish indigenous population of Sweden. What do you think of this? Ålanders oppressing the Finnish minority of Ahvenanmaa: . Or of this, "andliga fader" of RKP?: --Jaakko Sivonen 22:58, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

You have a very narrow and limited view of both Russians and Swedes and I hope that you one day grow out of it. I am not provoked by your attempts of trying to find anti-Swedish texts. You can hate people, but then you should have a legitimate reason why...saying that 'Russia should be hated' shows only your xenophobia..and limited knowledge of the real history, not the fennoman. As I said...it is difficult to discuss with you when you live in your shielded world. MoRsE 02:07, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Blocked one month

You have been temporarily blocked from editing for disrupting Misplaced Pages by making personal attacks. If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires. This is an unacceptable way to address another user. Your next violation will be met with an indefinite block. | Mr. Darcy talk 19:35, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

As long as the "violation" can be determined by anyone who bothers to whine to an adminstrator, i'll be banned in any case, since users KhoiKhoi, Drieakko, JdeJ, Fred-Chess, Kuban Kazak etc. hold personal hatred towards me and will seize any opportunity to get rid of me. And the adminstrators never question their reasoning. I will call a racist a racist and double standards double standards. It's just a good thing that no one really takes Misplaced Pages seriously because those users could really cause destruction if that was the case. They use Misplaced Pages for their own agenda (Russophile, Svecoman etc.). I hold no respect for them, for you or for the English Misplaced Pages, which is joke. --Jaakko Sivonen 21:15, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

On the contrary, this violation was quite clear. You can't call another user a racist. When you call it a "violation" with scare quotes, it certainly looks to me like you either don't understand the no personal attacks policy, or you believe that it doesn't apply to you. Either way, your stay at this Misplaced Pages is . Name-calling is forbidden to all users, whether Finnish, Russian, Swedish, or none of the above. | Mr. Darcy talk 21:57, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Incidentally, given that this is your fourth block for making personal attacks (and at least your 12th overall), I'd really like to see some strong evidence that you understand the policy in question before you're unblocked. | Mr. Darcy talk 22:08, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I understand - I just didn't realize that calling a person who has a picture of Stalin honoured on his user page could be classified as anything else. --Jaakko Sivonen 22:33, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Jaakko Sivonen (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

One month is clearly too long a time for one personal attack. Especially since I was right about the double standards of the user in question. Also, I believe Mr. Darcy is biased against me, since he does everything user JdeJ tells him to and does not go into the subject to see that it is actually users like KhoiKhoi who are in need of a block. I ask that some other adminstrator than Mr Darcy see into this and a) see if one month is too long a time for the violation in question and b) see if there are reasons to block or at least warn users like KhoiKhoi for edit warring for example. --Jaakko Sivonen 21:59, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Decline reason:

First, it's not just one attack; you've made a series of attacks, and this is the fourth block for them. Secondly, your recent behaviour has simply supported the block; comments such as "the following quote by you is just crap" and "Keep up the good work Chechens! Any act directed against Russia gets my blessing! I really hope that Russia is destroyed" are unacceptable. Use this month to calm down and reflect on the concept of consensus editing. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:10, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Jaakko Sivonen (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

One month is clearly too long a time for one personal attack. Especially since I was right about the double standards of the user in question. Also, I believe Mr. Darcy is biased against me, since he does everything user JdeJ tells him to and does not go into the subject to see that it is actually users like KhoiKhoi who are in need of a block. I ask that some other adminstrator than Mr Darcy see into this and a) see if one month is too long a time for the violation in question and b) see if there are reasons to block or at least warn users like KhoiKhoi for edit warring for example. --Jaakko Sivonen 21:59, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Decline reason:

This review does not count against the user's two unblock review limit as I did the review at the same time as Mel Etitis. However, I second the review above. I believe one month is entirely reasonable and erring on the short side considering this user's block history. -- Yamla 22:14, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

You and your likes have built up a wall of disinformation, prejudices and ideologies, which makes dialogue impossible. 12 previous blocks are speaking for themselves, one month might wake you up, at least we can hope. MoRsE 22:16, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

That's a personal attack. If you take a few minutes to read the talk pages of articles such as Pähkinäsaaren rauha, you'll see that I have very much tried to make dialogue, but have gotten little response. KhoiKhoi rarely gave other comments than "undo" or "revert" when reverting my well argumented edits. Why? Because he is biased against me, and it makes me very angry that he has yet to receive even a warning from his behaviour. What do you think of that? I will never cease to hate those who wish to oppress the status of Finnish. --Jaakko Sivonen 22:21, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

"I believe one month is entirely reasonable and erring on the short side considering this user's block history." Most of the blocks are from 3rr and it's ironic and sad that KhoiKhoi commits that on daily basis and never gets a warning. --Jaakko Sivonen 22:25, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Users "Bothnia" and "Fred-Chess"

If you happen to be reading this, I have a few things to say. "Bothnia": nothing could be more ridiculous than saying that Finns didn't live in Finland or speak Finnish in the 14th century... No one has ever claimed anything like that. The written language was created with the Bible translation made possible by the Reformation started in the early 16th century. Do you think there was no language before the written language?! Who do you think lived in Finland? Where do you think the Finns lived? Gosh... That's so stupid! Are you also saying that we can't know what languages were spoken by the native Americans or the native Australians before they were formed into written language? You should stay away from these topics: you know absolutely nothing about them. "Fred-Chess": I have not recruited any "meat puppets", you'll have to have evidence if you're going to claim that I "probably" have done something of the sort. --Jaakko Sivonen 10:22, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, what about this? (translation: ...Finnish-oppositing wills have removed the Finnish names from the article. Restore it, I can't right now due to a blocking." MoRsE 10:41, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

So? That was a normal notification of vandalism conserning a Finland related article in en.wiki. There is no rule against me expressing my opinions of en.wiki in another Misplaced Pages. Recruiting a meat puppet is personally putting someone to do as one wants, I was only suggesting, nothing wrong there. --Jaakko Sivonen 16:03, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Now "Bothnia" claims that Finnish, Estonian and Karelian hadn't developed into their own languages by the 14th century. This is wrong; it happened many centuries earlier. And even when they were the same language it was merely an earlier form of Finnish, myöhäiskantasuomi, and the place names were the same as they are in Finnish. --Jaakko Sivonen 16:00, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I am not talking about anything historical here, you were accused of meatpuppeting by Fred Chess, and that is what it looks like in the diff too. MoRsE 16:04, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I was talking about user Bothnia's wild claims in the poll, not about you... And as I already explained, nothing forbids me from expressing my opinions and making suggestions about this Misplaced Pages in another Misplaced Pages. And all users are humans who make their own decisions. --Jaakko Sivonen 16:08, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

As a side note: the German, the Hungarian and the Swedish wiki articles on the Treaty of Pähkinäsaari all mention the Finnish name. --Jaakko Sivonen 16:27, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Warning

It's beginning to look as though you have absolutely no self control. Despite being blocked, and being warned thnat your behaviour may lead to a permanent block, you're still insisting that you're right, attacking other editors, describing their views as stupid, etc. If you can't even pretend to be sensible and calm, it may be that you're eventually deemed to be too much of a hazard to be allowed to continue editing at all. Do you want that? --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 11:16, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't saying that the user himself is stupid, but his view of history was very ignorant. Thus it was no personal attack. --Jaakko Sivonen 15:55, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

That's a personal attack. | Mr. Darcy talk 16:06, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

No it's not. His views are historically simply wrong and I pointed this out. --Jaakko Sivonen 16:09, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

No, that's not what you did. You can't say that someone is ignorant, or stupid, or racist. This is an absolute. You can not use that language against other users. | Mr. Darcy talk 18:23, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Please read what I wrote before you comment on it... I called no person stupid. I called his claim stupid. Claims are not persons, ergo I commited no personal attack. --Jaakko Sivonen 16:01, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

By the way, this whole issue is sick... What's my "crime"? Wanting to have one Finnish place name shortly mentioned in an article concerning Finland and Finns. I guess even that is too much for certain users here. --Jaakko Sivonen 16:02, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

That's a further problem: that you still seem to have no idea that you did anything wrong. That implies that, when the block expires, your behaviour won't change. (Incidentlaly "is wrong" is not the same as "is stupid".) --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 16:20, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Well why don't you tell me? Tell me what did I do wrong in Treaty of Pähkinäsaari. --Jaakko Sivonen 16:22, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

What you did wrong? You once again attacked another user with insults, that's what you did wrong. You're constantly beeing blocked has nothing to do with your want to insert Finnish names, even if most of us disagree with that. The blocks are because you cannot behave towards other users in a civil way, instead you go around calling them racists or nazis, vandalising their user pages and similar actions. That, Jaakko, is what you do wrong. JdeJ 19:51, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

"even if most of us disagree with that" Misplaced Pages is not a democracy. The majority are not right in factual issues just because they're the (supposed) majority. I am yet to hear a good explanation to the question why the Finnish name cannot be shortly mentioned in an article about a treaty about a border in the middle of Finland. Mel Etitis pointed this out as well. I don't think I've ever called people "nazis" here. Racism, on the other hand, comes to mind soon when a language is being oppressed in articles concerning the people speaking it for no proper reason. I still have not been told what wrong I have done in the article Treaty of Pähkinäsaari, inserting the Finnish name is a natural thing, in my mind it should also be given priority, there were no people speaking a Scandinavian language in the region, thus Nöteborg is for sure a newer name than Pähkinäsaari. --Jaakko Sivonen 15:57, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Correcting "MoRsE" (again)

You wrote in an edit comment in Oulu Castle that "They did clearly not have any Finnish name at the time as they were Swedish castles, today they do have Finnish names, but they are later constructions" This is totally wrong. The area around Oulu was - and is - unilingually Finnish speaking (Swedes didn't live even in Northern Sweden at that time, let alone there!). There is no chance in hell that Finns used a Swedish name of the cities and castles right next to them. They soon called them all by the Finnish name, Oulu in this case. Do you actually think that Savonians referred to Olavinlinna as "Sankt Olofsborg"?! Uhm... No. It's very ignorant to think that Finns would have used foreign names of the places they lived next to (especially since that was the language of the occupier and oppressor). --Jaakko Sivonen 16:18, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

These castles were built by the Swedish rulers at that time, do you cincerely think they gave a name to the castles that were foreign to them? The Finnish names are common now, yes, but then they had Swedish names. Do you get my point? MoRsE 16:59, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

The Finns called them by the Finnish name then too. Why would people who don't speak a word of Swedish use the Swedish name of anything? After all the Finns didn't use the Swedish name even of Stockholm, the capital of Sweden, why would they then have used the Swedish name of a fortress next to their home? "Uleåborgs slott" is an ugly and difficult to pronounce name for a Finn who doesn't speak a word of Swedish, that's why they called it Oulu. --Jaakko Sivonen 17:09, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Please answer this, "MoRsE". --Jaakko Sivonen 15:43, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

"MoRsE" wrote in the poll's vote comment: "Misplaced Pages is not the place for revisionism " Excuse me?! What "revisionism"? The treaty was known as Pähkinäsaaren rauha in Finnish since it was signed. Ingria, where Pähkinäsaari is located, has after all always been inhabited by Finnic peoples and sometimes by the Finns themselves too. I made no "revisionist" edits, I made no claims of history there - I merely added the name in the language spoken by the people who were divided by this treaty signed between two blood thirsty reigns. So, please explain your choice of words or it's törkeä kunnianloukkaus as we say in Finnish. --Jaakko Sivonen 16:35, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Read Drieakko's comment in the poll - that summarizes it well. MoRsE 16:59, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

It was your opinion, so your going to have to tell it in your own words. --Jaakko Sivonen 17:09, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Please answer this, "MoRsE". --Jaakko Sivonen 15:43, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

To "MoRsE" again - as you were told in the talk page of Riga there's nothing wrong in mentioning place names in many languages, since the Estonian name can be present just because it's spelled differently than in most other languages. So, is there some other motivation that drives you? --Jaakko Sivonen 16:38, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, are you gonna add, "in Finnish 'Riika'" there too? I admit, I don't know the demographics for the country, but I think that there are many more ways to spell "Riga" than just 3. MoRsE 17:00, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Since the Estonian name is in there I see no reason not to have the Finnish name as well. --Jaakko Sivonen 17:09, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

...but why? what does it have to do with the city? Can you please give me an satisfying answer? There could be an separate article about it...or perhaps an paragraph, yes, that could be interesting, but like it is now....no. MoRsE 18:36, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Just saying that it hurts no one to mention a few names in different languages, it's no big deal. --Jaakko Sivonen 15:43, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Correcting some users (again)

"KhoiKhoi": you compared the issue of Pähkinäsaari with an ancient battle fought in modern Turkey - no, the Turkish name is not necessary there since the Turks did not live in Turkey in the 6th century B.C., the Finns did live in Finland in the 14th century (and had been living for thousands of years) and they spoke Finnish. The comparison is absurd.

"Bothnia": You seem to lack any basic knowledge of the history of Finland. Finnish was fylly developed to its final form by the 1300s and the names used then are the sames used today. Besides, the language from which Finnish, Estonian and Karelian developed is even called muinaiskantasuomi (suomi = Finnish) and it was very similar compared to present Finnish, the place names certainly the same. But that language was divided into Finnish, Estonian etc. maybe a thousand years before the 14th century, certainly hundreds of years before. There is nothing to suggest that the name Pähkinäsaari would be a new name. On the contrary, it is certainly much older than the Swedish name Nöteborg or the Russian name since Finnic peoples inhabited Ingria. I don't get where you are trying to go with the talk about the written language - why would it matter a bit? Do you think there was no language before the written form?! Are you saing that we don't know what languages were spoken by any indigenous people before it's written down? The Reformation allowed Agricola to make Finnish a written language by translating the Bible into Finnish. Finnish became a written language only two hundred years after the treaty of Pähkinäsaari: the language was exactly the same. The names mentioned in the document of the treaty are Finnish. --Jaakko Sivonen 15:36, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

"Irpen": You wrote that mentioning the Finnish name would be "unhistorical". What exactly do you mean by this? That's what the population of the area called it. It's more unhistorical to mention the Russian name since Ingria, where Pähkinäsaari is located, was russified (violently) only in the 20th century. The original peoples of Ingria are the Finnic peoples: Izhorians, Votes and from the 17th century Finns. In my mind it's a crime against humanity to mention the Russian name since Russians are mere intruders. --Jaakko Sivonen 15:48, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Correcting "Drieakko"

In the article Treaty of Pähkinäsaari you wrote the following "Finnic tribes living on both sides of the border, mainly Karelians, Finns, and Tavastians, had no say in the treaty." The word Finnic should be changed to Finnish. The "Finns" mentioned there doesn't mean the same as it means today, it meant the Finns living in Varsinais-Suomi, not the Finnish people. Its should aso be stressed that the Karelians were Finnish Karelians, not the Finnic people Karelians living in East Karelia. All in all it should be stressed that all the mentioned tribes, varsinais-suomalaiset, hämäläiset and karjalaiset, were all Finns, who were simply divided into tribes, in the same way that the svear and the götar in Sweden were both "Swedes". --Jaakko Sivonen 16:28, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

You are clearly mistaken now, the part that you are referring to was inserted by User:Drieakko he writes in the edit summary that he merged the info from somewhere. Wherefrom, I have no idea. MoRsE 12:21, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Corrected. What I said is still true and should be stressed in that part of the article. --Jaakko Sivonen 12:31, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

To "Berig"

You wrote "This is English Misplaced Pages and not the Finnish one. Jaakko Sivonen should explain why he did not suggest the Saami name as well since it is just as (ir)relevant as the Finnish one" Many, many foreign names are used in the English Misplaced Pages, see Riga for example. The Saami name is totally irrelevant, it is really merely speculation that they used to live more south than Lapland. No one has ever claimed that this treaty had a big impact on the Saami. On the other hand, its impact on the Finns was quite great, it divided the Finns in the Western, Catholic, and the Eastern, Orthodox, influence. No such thing happened to the Saami. The people really affected by the new border were Finns, and of course this is in the territory of Finland. --Jaakko Sivonen 19:27, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Just as it is "really merely speculation" that there were any Finnish speakers along the coast of Österbotten or the coast of Nyland before the 19th century. Historical populations are by definition speculation, and the further back in time you go, the more uncertain does it get. Not that I see how it matters. What you seem to not understand is that this is an encyclopedia, not a forum for debates. It is a fact that the Treaty of Nöteborg is known by that name in English. You may dislike it and fint it odd, fine, but that does not change the fact that it is known under that name and not the Finnish one. JdeJ 02:09, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

• "Just as it is "really merely speculation" that there were any Finnish speakers along the coast of Österbotten or the coast of Nyland before the 19th century." No, that couldn't be further from the truth. First up, it's Pohjanmaa or, in English, Ostrobothnia, not "Österbotten", and it's Uusimaa, not "Nyland". Those names are not used in English. Secondly, those areas were since ancient times used as hunting areas (nautinta-alue) by the Finnish tribes, permanent Finnish settlement came before the Swedish immgrants as well. And about Ostrobothnia: the coast of Central and Northern Ostrobothnia, Northern especially, has always been Finnish speaking - Swedish speakers are concentrated on the coast of Southern Ostrobothnia (Pohjanmaan maakunta). Swedes have always been mere intruders in Finland. They came only after the Finns had inhabited Finland for thousands of years. Luckily, the Swedish language is doomed to eventually dissappear. Its position is widely criticized by Finns but for now the politicians are in the leash of RKP. --Jaakko Sivonen 22:43, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
• "It is a fact that the Treaty of Nöteborg is known by that name in English." Do you want to cite someone about this? --Jaakko Sivonen 22:39, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Experience has taught me that there's no point in debating with fanatics so I won't. In the unlikely case of somebody reading this page, all Jaakko is saying is mere dreams of his, nothing to do with the facts. The areas today inhabited by Swedes in Finland have been Swedish throughout history, Finns are newcomers in those areas. Does anybody seriously believe that the state borders today are the same as the borders between peoples throughout history. No. Jaakko is quick to point out that there are areas outside Finland that have been inhabited by Finns for most of their history, but he is just as quick to forget that there are areas inside Finland that have never been Finnish. . And no people can be shown to have inhabited their present habitat in Europe for thousands of years. Not Finns, not anybody else. The Swedish language is almost twice as big as Finnish and is no more doomed to disappear in Finland nor anywhere else. Perhaps I might take the time to remind Jaakko that the Finnish language is a dwarf even in Europe, not to speak about the world. Not that I mind, I like the Finnish language and pay no attention to size, but it seems to be important to Jaakko. Finally, I have a large number of Finnish friends and not one of them shares Jaakkos fanatic nationalism or his hatred towards Finland's neighbours. Most Finn abhor that kind of extremism. JdeJ 06:14, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Lies. "The areas today inhabited by Swedes in Finland have been Swedish throughout history, Finns are newcomers in those areas." That's an outrageous lie. Names such as Malax (derived from Finnish Maalahti) and Jomala are enough to prove the Finnish past there. And let's also remember that a large portion of the Swedish speakers' families were originally Finns who changed their language during Swedish reign. "Does anybody seriously believe that the state borders today are the same as the borders between peoples throughout history." Definately not - Northern Sweden for example was Finnish until the 20th century, when the Swedish officials for example forbid the speaking of Finnish in schools. "And no people can be shown to have inhabited their present habitat in Europe for thousands of years." No you are just showing your own ignorance about the matter, see for example Antrea net, one of the world's oldest Fishing nets if not the oldest - that's about 10 000 years old. There's no reason to not think that the people then were not the ancestors of Finns (no proof of Finnish mass migration). "The Swedish language is almost twice as big as Finnish and is no more doomed to disappear in Finland nor anywhere else." Take a look at some statistics - in 1917 about 11 % of Finns were Swedish speaking, in the end of 2005 it was about 5.50 (Ahvenanmaa included). See for example the statistic here:. The Swedish speakers are slowly but surely being assimilated to the majority. Not to mention that practically all Swedish speakers speak Finnish but, despite Mandatory Swedish, most Finns speak Swedish only at a basic level or not at all. When Finnish and Swedish speakers discuss with each other it happens in Finnish. Swedish simply isn't an important language here, sorry... "Perhaps I might take the time to remind Jaakko that the Finnish language is a dwarf even in Europe, not to speak about the world." Uhm, so what? It's the overwhelmingly largest language in Finland and that's what matters in the language politics of Finland. Swedish is also a dwarf then - a little more than 9 million speakers isn't much in Europe or the world either. P.S. Thanks to Sweden's immigration policy Arabic will probably replace the Swedish language in the future and typical Swedes will look like this in less than a century. --Jaakko Sivonen 14:24, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

To "JdeJ"

You wrote "Finland is just as bilingual as Belgium, yet I see only a text saying Suomi on this map." That's a bad joke... Belgium is pretty evenly divided in two, the French speaking and the Dutch speaking, while of Finland's population 92 % speaks Finnish as a mother tongue and only about 5.50 Swedish (and that's Ahvenanmaa included). Bilingualism exists only in the legal level and in a few municipalities. "it is very offensive to the millions of us people who have lived for hundreds or over a thousand years in a country to find a map that does not recognise our existance and equal rights in our countries." So would you then write Ruotsi along with Sverige concerning Sweden? Finns are after all the indigenous population in much of modern Sweden. --Jaakko Sivonen 14:48, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Officially, Finland is just as bilingual as Belgium. Both countries have got two official languages that is equally recognised by the state. About your suggestion about writing Ruotsi in Sweden, I wouldn't have anything against it. The map should make it clear whether it aims to list majority and minority languages in the states or to list the official languages. If it also lists minority languages, as the text in the article made it look, then of course it should include Ruotsi for Sweden. If it only lists official languages, it should not. For the simple reason that Swedish is not official in Sweden, and that is in no way my opinion, just the fact. Anyway, I'd prefer a version with all the main minority languages, including Finnish in Sweden.JdeJ 15:02, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Blocked

For yet another 3RR violation at Treaty of Nöteborg, for which you have five preious blocks already, and edit warring across other pages as well, such as Treaty of Nystad, and continued incivility, for which you already have 4 previous blocks: "And I'm noting you about Vandalism and Historical Revisionism. Either that or then you're just very, very stupid indeed" "Do you not know anything about history? And still you think you're fit to edit here?" "I don't think calling you uncivilized can be interpreted as a PA in this case" pro-Swedish vandalism" "Stop your vandalism!", etc. I re blocking you indefinitely, since it s clear to me you will never function in a collaborative project that requires you to use dispute resolution rather than brute force and insults when you come into conflicts. Dmcdevit·t 05:15, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Jaakko Sivonen (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I think that blocking me indefinitely is too harsh. Especially since what I was reverting was wrong information which I was correcting and also adding the Finnish name to the article which cannot be considered bad in any way (the article is about Finland!). I have been merely working against edits which make Misplaced Pages seem as a non-Neutral website, check the case and say what I have done wrong in my edits what the others have not. KhoiKhoi also made a 3rr that day and he isn't blocked, now is he? Why am I treated in a different way? I'm sorry for those personal attacks, I got frustrated when Drieakko, KhoiKhoi etc. were not listening or acting to reach a solution on the matter although I made valid arguments which they didn't reply to. I promise to refrain from personal attacks in the future, as I said I got frustrated. I don't think it's reasonable to block me indefinetely for temporarily losing my patience. I'll also note Dmcdevit that I have tried to negotiate and reach a resolution, just see the talk pages - I have tried but usually the editors in question have not responded or have responded without proper explanations (and have also reverted without them). Considering all this, an undefinite block is way too harsh. Misplaced Pages even says that indefinite blocks should not be used if the user is making also constructive edits ("Established users with significant constructive edits should not be indefinitely blocked except when there is a community ban. In all other cases, they should be handled with appropriate time-limited blocks or arbitration."), which I have, I've only been distracted by this case in recently. I have also been editing constructively on other language Wikipedias. So, I'm asking that you make my block one with an expiration date instead of an indefinite. Naturally this should be reviewed by a different adminstrator. --Jaakko Sivonen 12:18, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Decline reason:

If this was an indefinite block for losing your patience once, that would be inappropriate. Or for your first 3RR violation. But this is your eleventh block, not counting block extensions, in less than six months. There's absolutely no reason to believe you wouldn't just continue in your abusive behaviour and so it would be inappropriate to reverse this block. — Yamla 14:02, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

It's unreasonabe non the less. Especially since the other side of the dispute is not punished in any way for their 3rrs. Besides many users have said that my edits were Neutral and OK, why do you take only the others side's opinions to account? My edits in question were not vandalism in any way, they were reverts, of which the oppposing side usually refused to discuss on. I have also behaved accordingly in other language Wikipedias ("There's absolutely no reason to believe you wouldn't just continue in your abusive behaviour").The problem is just in this case. If unblocked, I can promise not to participate in it any longer. Therefore an indefinite block is unreasonable and the Misplaced Pages regulations do not recommend it in this kind of case either. ("Established users with significant constructive edits should not be indefinitely blocked except when there is a community ban. In all other cases, they should be handled with appropriate time-limited blocks or arbitration.") I want another opinion. --Jaakko Sivonen 16:11, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Jaakko Sivonen (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I think that blocking me indefinitely is too harsh. Especially since what I was reverting was wrong information which I was correcting and also adding the Finnish name to the article which cannot be considered bad in any way (the article is about Finland!). I have been merely working against edits which make Misplaced Pages seem as a non-Neutral website, check the case and say what I have done wrong in my edits what the others have not. KhoiKhoi also made a 3rr that day and he isn't blocked, now is he? Why am I treated in a different way? I'm sorry for those personal attacks, I got frustrated when Drieakko, KhoiKhoi etc. were not listening or acting to reach a solution on the matter although I made valid arguments which they didn't reply to. I promise to refrain from personal attacks in the future, as I said I got frustrated. I don't think it's reasonable to block me indefinetely for temporarily losing my patience. I'll also note Dmcdevit that I have tried to negotiate and reach a resolution, just see the talk pages - I have tried but usually the editors in question have not responded or have responded without proper explanations (and have also reverted without them). Considering all this, an indefinite block is way too harsh. Misplaced Pages even says that indefinite blocks should not be used if the user is making also constructive edits ("Established users with significant constructive edits should not be indefinitely blocked except when there is a community ban. In all other cases, they should be handled with appropriate time-limited blocks or arbitration."), which I have, I've only been distracted by this case in recently. I have also been editing constructively on other language Wikipedias. So, I'm asking that you make my block one with an expiration date instead of an indefinite.

Decline reason:

How many times should we block you? You had plenty of chances to follow our most basic rule of treating each other civilly, and you did not. — _InBC 04:46, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I haven't been treated with civility here neither. If I know that from the next PAs I'll be banned of course I will then know to be careful. --Jaakko Sivonen 11:22, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Arbitration

It seems that user bainer has taken the case here. Of course I have no way of defending myself there now, but I hope someone reading it reads this as well.

• My edits were not vandalism in any way. It was a case of a dispute in an article and the other side has commited many 3rrs as well. I have usually reverted only when the other side could not give any explanations or if they were not explained well enough.
• I have tried hard to negotiate and discuss on the matter, but the opposing side has not listened. I have made conctructive edits but for some reason certain users have not approved them. I would for example like to know why it is wrong to mention the Finnish name in an article about a border in Finland.
• I have lost my patience a few times because my arguments have not been listened to. I am sorry for that. If my block is reduced to a time-limited one, I will refrain from personal attacks, I promise.
• Because it is clear that I am no vandal but only a user dissapointed in the current state of certain articles and because my goal in editing Misplaced Pages has always been to improve it, not to disrupt it, I think that blocking me indefinately would be very harsh, unreasonable and a justice murder.
• As a side note, I arrived to en.wiki in July, not the latter part of the year.

If I am despite all this blocked indefinately, I will still know myself that I am innocent and have fallen for what I believe in: Finland. --Jaakko Sivonen 16:44, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

KhoiKhoi's action

With what right did user: KhoiKhoi do this to my user page? Where does it say that something like that should be done? Take action against him, he has committed also 3rrs in the same articles as I have, for some reason no one has done nothing about that. The biggest problem of en.wiki is that most of the administrators are puppets who listen only to the complaints of certain users while not paying attention to those of other users. That is corruption and this certainly is not a "💕" but a very restricted, biased and corrupt one. Luckily most people hold Misplaced Pages as reliable as comics, for a reason! Those users, like me, who actually try to better Misplaced Pages with correct information and neutral point of view are blocked indefinately! --Jaakko Sivonen 14:56, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

It has been over one year now

Jaakko Sivonen (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have now been blocked for over 1 year and a month, that is since April 2007. Clearly I have had time to calm down during these 13 and a half months. I admit that I commited personal attacks back then, for which I apologize. All debate should be kept civil. I have been civil and constructive in my edits in the Finnish Misplaced Pages. Fighting in Misplaced Pages is very stressful and time consuming - trust me, I don't want to engage in it. I am in a state in my life in which I really want to avoid stress. If I am unblocked now I promise to be civil and calm in my edits and discussions. I will not make personal attacks or 3RRs. I know their consequences, having been blocked for a very long time now, and surely I wouldn't wan't to be blocked again, if I am unblocked now.

Decline reason:

Given your past history (13 blocks), I can't in good conscience unblock you solely on this basis. However, please follow the procedure below, and I might be willing to raise this with other admins. — Blueboy96 17:12, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This request for unblocking has been declined due to your history of vandalism and/or disruption to this encyclopedia. However, we are willing to give you another chance provided that you can earn back the trust of the Misplaced Pages community. To be unblocked you need to demonstrate that you are willing and able to contribute positively to Misplaced Pages. You can do this by:

• Familiarizing yourself with our basic rules.
• Pick any pre-existing article you wish to improve.
  • If you have trouble choosing an article to improve, see this index of articles needing improvement for ideas.
• Click edit this page on that article and scroll down past the message informing you of your block.
• Copy the source of that article and paste it to the bottom of your talk page under a new top-level heading (like this: = Article title =)
• Propose some significant and well researched improvements to your article by editing your personal copy of the article.
• When are you are done with your work, re-request unblocking and an administrator will review your proposed edits.
  • If we are convinced that your proposed edits will improve Misplaced Pages as an encyclopedia, you will be unblocked.

If you need help while working with your proposed edits, you may add "{{helpme|your question here}}" to your talk page. Thank you.

{{ I have written extensively on the the topic's background, details and consequences. I have written neutrally and according to the general view which historians have on this piece of history. I have also mentioned my sources. I am myself a history student. I hope this convinces you that I am able to edit constructively and thus I am able and willing to improve Misplaced Pages. I hope you read this suggestion for the improvement of the article and consider what I wrote above in my original request to be unblocked. If you don't unblock me now I hope that you would at least commute my indefinite block to a block with an expiration date. I believe my suggestion for an improvement below is one of good quality, proving my capabilities as a constructive user, and I do apologize for my rash and shortsighted behaviour in the past (personal attacks and 3RRs); a long time has passed and if I am unblocked I won't do that kind of stuff. --Jaakko Sivonen (talk) 19:26, 1 June 2008 (UTC)|As Blueboy96 suggested above, I have written below a large and improving expansion to a Misplaced Pages article according to the directions above. This article has currently only the statistics of the election in question. So the entire text part is written by me. Here is the current version of the article: I have written extensively on the the topic's background, details and consequences. I have written neutrally and according to the general view which historians have on this piece of history. I have also mentioned my sources. I am myself a history student. I hope this convinces you that I am able to edit constructively and thus I am able and willing to improve Misplaced Pages. I hope you read this suggestion for the improvement of the article and consider what I wrote above in my original request to be unblocked. If you don't unblock me now I hope that you would at least commute my indefinite block to a block with an expiration date. I believe my suggestion for an improvement below is one of good quality, proving my capabilities as a constructive user, and I do apologize for my rash and shortsighted behaviour in the past (personal attacks and 3RRs); a long time has passed and if I am unblocked I won't do that kind of stuff. --Jaakko Sivonen (talk) 19:26, 1 June 2008 (UTC)]]}}

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): I'm convinced. Request handled by: jpgordon 00:45, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll be civil. --Jaakko Sivonen (talk) 00:49, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Finnish parliamentary election, 1907

The Finnish parliamentary election in 1907, in the autonomous Grand Duchy of Finland, was the first parliamentary election in which members of parliament were elected to the new parliament of Finland by universal suffrage.

The election followed the parliamentary reform of 1906 which replaced the old Diet of the Estates, which had its roots in the period of Swedish reign, with a modern unicameral parliament of 200 MPs. The reform was agreed upon after a general strike in Finland in 1905 during which demands for a parliamentary reform arose especially among the Socialists. This coincided with similar development in Russia which too saw a general strike and, after the Russo-Japanese War, the birth of a new institution, the Duma. This background explains why Emperor Nicholas II of Russia allowed the parliamentary reform in Finland.

All political factions of Finland reached an agreement on the reform and the first election to the Parliament of Finland (Finnish: Eduskunta, Swedish: Riksdag) were set for 1907. The 1906 reform ended the first period of attempted Russification in the Grand Duchy of Finland which had begun in 1899 and seen such dramatic episodes as the assasination of Nikolai Bobrikov, the Governor-General of Finland, in 1904.

Before the election of 1907 the legislative power in the Grand Duchy had been vested in the Diet of the Estates, an age old institution of four estates (the nobility, the clergy, the burghers and the peasants) deriving from the period of Swedish rule and representing only a small portion of the people. This kind of institution had become quite ancient by the early years of the 20th century and the need for reform was thus genuine. The new unicameral parliament was to have 200 MPs, all elected by universal and equal suffrage of citizens over 24 years of age. Women as well were allowed to vote and stand for election; Finnish women received these rights as the first women in Europe. Previously only New Zealand had approved universal female suffrage, Finland was the second in the world to do that and the first to grant women the right to stand as candidates in election. Thus, in comparison with the former political system this reform can be considered radical.

The language strife of Finland was an important issue in the late 19th and early 20th century Finnish politics. Thus the first political parties of Finland, the Finnish Party and the Swedish Party, were born respectively around Fennoman and Svecoman ideas. A Liberal party was founded but soon also dissolved. The Finnish party was later split in the supporters of the "Old Finns" and the "Young Finns" who founded a party of their own. An even more important event was the founding of a Socialist party in 1899. First called the Finnish Labour Party, it adopted the name Social Democratic Party of Finland in 1903 and seeked the support of urban working class and the rural landless population. Universal suffrage was naturally very important for these groups since they had no political power in the Diet of the Estates. In 1906 the Agrarian League was founded to represent the interests of peasants and in the same year the Swedish Party adopted its present name, the Swedish People's Party. The topics of the campaign into the election touched for example social issues and the parties' stances to the Russification attempts.

The results of this first parliamentary election in Finnish history were somewhat a surprise for the traditional parties: the Social Democrats came through as clear winners, gaining 80 seats of the total of 200, which made them the largest party, although they did not reach a majority of the seats. Of the right wing, or centre right, parties the Finnish Party gained the most seats, 59, followed by the Young Finnish Party, 26 seats, and the Swedish People's Party, 24 seats. The Agrarian League gained only 9 seats but in the following years its support grew rapidly. In the election of 1907 the voters voted for party lists rather than individual candidates.

As a result of the election the representatives of workers and the landless people became the largest group in the parliament, whereas previously they had no political representation whatsoever in the legislative body. Women too gained representation; 19 female MPs were elected. They became the first female MPs in the World.

The joy of the Social Democrats over their victory proved to be short lasting. The second period of attempted Russification in the Grand Duchy of Finland began the following year and the Russian Emperor dissolved the Parliament of Finland on numerous occassions in 1908-1917. During World War I the parliament did not convene for a long time. Thus the Social Democrats were not able to push through most of their desired reforms during these final years of the period of Finland's autonomy, despite being able to keep their position as the largest party in all elections of this period. As a result many Socialist supporters lost their initially high hopes for the parliament elected by universal suffrage. This in turn was one factor among others in the development which lead to the Finnish Civil War in 1918.

The parliamentary reform of 1906 and the Finnish parliamentary election of 1907 gave birth to Finnish democracy. The Parliament of Finland elected by universal suffrage has existed continually since then. When Finland gained its independence in 1917 the country already had a working parliament and experience of free elections, unlike many other new states which gained their independence during World War I or in its aftermath. The centennial anniversary of the 1907 election was celebrated by the Finnish parliament in 2007.

Politics of Finland
State Constitution Declaration of Independence Human rights Law enforcement Military
Executive President (list) Alexander Stubb Prime Minister (list) Petteri Orpo Government Ministries (list)
Legislative Parliament Speaker: Jussi Halla-aho
Judiciary General Courts Supreme Court Courts of Appeal District Courts Administrative Courts Supreme Administrative Court Regional Administrative Courts Prosecutor General Chancellor of Justice
Recent elections Presidential: 2006 2012 2018 Parliamentary: 2015 2019 2023 European: 2014 2019 2024
Political parties Social Democratic Party (SDP) Finns Party (PS) National Coalition Party (KOK) Centre Party (KESK) Green League (VIHR) Left Alliance (VAS) Swedish People's Party (RKP) Christian Democrats (KD) Movement Now (LIIK)
Administrative divisions Regions (Maakunnat, Landskap) Sub-regions (Seutukunnat, Ekonomiska regioner) Municipalities (Kunnat, Kommuner) Wellbeing services counties (Hyvinvointialueet, Välfärdsområde)
Foreign relations Ministry of Foreign Affairs Minister: Elina Valtonen Diplomatic missions of / in Finland Ambassadors Politics of the European Union
Finland portal Other countries
v t e

Results

Sources

• Toivo Nygård & Veikko Kallio: Rajamaa, in Suomen historian pikkujättiläinen (edit. Seppo Zetterberg), p. 553-565, WSOY: Porvoo 2006. ISBN 951-0-27365-1
• Esko Heikkonen, Matti Ojankoski & Jaakko Väisänen: Muutosten maailma 4: Suomen historian käännekohtia, p. 67-71, WSOY: 2005. ISBN 951-0-27645-6

v t e Elections and referendums in Finland
Parliamentary elections	1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1913 1916 1917 1919 1922 1924 1927 1929 1930 1933 1936 1939 1945 1948 1951 1954 1958 1962 1966 1970 1972 1975 1979 1983 1987 1991 1995 1999 2003 2007 2011 2015 2019 2023 2027
Municipal elections	1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1928 1930 1933 1936 1945 1947 1950 1953 1956 1960 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 2017 2021 2025
County elections	2022 2025
Presidential elections	(1919) 1925 1931 1937 (1940) (1943) (1946) 1950 1956 1962 1968 1978 1982 1988 1994 2000 2006 2012 2018 2024
European elections	1996 1999 2004 2009 2014 2019 2024
Sámi elections	1999 2003 2007 2011 2015 2019 2023
Referendums	1931 1994
Elections in brackets were not public elections

it:Elezioni politiche finlandesi del 1907 fi:Eduskuntavaalit 1907

Above is my suggestion for the improvement of the article Finnish parliamentary election, 1907. It is a large expansion and improvement to the article which currently has merely the statistics of the election. I have written it as evidence that I can write constructively. Here is the current version of the article: --Jaakko Sivonen (talk) 19:26, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

That's really good ... I've taken it up at AN. Blueboy96 22:58, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Bradley Manning/October 2013 move request

Greetings. Because you participated in the August 2013 move request regarding this subject, you may be interested in participating in the current discussion. This notice is provided pursuant to Misplaced Pages:Canvassing#Appropriate notification. Cheers! bd2412 T 21:35, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Guggenheim Helsinki Plan

Hi. Thanks for your edit to this article. I am planning to work on the article over the next week or so. I was wondering if you could help with something: Some of the sources refer to the Helsinki City Council, and some refer to the City Board. Now the article just refers to the council. Do you think that is right, or if now, can you make changes in the article to clarify, pointing to the appropriate sources? Thanks for any help! -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:18, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

I'll see if I have time. The most recent decisions have been made in the City Board; some councillors have demanded that the whole council participate, but that hasn't been the case in the most recent developments. --Jaakko Sivonen (talk) 10:53, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Finnish Socialist Workers' Republic, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Petsamo (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Largest cities in Europe

Good Morning Jakkoo
after that consensus has finally been reached for this article some months ago, a user changed the article again in the sense opposite to consensus today: moreover, he introduced also factual errors which cannot be corrected since he keeps reverting to his version. Can you please have a look at it? Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 12:33, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

The problem has been solved thanks to an good-will admin, thanks anyway! Alex2006 (talk) 14:15, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Hallo Jakkoo
, thanks for your intervention, but now we have the same problem (with the same user) at List of cities in Europe‎: it is like trying to empty the ocean with a spoon... :-( Alex2006 (talk) 06:28, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Stop vandalizing

Don't vandalize on https://en.wikipedia.org/European_Parliament_election,_2014. Use the talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tuvixer (talk • contribs) 11:01, 27 June 2014 (UTC)