Talk:Soviet partisans in Estonia

	Soviet Union portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Estonia Low‑importance

Soviet partisans in Estonia is part of WikiProject Estonia, a project to maintain and expand Estonia-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.EstoniaWikipedia:WikiProject EstoniaTemplate:WikiProject EstoniaEstonia articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : WikiProject Estonia/Missing articles
Assess : Rate each tagged article by quality and importance to the WikiProject if it has not been done. (See Category:Unassessed Estonia articles)
Infobox : Add infoboxes to articles without it
Maintain : Portal:Estonia
Photo : Upload and/or add a photo to articles without it (See Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Estonia)
Stubs : Add info to stub-articles and check for start-class.

Military history: Baltic states / European / Russian & Soviet / World War II

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Baltic states military history task force
	European military history task force
	Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force
	World War II task force

title[edit]

I suggest keeping this creation by User:Bloomfield's sock (fake account) User:diwurgen, however, rough editing is needing ;-). The previous title was unacceptable for a number of reasons:

it was German Nazis, not fascists they were fighting against. We have Wikipedia, not BSE here, hence no Soviet terminology please
the Forest brothers were actually also anti-Nazi (anti-fascist), entitling the article Estonian partisans (anti-fascist) implied the other Estonian partisans i.e. Forest brothers were 'pro-fascist', which is wrong.
I suggest either Estonia partisans (pro-Soviet) or Estonian partisans (Soviet partisans) as title, with personal preference for the first version (simpler, and correct: these groups were in effect extremely tiny units of mostly Soviet paratroopers + Estonian communists who had failed to evacuate). --Miacek (t) 12:17, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am a little busy right now, but let's discuss first. Anti-fascist is really applicable as a term, and possibly describes the situation better than pro-Soviet. (I will consider both options before giving my final vote.) I promise to get back to you within three days at most. Let's not move unilaterally until then. Opinions from others should be looked at also. PasswordUsername (talk) 12:29, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I must agree with Miacek. Term "Fascist" is applied to Italian fascists in scholarly Western sources, not to German Nazi with whom those partisans fought. Please stop moving war.Biophys (talk) 12:57, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- No, the term "fascist" (lower-case "f" as in this article title) is applied in various ways, broad and narrow - which you could Google. People won't think that the Estonian partisans fought the Italian fascists. Got to run, will get back soon. PasswordUsername (talk) 13:15, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I consider it rather bad-faithed, that PU reverted my move this morning, without having made a single contribution to that pitiful article. he even failed to comment on talk before doing such a thing, regardless of the fact that I had commented in the edit summary field, when I first moved the page. I still think both Estonian partisans (anti-fascist) and Estonian partisans (anti-Nazi) are unacceptable, both denigrating the other partisan group that was, well, just incomparably more influential than the faction led by N. Karotamm. --Miacek (t) 13:26, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Err, I think the point of the Macedonia 2 decision was that controversial move ideas are discussed first to get hold of some sort of consensus. Please let's assume bad faith here last-resort only. (another bit at Miacek talk.) PasswordUsername (talk) 14:00, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If this is the case, we must revert this article to its original title (Soviet partisans) and then discuss. I think the arguments by Miacek are very convincing.Biophys (talk) 15:29, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The original article title was "Estonian partisans (anti-fascist)" - created by the blocked user Diwurgen (not to be confused with Digwuren) days ago. I hope you read that at the top of the page. PasswordUsername (talk) 16:48, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, Frank, given the trouble this page brought me I actually wish Digwuren or Martintg had shown up and proposed the deletion, a move that would have been wholly legitimate given the state of this article. The same problem we have would have been dealt with in the course of deletion process and much more thoroughly. --Miacek (t) 21:44, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think "Soviet partisans in Estonia" would be a better title, as there was nothing Estonian about most of the partisans. DJ Sturm (talk) 00:02, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, that is a good suggestion. --Martin Tammsalu (talk) 05:01, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Based mostly on Soviet censored sources[edit]

Xx236 (talk) 09:00, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I found a good english language source, and am in the process of cleaning up and expanding the article. --Nug (talk) 11:04, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit[edit]

Preserving here by providing this link. My rationale was: "Rm original research; rearrange; section break". Please let me know if there are any concerns. --K.e.coffman (talk) 17:11, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]