Talk:Kven/Archive Kvenland

Duplicate comments
This archive consists of comments that are also posted in other Talk pages and that should be, and have been, discussed in these talk pages. Labongo 06:35, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Kainuunmaa / Kainu(u) / Kvenland
1. The dialect listing - which you offer  – does not support you in any way. We certainly know where the Kainuu dialect is spoken, with or without that listing. It is spoken in the area of Kainuu, naturally. Nor does that listing in any way fight against what was said to you earlier. Just because the Kainuu dialect is listed there under what those folks call the eastern dialect group, does not at all mean that the Kainuu dialect would not be related to Meänkieli (Tornedalian Finnish) and/or the Kven language. Those three indeed are closely related !

We also know much about the areas that once were part of Kainuu. A quick search shows a number of place names in Northern Sweden, for instance, with the term Kainuu in them, with varying spellings. The term "Kven" on the other hand appears in the Tromsa (Northern Norway) area's historical place names at least 12 times, in varying spellings.

Old Russian and Swedish official documents also discuss Kainuu. The Kainuunjoki (the “River Kainuu”) in Sweden - better known in Sweden as the River Kalix – stands as a monument of its own of the past territorial history. There is indeed plenty of evidence - different types - of the geographical location and size of the historic Kainuu/Kainuunmaa/Kvenland.

Knowingly or not, in one matter you do touch a token of truth. The Medieval immigration to the Torne Valley region from the approximate area of the modern-day Häme in Finland did bring some Southwestern Finnish elements to the language historically spoken in Northern Sweden, particularly the Torne Valley region.

2. The fact that some website may not mention the Kven language by its Kven language name  – i.e. Kainu – is unfortunate, but proves nothing, except – perhaps - the poor informational content of that particular website. Besides, that website is written in the Norwegian language. In Norwegian the Kven language is not called Kainu, of course. In Kven language, however, the language is called Kainu. Again, when you will have learned and understood the meaning of this, we can begin to start discussing this matter in more depth. Please compare: An English language website would not call the Swedish language Svensk, or the Norwegian language Norsk. Why would they ? After all, they are writing in English, not in Swedish or Norwegian.

Please understand that Wikipedia is not meant for your personal learning and depating groung, but -instead - for an informational tool for all users.

3. It appear that no one commented the following unintentional blooper:  “Kvenland can also be seen to have included the territories starting all the way from the Norwegian mountain chain westwards”. That was now corrected to “eastwards”, as the text was - of course - meant to be stating.

4. The map collection which you offer does not show “all old maps of Fennoscandia”, as you claim. That is a collection of maps from the Lapland library better known as "maakuntakirjasto". In some old maps Kainuu is referred to as “Caiania”. Such is the case for instance in the map of the German Phipip Clüver. Also the German Christoph Cellarius (a.k.a. Keller) positioned Kainuu to his map.

In the map of Andreas Bureus (Anders Buren) from 1611, Kainuu – “Cajania” in the map – is clearly positioned to the map. The map can be found from the collections of the Uppsala University. That map, among many others, is missing from the “all old maps” collection which you offered. The term “Cajaniaeqve” is also mentioned in Bureus’ map texts.

The Anders Buren map from 1626 is also missing from the collection which you offered. “Cajania” clearly exist there too.

Your map collection does seem to include the highly regarded Olaus Magnus’ Carta Marina map from 1539. It appears, however, that you failed to notice the importance of the term “Qvenar” (Kvens) in that map. That term is clearly positioned in the map to the current-day area of Northern Sweden.

Furthermore, the map of Egidius Tschudi (1505-1572) shows “Kaienska Senpla” (North Bothnia) covering the Torne Valley district and parts of Today’s Northern Sweden, also parts of the Modern-day Northern Finland.

The 1570 map by Abraham Ortelius shows Kainuunmaa/Kvenland - “Caienska Semla” in the map – covering territories by the Arctic Ocean. Same is the case for instance in the map of Gerhard Mercator’s from 1595.

In the map by the Dutch man Simon van Salinghen the Kvens – “Querrnen” in the map - are positioned to two different places near and by the Torne Valley territories. Next to those texts also is written the term “Kayenshe finnen” (“kajaanilaiset suomalaiset” or “kainuulaiset” - Kvens - in Finnish).

5. You wrote the following sentence:  “Again asking for errors in the article to be listed”. Why should we do that ? We are converting the article back to the one which had already reached a consensus, after an extensive depate. The user Mikkalai thereafter declared that nothing should be changed in that text (now reverted back) without appropriate and easily verifiable valid sources. You must obey with that ruling, just like everyone else ! Give us your suggestions and valid references point by point, if you wish to change something. You must provide respected, distinquished sources to back any possible change that you may decide to suggest. That is your job - not ours -, to prove it, if you assume that something is stated wrong. We are not willing to begin depating something that has alredy been depated. What part of that do you find hard to understand ?

Steve Wondering 11:32, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Some comments:


 * 1. I do not understand your reasoning here. Kainuu dialect, one of the Savo dialects, has influenced Western dialects spoken in Lappland, including the one today called as the Kven language, but originally they belong to different dialect groups. Many people from Savo moved to areas inhabited by Western Finns during the 16th and 17th centuries and later also to northern Norway. This discussion however should take place in the Kven article.


 * 2. Searching for '"kvensk språk" kainu' in Google reveals that "Kainu" is used as the name for the Kven language by "Ruijan Kaiku" magazine that is published in Tromsø. Internet site here. All articles at least in the Internet version seem to be written by a person named Liisa Koivulehto. To me this looks like that there is a strong need to have "Kainu" established kind of afterwards as the new name for the Kven language among some people.


 * 3. The claim that “Kvenland can also be seen to have included the territories starting all the way from the Norwegian mountain chain westwards” does not make sense. For example, Orkneyinga saga says clearly that Kvenland was east of Gulf of Bothnia. It is not believable that Kvenland was spread here and there and different sources just tell about different parts of it.


 * 4. Your map correction is right. Carta Marina is however included (the map from 1539 CE). Andreas Bureaus maps from 1611/1626 CE have the same naming conventions than the map from 1635 CE. "Kaienska Semla" in the late 16th century maps is still placed outside of Pohjanmaa. The map by Simon van Salinghen (from 1601 CE?) I could not find but I take your word for it. For none of this there is no change in the overall understanding that Savo people started immigrating to north in the 16th century and used the name Kainuu extensively. At the same time, Norwegians kept calling northern Finns as "Kvens" at least in some of their dialects, the way they had called Finns before. Whatever the case, all these maps belong to a period of time that is long after the scope of this article and should be handled in the Kven article.


 * 5. The very old article that was copied to replace the current one was not referencing its sources, was overlapping with both the Kven and Kven language articles and listed lots of unrelated materials that had nothing to do with the Kvens at all. Therefore I needed to revert it. --Drieakko 12:36, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


 * The article is currently strictly sticking in material about Kvens of the past, like its name says. History of Kainuu and Origin of the name Kainuu should exist as separate articles even though speculation about their connection to Kvenland seems to have dumped the entire discussion here. If they have a reference to the early Kven material, that should be reflected in those articles. --Drieakko 12:48, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

From the Norwegian mountain chain to the White Sea, from the Gulf of Bothnia to the Arctic Ocean
To the user Drieakko:

1. You state above the following:  "To me this looks like that there is a strong need to have "Kainu" established kind of afterwards as the new name for the Kven language among some people".

You ought to realize, user Drieakko, that the Kven language became legalized only last year, 2005. So nothing is happening "afterwards", as you see the matter, but right from the beginning, i.e. last year, and already well before that, and also right now as we speak. You yourself perhaps follow these issues a bit late, it seems. Some of us others have been well aware of all ot this development all along. One should not write about these sort of matters to Wikipedia - or anywhere really -, if they are not well enough informed.

2. You appear to have woken up late also to another point discussed above. Thus, please, allow me to repeat the following correction which I already made before your above comment. Once more: The sentence in question was of course meant to say "eastwards" from the Norwegian mountain chain. That correction to this unintentional blooper was already made earlier to the comment in question itself, before your last comment (see the original comment above). This matter and the related saga information - as stated in my above comment - was already discussed long ago in this forum (please see the archive).

So, to say that we have suggested that "Kvenland was spread here and there", is simply wrong. The historic Kvenland, or area "ruled" by the Kvens - which ever you prefer -, based on much of evidence, likely included the territories stretching eastwards from the Norwegian mountain chain all the way to the White Sea, and from the shores of the Gulf of Bothnia all the way to the Arctic Ocean. The area of Tromsa in Norway alone has at least 12 prehistoric Kven place names (written in varying spellings). Source information for this can also be found from the archive.

3.  What needs to be done is the following:  The two Kven texts must be united, as they were before. That is why the earlier version was brought back already several times. So, when ever anyone sees the last Diki Wiki version been tampered with - and particularly if it is without proven and valid sources -, please go ahead and bring back the united and last Diki Wiki version (see history), which had reached a concensus among many writers contributing to this topic in Wikipedia.

As is known, innocent Wikipedia users have been blocked from contributing to this topic in Wikipedia, without valid reasons. When this ill-fated blocking was done, this sort of wrongful action - a splitting of the Kven article - was made possible and was manipulated to Wikipedia by a user, Leifern, who admitted to not knowing anything about the Kvens. As the Norwegian website does - the site which you call "official" above -, the Kvens and their history must be dealt with in one place, that is to say one article. The same has been done with numerous other groups in Wikipedia.

We are now reverting the text back to the Diki Wiki article which had reached a concensus recently. All changes made to it must be well backed up by known historians and/or other sources, like the user Mikkalai and others clearly requested a while back. Thank you.

The heading for this article must be changed back to be simply Kven. We are talking about one group of people. In this article the roots and the history of this group are dealt with in the light of science and information gathered by known historians and other specialists.

Steve Wondering 18:43, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

A recent King of the Kvens, outside of Norway
Finland became slowly integrated into what is known as Sweden-Finland, not so much through any wars between the Swedes and the Finns, but rather through scirmishes between the Finns themselves, others sympathizing with the catholic Swedes in the west, others with the orthodox Russians in the east.

Finland for along time consisted only of the Southwestern part of what today is considered Finland. That integration in question did not for a long time - for centuries to come - include the Kvenland areas that are a part of today's Finland up north.

The King of Sweden made sure to announce it publicly when he felt he had the right to call himself the King of the Kvens (and yes, in Swedish and Finnish that particular term/word - generally speaking - was not used in reference to the Kvens. Nevertheless, the King was refering to the Kvens).

Steve Wondering 18:27, 30 August 2006 (UTC)


 * This post by Steve Wondering 18:27, 30 August 2006 (UTC) was also posted in Talk:Kvens of the past. The discussion should continue on that forum.Labongo 11:54, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

King of Cajani castle, yeaah
Drieakko is truly amazing: "The king was crowned 1607 CE. Construction of the Kajaani castle close.." The Swedish King claimed to be the king of Swedes, Finns, etc and a king of one castle, the Cajani castle. Why on earth would he want to be king of that castle? He had 50 castles. Once again, Drieakko you are pathetic in your reasoning. But it si funny. --84.216.53.123 18:14, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I think this is an absurd distortion of Drieakko´s argument. Can we have please just a bit more rerasonable criticism.217.112.242.181 20:47, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

There are loads and loads of completely absurd discussions with Drieakko and his so called unbiased reasoning. Qven in nan original text from the 9th century is translated to Finn by some translator, and this Drierakko finds reasonable and logical; just to mention one silly example. Yeaah.--84.216.52.231 11:41, 3 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Kajaani castle was established 1604 CE in the middle of Kainuu (Swedish Kajanaland) that was a recently inhabited area by kajaner, settlers from Savo. The disputed area had been under Swedish rule for a long time already, but officially granted only in 1595 CE. When duke Charles, who had ordered the castle to be built, was crowned as the king Charles IX of Sweden in 1607 CE, he added "caijaners" to his title. Like with the castle, the main reason was to emphasize Swedish power over the area and irritate Russians. This was rather pointless, and "caijaners" were dropped from the royal title after king's death 1611 CE. Similar short-term addition in his title was that he declared himself to be king of the Lappers j Nordlanden which was targeted against the King of Denmark. Also that was dropped 1611 CE. --Drieakko 07:34, 3 September 2006 (UTC)


 * '''Neither one of the signers Drieakko and217.112.242.181 knows what they are talking about. You appear to be the same person  (the latter signer is a proven and admitted sock puppet).


 * It has been quite pointless to keep requesting sources from you, with the detailed book and page information, or for exact quote from known specialists, to support you statements. There are't such sources, as has been stated so many times before.  If you disagree, please provide these easily verifiable sources, as Mr. Mikkalai requested from you already a while back.'''


 * Not being able to do that shows to everyone that you are nothing more than a persistent anarchist, most obviously the one single one as was revealed before. Go on, - once again - what do you have to counter or argue against the statements (exact quotes were provided) and proof provided for instance yesterday by the most known and respected current Kven historian in the world, the Professor Emeritus Kyösti Julku.


 * To accuse the Professor Emeritus Julku - or for instance Professor Jouko Vahtola, or other professors provided - national-chauvinistic mounts to anarchy, nothing more ! You, user 217.112.242.181 (with proven and admitted other user accounts) declined to provide sources in the past, too !


 * This issue should be discussed in the talk page for the article about Kings of Kvenland Talk:Kings of Kvenland. Please limit the discussion in this talk page for the minitorty group in Norway only.Labongo 07:15, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Your arguments are foolish, user Driekko
Once again, you appear to be quite hard headed. We just got through handling this issue !

Your arguments are foolish, user Driekko. Therefore, please leave the reasoning for specialists, and let us only reveal the findings of science in Wikipedia, not the goofy views and opinions of yours.

You state for instance the following on the related column: "Also note that Kainuu never appears in any sources during the time from which all Kvenland sources are from ... "

Please realize, user Drieakko, that the reason for that is simple. The word "Kainuu" thrives from the Finnish language. Even any beginning history student could tell you: The written Finnish language from that time - before 1250 AD - is not available. That is the reason why.

Do you understand that ? That is also largely the reason why the names for Kvenland in other languages - in varying spellings - appear later (some for the Kvens also before. Compare for instance Tacitus' "Sithons" during the first century AD). Similarly, the Finnish language term for Sweden, Ruotsi, does not appear in any existing known written document, because the term is from the Finnish language !

The Finnish epic Kalevala, however, largely concentrates to the history even much older than the Viking Age. Kalevala - to a great extend - deals with the history, culture, poetry, songs and other legacy of Kainuu (Kvenland), also Karelia (Karjala,) going back to way back when.

Steve Wondering 13:03, 3 September 2006 (UTC)


 * This personal attack is also not relevant for this article, and I believe these issues have been discussed earlier.Labongo 07:17, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


 * This comment is also posted in Talk:Kvens of the past and the discussion should continue there.Labongo 07:22, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Another unreferenced and unprecedented claim from the proven vandal, "Drieakko"
Or if you do claim to have a source - other than your own writing - please present it now ! All historians seem to disagree with your outrageous viewpoint about the time of the historic Kvenland (Kainuu) areas of the modern-day Finland in question becoming a part of Sweden-Finland.

You state the following, regarding the Kajaani (Kajana, Cajana, Caijan/a etc.) area of the modern-day Finland: "The disputed area had been under Swedish rule for a long time already, but officially granted only in 1595 CE."

We know why you again refuse to offer any sources for this newest radical claim of yours. There simply aren't any sources to support you !!

Once more, please read what the most renown expert states in reference to this issue below. The area up till then, really - as numerous historians have pointed out -, could not have been claimed by neither the Russians nor the Swedes. It is as simple as that. This truly is not the only evidence of this matter at all. There is no evidence to refute this information ! What ?

Once again: The Professor Emeritus Kyösti Julku states in reference to this matter and the King of the Kvens for instance the the following (Yes, - like numerous other historians - he of course makes the connection with the Kvens and the "Kainulaiset" in his book several times - - KVENLAND / KAINUUNMAA, 1986):

"Once King Karl IX had strengthened his hold on the crown of Sweden he appended to it the title "King of the Kainulaiset", apparently using it for the first time on 16.3.1607.

''This title was later dropped, but Kainuu, or Ostrobothnia, occupied a separate position from the rest of Finland for a long time to come. Thus when Queen Christina appointed Count Pehr Brahe as Governor-General, he became officially Governor-General of Finland, Åland and Ostrobothnia.''

This can only be interpreted, of course, as implying that the incorporation of Ostrobothnia into rest of the country by international agreement was still a recent event and remained fresh in people's memories."

We hope you understand the meaning of the last paragraph, user Drieakko. If you disagree with these findings of science and the best experts, please do not appear here to state anything without sources (exact quotes, name(s) of the publication, exact page information, etc.). If you do not come up with the appropriate and valid source information, you simply are a looser, once again !

Steve Wondering 13:52, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

The posts above have also been posted to Talk:Kvens of the past by their very vocal originator. Discussion continues there. --Drieakko 17:53, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

User Driakko shamelessly uses outright lies. His sources disagree with him !
The above last comment to the user Drieakko was not sent by the signer of this comment. However, it hits the point. Thank you writer ! It is very true, that the user Drieakko - again - fails to provide a single source to back himself up ! He simply cannot !

User Driekko:

Hopelessly, you now attempt to refer to a book by Jorma Keränen. However, that book does not support your view in this matter, unless you are now beginning to agree with us, and the Professor Emeritus Kyösti Julku.

After you have now reviewed the peace treaties in question, you seem to be coming to the exact same conclusion which we made just a bit earlier: When the Swedish King and the Count Pehr Brahe first apprehended to their titles the references to the Kvens in the early 17th century, the annexation of the historic Kven areas in question to Sweden-Finland had happened only very recently - based on all information available - (this is exactly what the Professor Emeritus Julku's text above declared, remember --> please check it above yet again!)

The Treaty of Nöteborg in 1323 AD - which you refer to - did not in any way include any of the Historic Kvenland territories of the modern-day Finland to Sweden ! For you to state the following is nonsense: "Swedes very soon violated the treaty and started systematically take over the lands beyond the border"  ---> ''Less true words have never been spoken ! That thought is based on your wild imagination, nothing else ! There is no evidence, none, to support that. There simply is no room for that sort of garbage in Wikipedia, or anywhere !''

Even the Finnish Wikipedia's text is closer to the truth, by stating that the Treaty of Tyavzino in 1595 AD probably only confirmed the Treaty of Nöteborg from 1323 AD, which treaty famously does not grant either power, Sweden nor Russia, even a token of the historic Kvenland territories of the modern-day Finland:

"Siitä johtuen nykyisille historioitsijoille ei ole selvinnyt, oliko Täyssinän rauhan raja pelkästään vahvistus Pähkinäsaaren rajalle ..." (did you contribute to that text as well - I have not ?).

Same way as in this discussion page, you are using source information falsely also on the Wikipedia's Kven article text itself. The sources you use do not agree with you - instead, in critical points they disagree with you. Thus, you are shamelessly abusing these respected historians to push your outright lies !

Which credible historian places Kvenland to the extreme Southwestern Finland (Varsinais-Suomi) for instance, as you still continue attempting do, although now you appear to have cleaned up your map and arrows a little bit ? Solid proof has been brought up on this discussion page earlier for instance about the historic documents (papal letters, etc) and other evidence showing that the Southwestern area of the modern-day Finland was called and known as Finland (in varying spellings), never Kvenland !

If Kvenland was where you're pointing it to have been located, where was Finland then - knock knock ?

For you to tell us to go and read such and such books is silly, you must admit. That goes to show what you are made of ! Yet, you are welcome to try to prove your above - hilarious - claims, by giving us 'the exact quotes and the page information (that is how we have presented our sources in numerous occasions). Please, enroll to study history, is our suggestion ! Good luck to you (or try cooking, perhaps) !

Steve Wondering 17:41, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Yet another duplicate post that has nothing to do with the Kven minority article. Discussion should continue in Talk: Kvens of the past. Labongo 18:16, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Kings of Kvenland
Together with other Finnic groups, the Viking Age Kvens are believed to have participated in the Varangian/Viking conquests abroad (pease review the archive of this discussion page fore more information).

An investigation to the following collection of selected sources and references (each somehow relating to the Kvens) can - perhaps - give more understanding as to how the Kvens (and/or Finnish people in general) were viewed in historic texts during the Viking Age (800-1200 AD) and the Medieval period:

In 870 AD, the Norwegian explorer and leader Ottar from Hålogaland writes a thorough account about his Northern Scandinavian and White Sea exploration trip, where he discusses the Kvens. According to Othar, the Kvens ruled the territories of the Northern Scandinavia - east from the Norwegian mountain chain - which he traveled through.

In 890 AD, the English King Alfred the Great writes in the ''Universal History of Orosius about the Kvens and the land they rule.

In 1075 AD, Adam of Bremen, one of the most important German medieval chroniclers, discusses Kvens in Gesta (a history of Bremen/Hamburg and of the northern lands). He calls Kvenland Terra Feminica. Comparisons to Tacitus' (98 AD) similar Sithons' (i.e. Kvens') female leadership reference and the historic Nordic references to the female leader "Gygr" and/or "Pohjan akka" have been drawn ever since.

In 1154 AD, the Arab historian and scientist, Muhammad al-Idrisi tells that the King of FMRK has possessions in Norway. "Fmrk" is believed to refer to Finnmark, which area - according to the Norwegian leader "Othar" and according to the Universal History of Orosius (republished by King Alfred the Great'' in 890 AD) - was "ruled" by the Kvens.

In 1157 AD, in his geographical chronicle, Nikolaos, the abbot of the monastery at Thingeyrar in Northern Iceland, talks about "two Kvenlands" that reach the areas "north from Bjarmia".

In 1170 AD, the Historia Norvegiae tells about the whereabouts of Kvenland. According to the text, the Kvens served pagan gods.

In 1187 AD, according to a Swedish chronicle, the main Swedish center, Sigtuna, is conquered and destroyed by an attack from easterly direction. Later medieval Swedish sources explain the Karelians to have been behind this attack. However, around this time the Kvens and the Karelians are known to have began their cooperation. Historians believe the River Kemijoki (part of the historic Kvenland) settlement name of Sihtuuna to derive from the name Sigtuna.

In 1200 AD, the Danish historian, Saxo Grammaticus, tells about Finnish kings.

In 1220 AD, the Icelandic bishop, poet, and historian, Snorri Sturluson, writes the Ynglinga Saga, in which marriages and wars of Finnish and Swedish royal families are mentioned.

In 1230 AD, in the introduction to the Orkneyinga Saga, Fundinn Noregr discusses the kings of Finland and Kvenland and their conquest of Norway. Based on the information given in this saga, the ruling families of Sweden, Norway, the Orkney Islands, Normandy, and England descend from these Finnish and/or Kven kings.

In 1230 - 1240 AD, in Egils saga - possibly by Snorri Sturluson (1179-1241 A.D.) - Kvens are discussed.

In 1251 AD, the Karelians fought against the Norwegians.

In 1271 AD, the Kvens and the Karelians cooperated in battles against the Norwegians in Haalogaland. These battles had a lasting effect in the life of the entire Northern Scandinavia.

The Professor Emeritus Kyösti Julku from the University of Oulu in Finland states is his 1986 book KVENLAND / KAINUUNMAA, page 187, the following (exact quote / the original text WAS written in English as follows):

"Once King Karl IX had strengthened his hold on the crown of Sweden he appended to it the title "King of the Kainulaiset", apparently using it for the first time on 16.3.1607.

''This title was later dropped, but Kainuu, or Ostrobothnia, occupied a separate position from the rest of Finland for a long time to come. Thus when Queen Christina appointed Count Pehr Brahe as Governor-General, he became officially Governor-General of Finland, Åland and Ostrobothnia.''

This can only be interpreted, of course, as implying that the incorporation of Ostrobothnia into rest of the country by international agreement was still a recent event and remained fresh in people's memories."

In his above mentioned book, the Professor Emeritus Julku points out what numerous other historians have concluded as well: Kainu(u) means Kvenland in Finnish language, and kainulaiset refers to the Kvens (the Kven people). In historic texts Kvenland has also been referred to as Ostrobothnia, which term thrives from the Swedish language. - -W.B., Sept.4, 2006


 * More spam from another sock puppet. This time the disucssion should continue in Talk: Kings of Kvenland

Kvens - the modern-day and the past - used to be under only one article, Kvenland under another
The above heading tells how things were, and how they should be now. Therefore, your above statement is not accurate, user Drieakko.

I demand for the Kvens of today and the Kvens of the past to be handled in one article, under the heading of the term Kven (also Kvens, etc., must be forwarded there). In the past depate in this forum it has clearly been shown and agreed upon how the modern Kvens represent the very same group of people as the Kvens of the past.

Personally, I do not mind at all that the term Kvenland has a separate article in Wikipedia, just like the terms Finn and Finland can be - and probably are - handled in two separate articles.

In fact, Kven and Kvenland were two separate articles up till quite recently. No on was fighting that point to my knowledge.

The Kvens of the past and Kvens of today must be united into one article, because we are discussing here the one and the same group/tribe of people. The article - of course - must also deal with the roots/history of this group/tribe of people, in light of the information available and in light of the known findings of respected historians and/or other scientists.

A calm and a consensus had recently been reached about the Kven article (which was largely composed by the user Art Dominique). There was then only one united article about the Kvens, another about Kvenland, also another about the Kven language. I was not against that separation.

Then came Mr. Leifern (now also known as Labongo) to the stage. For the beginners he declared that he knows nothing about Kvens. Nevertheless, he now came to demand for the modern Kvens and their ancestors to be split into two separate articles. This despite of the recent consensus reached, and despite the ruling posted by Mr. Mikkalai, based on which no one any longer was to tamper with the Kven article without first providing proven, valid and easily verifiable sources.

At that point the user Mikkalai had stopped his attempts to block the user Art Dominique. Some time before that Mikkalai had attempted to block Art Dominique, to no prevail. The user Art Dominique complained, first publicly announcing that he/she launched the user account of Digi Wiki, to be able to place his/her complaint to the administrators' site about the unfair block in question (Art Dominique could not write there either).

Mr. Mikkalai did another unfair blocking of Art Dominique at this point, proving how he keeps contradicting himself. He allowed Mr. Leifern to split the Kven article, without the sources and/or valid reasoning he had shortly before been after. Mr. Mikkalai too has announced that he is not knowledgeable about the Kvens. That figures. These two mates do not belong to this stage ! They both act cowardly and childishly, and neither one possesses the knowledge required !

Steve Wondering 18:27, 30 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Yet another long post from Art Dominique. --Drieakko 18:42, 30 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Sigh. Yesterday I was accused of being the same person as Drieakko today I am Leifern. For the record, I don't use multiple account as Art Dominique/ Digi Wiki/ Steve Wondering probably does. Also, I hope this user soon realizes that these long nonsense comments, personal attacks, and endless reverts don't improve the quality of the articles.Labongo 11:09, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

User 217.112.242.181 is a proven and admitted vandal
Yes, yes, check such and such book. We've heard that before, haven't we. I happen to be the one, who first introduced here the work you mention above, and you seem to agree, by stating:

"Northernmost Fennoscandia may have been inhabitated by the way described by Art Dominique/Steve Wondering".

Do not forget what we are discussing here. It's the Kvens, silly ! They indeed are the ones who inhabited the "Northernmost Fennoscandia". So we salute you. Thank you for that remark !

Why don't you now finally begin giving us the exact quotes (+ page numbers) - as has been requested continuously -, when you attempt to present any findings of science (that is what we are doing).

Remember, earlier you were stating that nothing has changed in this respect since the 1960s. Remember, how you were then proven wrong. The entire matter - what comes to the northern settlement routes - indeed has been re-thought since the 1960s, and the subject is now taught in schools entirely differently than in 1960s.

By the end of the gone spring you already approved the Diki Wiki's Kven text (just like Mr. Mikkalai and others as well). However, you stated, that you were still - perhaps - not fully satisfied. You have contradicted yourself in the past as well, remember.

You yourself appear to have learned from the practices of KGB - it seems -, that continuing to repeat lies can make the lies appear as the truth. Furthermore, you appear to be very hard headed. That is the reason why we sometimes have to keep bringing up the same matters and facts, from time to time. The same questions keep surfacing. As you have noticed, we have also asked you to check the archive, as in the above comment, and we repeat:'''

"We hope you agree, that it is not reasonable to request for us to have to provide evidence to everyone separately. Please check the archive for the beginners."'''

Regarding "Sitoni / Sithoni, etc.: 'Another Professor Emeritus (other than Julku), Unto Salo, spells the word in question "Sithoni"''.

Perhaps you'll understand this: ''Älkäämme takertuko pikkuseikkoihin, matkallamme suuriin päämääriin !

The above statement hits the point with you very well, and we'll repeat: "We have provided our sources in detail, you have not, not even a single quote with a matching book and page information."

When you were asked for sources in the past - even a single detailed source -, you refused. You explained that you were not going to do our homework for us. Why not do your own homework at least.

The archive shows many cases of you vandalism. Below is just one past comment clearly revealing some of the serious types of foul play practiced by you - all unacceptable in Wikipedia -, including also misquotations by you, followed by your admitting of guilt comment in the end.

The Finnish Wikipedia shows your temper as well, including your swearing by the women's private parts. Conclusion: You are a proven and admitted vandal and a trouble maker in wikipedia. A list of some of your user names can be found from a related discussion (but who really cares).

What on earth 11:36, 8 September 2006 (UTC) (- ->  Ps., to the user Drieakko, that vulgar language part - women's private part - was an exact quote used by the accused, and copied and pasted here from a past comment.  That was now removed, to please you.)

Vandalism by 217.30.179.130 (a comment from the archive)
"Below are three misquotations by user 217.30.179.130, from his unsigned message above (his previously used IP address 130.234.75.167 shows that the message is his):

Claim Number One: "Tavastians (a group of Southern Finns) were present on the Arctic Ocean alreydy during the Viking Age".

Claim Number Two: "Some believe that the Kvens were the original inhabitants of Northern Norway".

Claim Number Three: " According to Ottar, the Kvens were living in Northern Norway and around the White Sea".

When you choose to quote someone, please use the copy and paste technique. No one has said any of the three sentences above. You simply changed the wording, to make up goofy sounding sentences, which you claim some one actually wrote.

Please, explain: When and where were those sentences written ? You are simply participating in vandalism, aren't you.

You've also changed the content of a comment written by another Wikipedia user to this discussion page (and we do not mean you placing your responses between the lines, although for that too you ought to ask a permission from the writer of the comment).

At 13:45, 19 March 2006, using the IP address 130.234.5.136 you added the following sentence to the text which another Wikipedia user had written under the headline Lack of public funding a major cause for lack of information:

"It's not going to happen, however." You did not return to fix that act of vandalism which you published as a page http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kven&oldid=44501610.

You did not write that sentence in italic text, nor did you margin that sentence with your text, as you did all your other parts of your comments. Purposely or not, you made it appear as if the other party would have written that comment.

From here on - to avoid further such temptations and/or accidents - please refrain from placing your comments in between the lines written by other participants on this discussion forum. The above mentioned particular insert of yours has as of yesterday been changed to reflect the fact that it is a part of your response, and not a part of the text of the other party.

Wikipedians against vandalism, March 22, 2006


 * Comment from the guilty party: I apologize for misquoting. ..."   - - -> (this was your answer.  It continued ...)

This past message was pasted here by What on earth 11:36, 8 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Dear Art Dominique. Kindly stop this kind of posts. They are beyond common sense. --Drieakko 11:35, 8 September 2006 (UTC)