Talk:Kvens of the past/Archive 2

Who is the vandal who deletes lots of information?
To the editors of Wikipedia! There are at least on every active vandal who deletes lot of texts that are arguing against the article "Modern mythology of Kvenland" or Kvens of the past that is the official term, which the author claims to be reliable science. Please check this person and give him/her a remark. Discussion texts must not be deleted!! Especially in a topic where the articles is written by an ethno-political activist and "no one" can change the text in the article. This is serious misconduct and vandalism--84.216.55.77 10:38, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


 * If you are refering to the archiving of the earlier posts which took place today, they are found here: Talk:Kvens_of_the_past/Archive_1. Archive is clearly marked at the beginning of the talk page. Note that Wikipedia recommends discussions to be archived after the talk page has reached a certain lenght. Note that the article is not protected, just semi-protected because of continuous vandalism. --Drieakko 13:10, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Kindly point out parts of the text that are "ethno-political activism". They will be removed. --Drieakko 13:22, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay, there are overwheling loads of so called discussions. I change my mind, let the rubbish be there and let us talk some more bullshit here instead--84.216.53.133 15:21, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, most of your conclusions, discussions and exclusion of discussions, in the "Mythology of Kvenland" is biased and can be termed as ethno-political statements which tries, as always, be covered by objective and neutral phraseology. Kindly, remove all discussions and conclusions and refer only to well established research. Exclude everything else, including your so called intepretations--84.216.53.133 15:21, 9 September 2006 (UTC) Well, did you not say "Couldn't care less"? Or was it Labongo. You do discuss and write in the same style.Is Labongo your twin brother?--84.216.53.133 15:25, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Dear anonymous editor User:84.216.53.133:
 * You are on the verge to breaching the No Personal Attack policy. If you continue with this attitude, you will be blocked for period of time amounting to the time required for you to chill off.
 * Fred-Chess 18:50, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Oops. I have stated that the article is modern mythology and biased by ethno-political statements. And that the author is an amateur in the field. "Bullshit and rubbish" was aimed to the whole discussion by all authors, not only Drieakko/Labongo, my own texts as well. I believe many agree on that part. No personal, but collective attack on the whole discussion. But I do see the point: It is useless to discuss with Drieakko and his, I believe, twin brother Labongo.--84.216.53.134 07:21, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


 * User:84.216.53.133, kindly list one by one what are "ethno-political statements" in the article. Also list what are the "so-called interpretations" in the article that you want to be removed. Also say the reasons why you want them removed. --Drieakko 20:08, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


 * As I have said many times. Wikipedia is, in my opinion, not for the presentation of new perspective in complex fiedls, especially not by amateurs in the field. Just present facts and conclusions presented by scholrs in the field. No ideas of your own. Delete the rest; I believe that you have already figured out what should be deleted. Well, bye bye. All this is just wast of precisous time--84.216.53.134 07:25, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


 * It would be more helpful to list and reason the elements that you want to have removed. --Drieakko 08:17, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I have given you some 20 examples on the road. I believe most if not all of them you have rejected. Anyone who defends a translation of Qven in the original text to Finn in the English version is an amateur, which one should not discuss with because he does not listen to reason, and this is just one example of ethno-political statements. No one professional would do that kind of obvious errors. The perspective of Drieakko is ethno-political and therefore biased.--84.216.53.207 17:20, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I would still like you to list and reason the elements in the article that you want to have removed. There is not a single post under your IP in the archive so I don't know which content you are referring to by "20 examples". Please adopt a username. If you are unhappy with the translation of Ottar's account made by the University of Victoria, please provide a link to an alternative one. Kindly note that personal remarks don't get you anywhere in Wikipedia. --Drieakko 17:35, 10 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)


 * All known sources about ancient Kvenland are well referenced and covered in the article. Julku's work is referenced as well as several other prominent Kvenland theorists. Julku never provided archaeological or linguistic support for his theory, so it remains an academical excercise among several others. Your long rants and deragotary personal comments do not unfortunately change that.


 * Eastern border of Sweden had been set by the Treaty of Nöteborg in 1323 CE, stretching from Lake Ladoga to the Gulf of Bothnia. However, Swedes very soon violated the treaty and started systematically take over the lands beyond the border. But not until the Treaty of Tyavzino in 1595 CE were these lands officially granted to the kingdom of Sweden by Russians. Much of the area was recently inhabited by settlers from southern Finland and especially from Savo (in Kainuu, but also in rest of Pohjanmaa) during the 16th century, and its governance was very thin.


 * This is all well covered practically in any book handling the history of Sweden (or Finland). But I still fail to see relevancy to the article. Are you perhaps claiming that since this largely colonial area had a detached administrative status in the 17th century before its governance was properly organized, that is a proof of it being the same as ancient Kvenland? Reductio ad absurdium. --Drieakko 16:52, 3 September 2006 (UTC)


 * What book? What page?  You are still decliming to offer us any source !  We know why.


 * No source supports your claim. If you dissagree, please give us the exact source information. How many times do we need to ask you ??

Kven kings 20:20, 3 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Are you refering to the "newest radical claim" of mine that Sweden and Russia had a Treaty of Tyavzino in 1595 CE granting Sweden the official right to Kainuu and most of Pohjanmaa? Kindly follow the link yourself and study the subject. Good read is for example Uudisraivauksen ja rajasotien kausi. Kainuun historia I. Kajaani 1986. by Jorma Keränen. --Drieakko 21:20, 3 September 2006 (UTC)


 * As a side note: "Sweden-Finland" is a fictional name invented by the nationalistic Finnish historians. --Drieakko 04:25, 4 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)


 * Kindly read more about this issue for example here. I'd recommend also some basic books about history of Finland, like Suomen historian pikkujättiläinen by WSOY.--Drieakko 18:02, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Everyone understands, that if you really could pick up a quote from a historian or a page from a history book (exact quote included here) to support your outrageous claims, you of course would. Wouldn't you ?  It's really as simple as that.


 * You're being humiliated, and by purpose. You deserve it !  Read more, assume less.  Please, give up vandalizing Wikipedia, the findings of science and the work of historians !


 * I actually browsed this for you from Suomen historian pikkujättiläinen: read pages 82-83. Text is an easy read. However, I think that the problems here are of nature that I can not help you with. --Drieakko 19:01, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Kings/rulers of Kvenland in light of some historic documents
Together with other Finnic groups, the Viking Age Kvens are believed to have participated in the Varangian/Viking conquests abroad (plese check the discussion archive for more related 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


 * Blah blah blah. Most of the sources cited above do not even mention the Kvens.Kraak 12:16, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Most of the claims in the text are made up or erroneous, some examples:


 * 870: Ottar did not write anything, He did not travel through Kven areas. He did not say that Kvenland was east from the Norwegian mountain chain.


 * 890: King Alfred did not write anything. There is no mention in Orosius that Kvens would have ruled anything.


 * 1075: The land in question is Terra Feminarum. Relation to Kvenland is likely, but not certain. Relations to Sitones and "Pohjan Akka" surely have not been drawn "ever since", they are very speculative and very recent.


 * 1154: Ottar or Orosius did not say that Kvens ruled Finnmark.


 * 1157: Níkulás was an abbot in the monastery of Aþverá.


 * 1187: Remark about Karelians and Kvens starting their co-operating then is imaginatory.


 * 1220: Ynglingasaga does not mention kings or royals in Finland.


 * 1230: Orkneyinga saga does not say that kings ruling in Kvenland/Finland were Kvens/Finns. ... And so on. --Drieakko 17:13, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Modification
I modified the reference to Kyösti Julku´s theory, which is, after all, often cited with approval by historians and archaeologists. The previous version said almost directly that Julku must be wrong, which is not very NPOV. I do not personally buy Julku´s theory, but I tried to give the air of neutrality for the critical comments. Art Dominique should suggest modifications and additions for the present article, instead of reverting the old version which was definitely of inferior quality. Kraak 12:00, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Well neutralized. --Drieakko 14:05, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


 * You do not need to be Einstein to figure out what is happening. Everyone can see to themselves.  The user Drieakko continues to back up from his previous statements.  Yet, his text is still full of grab and nonsense, as has been pointed out by others on this page.


 * Diki Wiki's text - on the other hand - reveals what historians are saying. That is why for that text detailed sources have been provided, when ever requested, and even without requests !  -- Steve Wondering --


 * My personal opinion about Kyösti Julku's theory that his own neighborhood around Oulu was Kvenland is that it is incorrect in its entirety. But this opinion should not be reflected in the article. --Drieakko 06:38, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Abbot Nikolaos' Kvenland from 1157
There is still one ancient Kvenland reference missing from the article. Abbot Nikolaos from the the monastery at Thingeyrar in Northern Iceland is known to have mentioned Kvenland in his publication about European geography. According to the very short remark, there would have been "two Kvenlands" seemingly somewhere "north of Bjarmia". Possibly a very convoluted remark, but nevertheless about Kvenland. I have been hesitant to add this to the article since I have not been able to find the related content in the public domain. In my opinion, adding content that can not be immediately cross-referenced is not very welcome, since it seems to have created plenty of chaos in the past.

If someone knows a reliable server that is hosting the content in question in any language, kindly let me know. --Drieakko 18:09, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

The person in question seems to be the abbot Níkulás Bergsson in the monastery of Aþverá (Munkaþverá, founded in 1155 CE) in Northern Iceland (Eyjafjǫrñr) and the publication Leiðarvísir og borgaskipan which was basically a guidebook for pilgrims about the routes from Northern Europe to Rome and Jerusalem. Still no luck with the online version. --Drieakko 13:21, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Added now the last remaining reference to Kvenland in the article. Also added the known 3 references to Kvens that do not mention Kvenland, but are from the same era than Kvenland references. Three of the four references can not be cross-referenced by Internet sources, unfortunately. --Drieakko 20:41, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Move this article to Kvenland
Below are two comments from Talk:Kven that suggest to move this article to Kvenland. Since the redirect page Kvenland is protected this need to be done by an administrator.Labongo 10:13, 7 September 2006 (UTC)


 * [...] The name "Kvens of the past" for [this] article is not very good since it kind of robs the present-day Kvens from their past. I'd prefer the "Kvens of the past" to be called just Kvenland" which is the name uniting all ancient sources (that end around 1250 CE) and which is the common headline for the subject in other publications. The known history of the Kvens in the north, starting in the 16th century, should be handled in [the Kven article]. Any comments from Suedois that originated the split and article naming convention? --Drieakko 05:09, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I suggest one of the following names: "Kvens (ancient)", "Kvens (prehistoric)", "Kvens (protohistoric)" or "Kvens (early medieval)". Or Kvenland, aa Drieakko suggests. Kvens of the past is arguably a very poor headline.130.234.5.137 12:17, 31 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Since the page has been unprotected it can be moved now. I think Kvenland would be a better name.Labongo 08:31, 6 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Kvenland is still a protected redirect. --Drieakko 08:49, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

A message to the user known as Steve Wondering, Digi Wiki, Art Dominique, and possibly other names
Dear Editor, since you have been involved in editing the Kven, Kven language, or Kvens of the past articles in the last months, articles that have been disputed in the last ten months, your name is listed in the Request for Arbitration on this matter. You can make a statement here: Requests_for_arbitration. Best regards, Fred-Chess 16:17, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Steve Wondering, I posted a copy of your comment below in Requests_for_arbitration.Labongo 07:13, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

User Drieakko continues backing away from his outrageous writings, as we figured he would
To user Fred-Chess: We tried the route you suggest already before, remember. You indeed have been one of the major causes of chaos here - please check the archive.

Despite of numerous requests, you kept pushing false information, and - of course - you were persistant in not providing sources. Then you sort of apologized for your behavior only a couple of months ago, for which we salute you. - - Steve Wondering


 * User Labongo:


 * '''Your view is not a "generally accepted" view at all, but only your view.


 * 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.


 * There is a reason why we are asking for the exact quotes and exact - easily verifiable (as Mr. Mikkalai put it) - book and page information from you. The reason is, that simply showing a list of authors and books proves nothing.  Wikipedia's vandals and foul players are known to resort to exactly this sort of tactics.


 * Once again: The sources offered do not agree with the text written in the Kven article !  To understand this, you only have to read the last comments by the user Drieakko.  As everyone can see, he continues backing up from his statements.  In different ways, he goes on apologizing, while he attempts to round of his false statements.  What does that prove:  This is only a learning processs to him.  He really doesn't have anything to contribute to this topic, except for chaos !


 * User Labongo/Drieakko: It is your job to show where exactly someone - a respected and known historian or other scientist - agrees with your text.  The burden of proof is in your hands to show evidence.  Please, include exact quote(s) and page information.  That is how Mr. Mikkalai wanted to proceed, after a recent concensus was reached.


 * We are quite familiar with the related material in question. We have provided our sources in detail, you have not, not even a single quote with a matching book and page information.  - - Steve Wondering


 * Pälä pälä, as we say in Finland. You just keep repeating yourself, without making any new points. After the modifications made by Drieakko himself and by others, the present article does not push any "radical new theory". It is just describing the sources and summarizes efficiently the different theories made by established scholars, including Kyösti Julku. It is now much more NPOV than the version you wrote using the name "Digi Wiki".217.112.242.181 20:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Please, find an answer to you below: - - What on earth 11:21, 8 September 2006 (UTC)


 * The comment by 'Steve Wondering'' was also posted in Talk:Kven and discussion should continue there.Labongo 06:51, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

User Drieakko - with multiple names - removes comments that criticize him
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.

You have been accused to be that very person, remember. That part of the text was now removed - nevertheless -, to please you. So now, allow the comment to be posted, please !

Furthermore, the first comment (of the two) is not entirely the same at all as the one in the related discussion. Do not remove it, or any other comments !

--> the comments in question have been re-entered below !

What on earth 11:58, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

User 217.112.242.181 is a proven and admitted vandal
By the end of the gone spring you already approved the Diki Wiki's 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 (the given example was removed from here, per the request by the user Drieakko).

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 11:21, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

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 11:21, 8 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Dear Art Dominique. Kindly stop this kind of posts. They make no common sense any more. --Drieakko 12:23, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Suggestion for Art Dominique / Digi Wiki / Steve Wondering
Hi.

The ongoing Arbitration suggestion might result in sanctions for you. And even worse it may be if you refuse to state your own case. You may be hard-block indefinitely.

Maybe you feel uncomfortable with the Wikipedia processes and buearucracy? If so, I want to suggest the Ass. of Member Advocates, a assosiation of volounteers that can assist in questions about policy and practices. You can ask an advocate to help you write a response to Requests for arbitration. It would be in the interest of everyone to have statements from all involved parts. See AMA Requests for Assistance to request an advocate.

Fred-Chess 15:03, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Seems that there is a unanimous decision by the arbitrators to take this into Arbitration Committee now. --Drieakko 05:00, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

User Drieakko continues vandalism: removes texts that prove him wrong
User Drieakko: Do not remove the below message again ! It appears that you have removed a whole lot of messages from the discussion archives as well. Do you wísh your own discussion messages to be removed as they appear - how about all your contributions to Wikipedia - they seem to heavily fight against the findings of science anyway ?

Torne Valley, Northern Norway and today's Kainuu were all part of Kvenland
Torne Valley, the extreme Northern Norway and today's Kainuu were all part of Kvenland. That is why the languages and accents spoken in those areas at the present day are so closely related to each others.

This is not - and was not - changed considerably by the fact that migration to the historic Kvenland areas from the modern-day areas of Häme and Savo in Finland took place.

As in other cases of migration usually, the newcomers acquire the language and/or the accent of the locals, not the other way around. - - Stimulater 13:11, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Another missing Kven king source added: Faravid
In 1230 - 1240 AD, in Egils saga - presumably by Snorri Sturluson (1179-1241 A.D.) - discusses Faravid, the King of Kvenland (source: KVENLAND / KAINUUNMAA, 1986, page 73 - includes a picture of an old manuscript - Professor Emeritus Kyösti Julku).

- - Steve Wondering 10:52, 12 September 2006 (UTC)


 * User:Fred-Chess, please tell your opinion how to act on posts like this that are spammed on multiple forums with no intention to initiate any discussions. --Drieakko 10:54, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Yet another missing Kven king source added: Fornjótr
In 1230 AD, in the introduction to the Orkneyinga Saga, Fundinn Noregr discusses Fornjótr, the King of Finland and Kvenland and the conquest of Norway by his son, Nórr (source: KVENLAND / KAINUUNMAA, 1986, page 61 - includes the Icelandic and Finnish spellings of the original text -, Professor Emeritus Kyösti Julku).

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 contrary to what the user Drieakko claims, there is no mentioning about Gotland in this context. The text is very clear and quite easily readable and understandable to all Scandinavians, and in particular to those who can understand the modern-day Icelandic language.

- - Steve Wondering 11:16, 12 September 2006 (UTC)


 * The article is nowadays linked to the original text of Hversu and Fundinn Noregr (Orkneyinga saga), and the name of Gotland is clearly visible alongside of Kvenland and Finland. Has Professor Julku has manipulated the text in his book?217.112.242.181 18:59, 12 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I think there is a version of Orkneyinga saga around by an unknown scribe that has already polished the confusing "Gotland" away from the text. Julku has just selected that version for his own publication, not mentioning that it is not the commonly accepted original. All versions of Hversu mention Gotland, though. Julku conveniently leaves Hversu unreferenced in his book. --Drieakko 19:13, 12 September 2006 (UTC)


 * This convoluted mention of Gotland and Finland/Kvenland under the same rule a long time ago might actually have happened. During 0 - 200 CE most of the coastal area of Varsinais-Suomi was inhabited by settlers that had come either from eastern Sweden or Gotland. They vanished by 400 CE. It is also noteworthy that both mentions of Finland in Ynglingasaga roughly date during that period, the other one of them describing Old Snow as a powerful man in Finland who married his daughter off to the king of Sweden. The same Old Snow is then mentioned in Orkneyinga and Hversu, that both give an unexplained reference to Gotland. This is all very speculative but makes certain sense and ties most of the pieces together. This would mean then that stories of Finland in Ynglingasaga and Kvenland in Orkneyinga and Hversu actually describe people that were from Gotland and ruling in Finland/Kvenland. In addition to this, there are no mentions of Finland in sagas at all, and Kvenland appears only in Egil's saga (and then one mention about Kvens as raiders). --Drieakko 19:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Regarding spelling of "Sitoni" / Sithoni, etc.
To the user 217.112.242.181:

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 ! - - what on earth 12:55, 8 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Kindly continue this discussion in Talk:Sitones. --Drieakko 13:05, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

The user Labongo attempts to distort the truth the following way
User Labongo states: "your requests for references have been answered hundreds of times."

Notice, how again you present a hopelessly goofy claim, user Labongo. Can you show us one such occasion where what we have been after has been offered to us, in terms of quotes and the related page informaiton ?

No one has asked as an attachment for the Kven text a list of references which disagree with the information offered. This is the absurd case now.

We need to see where exactly those offered sources agree with the written text offered in the Kven article. Those sort of pinpointed and exact - easily verifiable (as Mr. Mikkalai wants) - quotes and sources are offered in several key points of the Diki Wiki's text. For us to ask you to understand the difference in that approach is too much to hope for, it appears.

You appear to be too young for this sort of conversation, it seems safe to state.

In the case of user Driakko's text that sort of showing of exact book and page information and - importantly user Labongo - exact quotes on those pages from known and credited historians and/or other scientist cannot be provided.

Read the bold text from the above sentence. That is what is wanted, not what you claim that has been requested ! Please, read what our messages exactly say. After you have done that, please stop setting words in the mouths of others, and particularly in the mouths of historians in relation to the Kven text.

Perhaps just for you - and the types of you - it is important to repeat yet one more time: We have never asked - and we are not asking now, and we shall not ask in the future - a list of related books an/or historians who have written about the topic. Instead, we are asking for it to be pointed out where exactly those given sources agree with text pushed for Wikipedia.

We are familiar with the sources offered. They appear to disagree with the text of user Drieakko !

What part of the word "disagree" do you find hard to understand ?

Wikipedians against vandalism 12:42, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Diki Wiki text must remain the starting point for any changes/additions requested
Someone above (Drieakko/(Labongo) offered us a source which - according to them - was "written by someone".  They added, that this shoud satify the need for the requested sources by Steve Wondering (and others).  However, a source "written by someone" does not point to a reliable source which Mr. Mikkalai and us others have been after.  Please, do not offer something as ridiculous as that for a reference !

'''We suggest that you do as was agreed and concluded in the wide consensus reached by all participants of this forum during April and May (also in early June) of this year. No changes in the "Diki Wiki" Kven article can be made without proper and detailed references ! That text must be the starting point for any discussions.'''

'''Please, do not forget to provide the exact quotes and page numbers of the sources offered for any requested change or addition for the Diki Wiki's Kven text ! You are expected to suggest such possible changes and/or to discuss the content of the Diki Wiki Kven text on this discussion page.''' - - Swedish girl 09:15, 12 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Art Dominique/Steve Wondering/Swedish girl/Digi Wiki/Kven kings/Stimulator/Wikipedians against vandalism etc. has an interesting gender identity! Howevere, the Finnish ultra-nationalist posing as a Swedish girl should realize that it is highly unlikely that Digi Wiki´s version will be back. Artie baby, if you want modifications, you need to start co-operating. So, please, stop the reverting campaign, cut down insults, and stop that silly sock-puppeting, which is not fooling ANYONE. Frankly, you are a huge embarassment for the rest of us Finnish wikipedians. You'll be able to do better, so...in the language of our ancestors...miehisty. Kraak 12:42, 12 September 2006 (UTC) (same as IP 130.../217...).


 * I would also like to see an end to this meaningless and embarrasing posting. The so-called "Digi Wiki" article written by a banned sock puppet User:Digi_Wiki is very far from the Wikipedia level text, whatever the same user's newest sock puppets claim. --Drieakko 15:49, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

The modern-day and the past Kvens must be presented under one headline
Please realize that the current and the past Kvens represent a one and the same group of people, and thus they must be presented under one headline: Kven (also Kvens, etc.). That one article must - of course - also deal with the history of the Kvens, in the light and the findings of known science (the sources must be clearly presented in detail).

The past Kvens and the modern-day Kvens are very closely related to each other, genealogically, culturally, linguistically - and every which way - as has been thoroughly proven in this discussion page (page history shows that, although some of you folks (Leifern / Drieakko) appear to have deleted a whole lot of comments from there, particularly those comments that prove the current text false.

The Jews ought to - perhaps - not be presented as a one group of people in Wikipedia, as they are a very mixed group of people, who necessarily - as often is the case - do not share much more common together than their religion.

- - Steve Wondering 13:00, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

I brought some of the above deleted messages back - - Kvenar eller inte 04:22, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh. Kindly present your genealogical proof about ancient Kvens. You seem to know their language as well. --Drieakko 04:50, 14 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Answers to that have been given already. Below please find yet another reason why the past and the current Kvens are also genealogically related, and closely so.  --What on earth 05:29, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Do not acrhive messages as soon as they are posted
Please, do not resort to these sort of tactics, user Driakko. You are not allowed to archive posts as soon as they are posted here. We could also archive or delete all your comments as soon as you post them.

Those above comments and the ones you removed and/or deleted have not received enough airtime. One minute is not long enough for anyone to view those comments, not even a day. Some comments reverted back here were not even archived at all. That is why they must be brought back for readers' review. --What on earth 05:29, 14 September 2006 (UTC)


 * There has been no special archiving of your posts as you can see in the archive history. However, spamming the same post multiple times on this and/or other talk pages is frowned upon, as well as copying random chunks of old posts back to the talk page from the archives. --Drieakko 13:32, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

The past and the current Kvens are related in every which way
You have not red the past messages, user Drieakko. You are too busy deleting and archiving the messages posted here, before anyone gets to read them.

It was shown in detail in this forum before - place by place, town by town - that all the Northern Norwegian Kven communities received their migration waves from the areas of the historic Kvenland. The migrants - of course - brought their genes with them, wouldn't you have ? --What on earth 05:29, 14 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Kindly talk about these migrations in Talk:Kven. --Drieakko 13:14, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Birkarls
Article about birkarls now has some aspects related to the matter of ancient Kvens. --Drieakko 05:11, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

User Leifern keeps on deleting discussion comments
User Leifern: '''Do not resort to deleting comments from this or any other discussion pages. The "history pages" reveal that you have done this sort of vandalism in the past as well.'''

Among others, you have deleted a number of comments from this discussion page from May and June this year. Those comments - as well as you related deletions - clearly prove your vandal acts which fight against the nature and the rules of Wikipedia.

Please realize that the current and the past Kvens represent a one and the same group of people, and thus they must be presented under one headline: Kven (also Kvens, etc.). That one article must - of course - shortly describe the history of the Kvens, in the light and the findings of known science (the sources must be clearly presented in detail).

The past Kvens and the modern-day Kvens are very closely related to each other, genealogically, culturally, linguistically - and every which way - as has been thoroughly proven in this discussion page (page history shows that, although you appear to have deleted a whole lot of messages from there, particularly those that criticize your vandal acts).

The Jews ought to - perhaps - not be presented as a one group of people in Wikipedia, as they are a very mixed group of people, who necessarily - as often is the case - do not share much more common together than their religion.

- - Steve Wondering 13:00, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

after a vandalic action - a deletion of a group of messages from here - by the user Leifern, I brought the above messages back - - Kvenar eller inte 04:22, 13 September 2006 (UTC)  + reverted back on September 18, 2006


 * More or less the same message has been posted just above this one, with the same comments about the Jews. --Drieakko 18:00, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Modern Kvens are provably descendants of the historic Kvens
There is no evidence that the modern Kvens would not be direct descendants of the Kvenland's Kvens mentioned in historic sources. --Kvenland's daughters 15:57, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
 * This must be Steve Wondering again, trying to give an impression that his POV has wide support among the users of Wikipedia.Kraak 06:41, 19 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes. His aim seems to be make a mess out of talk pages. He posted the messages above as User:Derbigum but signed them as User:Kvenland's daughters and User:Kvenar eller inte. --Drieakko 07:24, 19 September 2006 (UTC)


 * As far as I know suspicially many "kvens" that arrived in the Sami regions also knew the Sami language quite well in addition to their Finnish dialect. In many Sami regions they blended seamlessly into the local Sami communities. It appear to me that the Kvens where well aquainted with the Sami culture else why so little problems with the intigration. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by XiXaXo (talk • contribs) 17:24, 16 December 2006 (UTC).

Kvens in the Getica?
Apparently there is a possible reference to the kainulaiset (Kvens?) in the Getica by Jordanes from the 6th century CE. Jordanes mentions a tribe called Cainothioth alongside the Finni. -- 217.112.242.181 20:05, 19 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Getica in original language here and translation to English here. "Cainothioth" is not found in either one. The part mentioning "Finni" is here (III:23):


 * "Sunt et his exteriores Ostrogothae, Raumarici, Aeragnaricii, Finni mitissimi, Scandzae cultoribus omnibus mitiores; nec non et pares eorum Vinoviloth; Suetidi, cogniti in hac gente reliquis corpore eminentiores: quamvis et Dani, ex ipsorum stirpe progressi, Herulos propriis sedibus expulerunt, qui inter omnes Scandiae nationes nomen sibi ob nimia proceritate affectant praecipuum."


 * which translates into:


 * "And there are beyond these the Ostrogoths, Raumarici, Aeragnaricii, and the most gentle Finns, milder than all the inhabitants of Scandza. Like them are the Vinovilith also. The Suetidi are of this stock and excel the rest in stature. However, the Dani, who trace their origin to the same stock, drove from their homes the Heruli, who lay claim to preëminence among all the nations of Scandza for their tallness."


 * "Finni" in this context are most probably Sami people. Several suggestions have been made for "Vinovilith", with none especially convincing. There is a light chance that it is a mis-spelled "Kven", among many others. --Drieakko 02:34, 20 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks Drieakko. So there is something wrong with the third-hand source I used. Possibly the Vinoviloth have been fancifully interpreted as a corrupted form of the hypothetical Cainothioth. The source I used derives the name Cainothioth from a Swedish linguist called Svennung, who translated and interpreted Getica during the 60´s.217.112.242.181 09:24, 20 September 2006 (UTC)


 * No prob. This is a similar kind of over-interpretation that has been made about Sitones in Germania. It has also spread around as a "fact" that Tacitus mentions Kvens even if it is only a wild speculation of a now-retired professor. --Drieakko 12:35, 20 September 2006 (UTC)


 * For the sake of completism, I added the Vinoviloth to the chapter Possible other sources. Apparently it was another example of wild speculation of an old professor, a Swedish one in this case. BTW, I added a source that might be of interest to you on the Talk page of Birka.


 * Thanks. Do you have the name of the book and of its author who speculated about the Vinoviloth? --Drieakko 06:32, 23 September 2006 (UTC)


 * The book I was reading referred to this study as its source: J. Svennung. Jordanes und Scandia. Uppsala 1967.


 * Thanks. Added that as a reference to the article. --Drieakko 13:10, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Message to Art Dominique
Art Dominique (and your many sock puppets), kindly read WP:NPA and try to understand that all messages that are attacks against other users will be moderated. According to Wikipedia rules, they are never allowed. No exceptions. Also random actions on Talk pages will be removed. Copying dozens of archived posts back to talk pages here and elsewhere while randomly deleting current posts will also be reverted. Kindly make posts that stay on the subject without trying to intimidate or humiliate other users. Your contributions to discussions are ok and welcome. But please try to calm yourself down. Thank you.

It would also be appreciated, if you bothered to reply at Requests_for_arbitration/Kven/Evidence. --Drieakko 18:22, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Since your master account User:Art_Dominique has been declared as a banned user, all your sock puppets and IPs and posts made by them will be terminated according to Wikipedia rule Banning_policy. If you want to continue contributing to Wikipedia, kindly present your case at Requests_for_arbitration/Kven/Evidence and try to get pardoned. --Drieakko 06:03, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Consolidation of Sweden
This is a side issue, but I have doubts about linking this article to the Consolidation of Sweden. That term usually means integration of Svear and Götar to a single state of Sweden. Sweden was Sweden when Finland was under its rule and it remained Sweden when entire Finland 1809 was annexed by Russia. --Drieakko 03:50, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, this is difficult question. When Sweden was consolidated? According to one view, already in the late Viking Age, according to another, only during the mid 13th century. If the latter view is accepted, one could say that the "conquest" of Finland was a part of the "consolidation" of the medieval Swedish kingdom, which was not the same thing as the post-1809 Sweden.--217.112.242.181 10:37, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, a difficult question. Sweden as an identity, Sweden proper and kingdom of Sweden all basically being different things. Inhabitants of Finland had for centuries full civil rights in Sweden (being part of the "Sweden proper" that controlled the kingdom of Sweden), but the identity of Sweden was never dependant on whether Finland was a part of Sweden or not. This identity was created by the unification of Svear and Götar. IMHO, consolidation of Sweden means the process to create the identity of Sweden. --Drieakko 10:58, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I would even despute that. The modern Swedish identity is for a large part the result of the psychological trauma associated with the loss of Finland, and the resulting turn to Scandinavism. -- Petri Krohn 20:24, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, that sounds tempting ;) But some more evidence should be given about that. --Drieakko 14:46, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

The earlier occasionally offered theory about the term "Finn" does not stand today
The below statement in the present Kvenland text is among some of the most untrue statements offered there:

"There was a clear need to have a distinct name for the Finns in the north, since Norwegians, unlike their neighbors, already called the Sami people "Finns" and using the same name for the Finns on the same area might have been confusing."

The above false theory has been shown wrong many a time, and the appropriate sources have been presented. The Finns were called Finns, Fennis, etc. Sometimes those terms can be seen to have been used in reference to the both groups, the Finns and the Samis. The Samis were sometimes referred to as "Sgridfinns", etc.

One doesn't have to go further than the early papal letters. There the Finns of the extreme southwestern corner of the present-day Finland were referred to as Finns. The detailed sources have been offered here long ago already. Thus, lets not start this nonsense talk again.


 * Ditto. --Drieakko 12:14, 17 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Art Dominique, you can use this webpage http://www.dokpro.uio.no/ordboksoek.html to verify that Finn=Sami. You will also find that Finne=person from Finland. But note that Finne translated to english would be Finnish person (as Svenske is translated to Swedish person). Also, note that something is not shown many times even if you have posted multiple posts citing a single reference.Labongo 12:52, 17 October 2006 (UTC)


 * You are wrong, the latest books about sami history clearly state the connection with the "Finnas", also it is very clear that the "Finnas" in the saga texts and in the early laws of Norway refer to south sami population and the sami population in general. You may find a excellent link about the presence in the sagas and in the mythology to a article in the Sami People section by Mundel. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by XiXaXo (talk • contribs) 17:12, 16 December 2006 (UTC).