ArchiveIntentoftheRFCrequest HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA       Much ado about exactly what  Just to put the alleged POV title debate into perspective  Occupation one  Soviet occupation and annexation   article section title  Occupation two of the Baltic states not Baltic SSRs  German occupation   article section title  Occupation three  Under Soviet rule    article section title So what we have is  Soviet Nazi and Soviet rule over the occupied Baltic states  or more succinctly  Occupation of the Baltic states Soviet annexation  is appropriately represented and mentioned in the section title where it belongs There is no need to change the title of the article nor the scope of article content While I have quietly expanded the section on contemporary Russian BTW polarized scholarship on the topic with respect to the Soviet aspect of the above my editorial opposition insists that mediation and arbitration will be necessary if I dont start to see things their way What exactly is missing that requires the threat of mediations and arbitrations when I myself who is regularly portrayed as a rabid nationalist ignorant of mainstream scholarship have added and expanded  versions of history which have no basis in fact and have done so without denigrating the proponents of those versions in article content De jure and de facto recognition all belong in the article on state continuity neither with respect to the act of annexation have anything to do with the Baltic or Soviet or Russian positions on the socalled joining of the Baltic states to the Soviet Union which are  SovietsRussia  workers revolutions overthrew the Fascists and demanded a government friendly to the USSR Baltics originatedpetitioned to join and Latvia originated petitioned to give away Abrene to Russia joining was completely legal according to all international law  hence no occupation  The rest of the planet and including   annexation was forcible joining illegal  hence occupation Any points editors wish to make over de facto or de jure belong in the state continuity article As far this article is concerned there are no tangible POV issues there are no censored or suppressed controversies whether or not they even have merit As for myself I have been constructively expanding appropriate content while editors with fluent Russian language skills dont lift a finger So exactly who has the interest of objective and inclusive content at heart Judging by the addition of content representing reliable and where not reliable to fact at least reliable and representative as to opinion sources fairly and accurately represented that would be myself    Martin and I have started what can become a httpenwikipediaorgwikiTalkOccupationoftheBalticstates