Talk:Battle of Napue

message: I followed Niktin to this article and am surprised that a dispute even exists - in this case sources from both sides do not even contradict each other, only complementing the dead/wounded ratio. What's the problem with leaving the more precise data (as absolute numbers appear the same)? --Illythr (talk) 23:27, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I have so far mainly added real references instead of a reference to www.absoluteastronomy.com, which of course never can be used as a reference here. I have also added that the battle took place within the borders of the Swedish Empire, instead of just saying it took place in Finland, which didn't exist at that time. I think that's rather important to know for the reader, since earlier most of the Swedish battles took place in other countries. Närking (talk) 18:01, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Uhh, I didn't take time to examine the "source" Niktin was adding: "The source of this article is Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.  The text of this article is licensed under the GFDL." --Illythr (talk) 18:23, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, that astronomy page was just a mirror of the Wikipedia article! Good sourcing! Närking (talk) 18:39, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

text: Finland has existed since she rose from the sea. A country does not need to be independent to exist. --Jaakko Sivonen (talk) 22:04, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Finland came into existence only when people formed a concept of a territory called Finland. A loose concept of Finland started to evolve around 15th century or so, but in the first phase it included only the present South Finnish regions. I am not certain if Ostrobothnia was considered to be a part of Finland already in the early 18th century.--130.234.68.225 (talk) 14:37, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Losses

message: I had thought that Wikipedia is for increasing information – not for destroying and ruining an article that is based on latest information performed by military experts and historian like Kustaa H.J. Vilkuna and Heikki Ylikangas in 2014 here on the spot of the event (in Isokyrö). My humble role as a local historian was to gather the information together and perform it in a short form. I have studied all the Battle places meter by meter, as well as visited the remains of hiding places for local civil people. It may even be that I have more verifiable and updated knowledge about the battle and other events here in my birth parish than Mr. or Mrs. Manelolo.
--Kmielty (talk) 13:46, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The article can be restored to its old form (I see that most of the text in the article was removed 6 November 2017 by a certain user). I don't support the removal of the text, which I presume you wrote. You can restore the article to its former state, but I would at the same time recommend you resource it and put the citations where they due in the article and not just at the very end of it, that way your text will hold much more value and not be as easily challenged. Imonoz (talk) 21:40, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

text: I have restored the text. I recommend you to go through it and put the sources where they are needed in the article. I've put "Citation needed" marks to suggest where. I presume the four sources you have added in the end of "The terrible sufferings of the civil population" are the ones you used for it. Put these citations after each sentence(es) where they due (this is important). Imonoz (talk) 19:03, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

text: I get what you're saying and I do not distrust the sources used. The problem is that no original research (WP:NOR) can be used on Wikipedia, it should be verified by published sources which the readers can easily follow up. Not necessarily for the truth in the article, but the reliability of it. Sources like "Numerous updated reviews of military and history experts: Brigade of Ostrobothnia, Colonel C-B.J.Petander, General Apraxin etc." - "Riviews of the Brigade of Ostrobothnia, colonel Petander, general Apraksin, professor Ville Sarkanen, etc." - "Military and local parish records" does not cut it very well here, in my opinion. I just don't see how the reader is able to follow that up (to check the sources) easily. Paholaisen sota, Viha: perikato, katkeruus ja kertomus isostavihasta, Ett fattigt men fritt folk and Kovien kokemusten kansaa looks to be good ones, but the pagenumbers in the books, for each claim in the article, is missing. There can be many sentences with only one final citation, but then that book has to support all those sentences as well (including the pagenumbers). Whenever there comes a sentence not supported by "citation1" you should stop and put "citation1" before the new sentence and then keep going with "citation2" for the new one and so forth. Imonoz (talk) 18:55, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ruining the article of the Battle of Napue 

message: The finnish wikipedia is full of nazi propaganda. In this article too I feel that claims of "a saying", can be considered such. The finnish state machinery and many people holding and expressing inappropriate militaristic and sexist views that can be considered nazism or compared at least, is wide spread problem, but one that has been hus hussed too long.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:999:52:4261:B82D:8585:EF5:E8E2 (talk) 00:41, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article contains nazi propaganda.