Talk:Finvenkism

message: This page is looking great, nice job everyone. However, I'm a little uncertain about one passage... 
"It also assumes Esperanto can be "officially adopted", either by national governments or international organisations like the United Nations or the European Union. Because of this Esperantists are usually loyal to state authority ."
Personally, I don't know enough about Esperanto to argue this, but it seems a little too broad and bold to say of Esperantists, especially without any source. Seeing the potential in government support of Esperanto seems different than being "loyal to state authority". I'd like to hear what someone else thinks, because I might just be missing something.
Thanks. The Deformed Child 11:47, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Esparantist Loyalty

message: This article contains a big deal of incorrect information. Most of that comes from the confusion of two different (though somewhat related) belief-systems: Firstly, there is Finvenkismo, which is the ideology that Esperanto should become the general second language for international communication, that this is the main goal of Esperanto, and that thus the promotion of Esperanto culture is mainly viewed as a tool that might help to attain this goal. Secondly, there are the myths prevelant among Esperanto speakers, as noted by Ziko Sikosek (exaggerated numbers of speakers, exaggerated support of Esperanto by famous individuals etc). Though Finvenkists probably more often believe the myths than Raumists, this isn't necessarily so. Many Finvenkists are aware of the fact that those myths are false (and thus aware that the they are still very far from attaining their goal). On the other hand, there are also some Raumists who believe some of the myths.
Now Ziko Sikosek does not critisise Finvenkismo (which is about what ought to happen), but only critisises the myths (i.e. talks about what is the case). He is not an anti-Finvenkist. Indeed from 2003 to 2005 he worked as a librarian for UEA, which is a largely Finvenkist organisation. 
Libera Folio is clearly Finvenkist. They criticise the (Raumist) Civito on a much deeper level then they criticise the (Finvenkist) UEA. From the beginning, they made it clear that their critique against UEA is not ideological, but merely a critique about details in the way UEA is being administered. On the other hand, they have criticised the Civito on ideological grounds (i.e. they have criticised their extrem Raumism). 
Finally, their is no correlation between valuing the symbols of Esperanto and Finvenkismo. Actually, the Civito values Esperanto-symbols: It makes the Esperanto-flag and the Esperanto-hymn official in its constitution. UEA, on the other hand, uses the flag much less. 
Because of these inaccuracies in the article, I have now inserted the Disputed-tag. Marcoscramer 23:49, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I now reworked the article and removed the Disputed-tag. What do others think? Marcoscramer 00:22, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Incorrect information

message: One source to cite would be Esperanto Sen Mitoj, of course.  I think this could also stand to have some translated quotes from Zamenhof's "Esenco kaj Estonteco de la Internacia Lingvo", in which he makes arguments that some constructed auxlang will necessarily be adopted, sooner or later, and that Esperanto is by far the most likely candidate.   I'll try to dig it up later.  I can't comment on all of the accuracy issues raised by Marcos Cramer, but I would agree that the use of traditional symbols isn't strongly correlated with finvenkismo in my experience. 
Another possible source might be "Cxu Zamenhof Pravis?" by Vinko Oslak. --Jim Henry 21:51, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  sources 

message: I have a bit of a problem with this article's current structure, which proposes an (original?) critical analysis of Finvenkismo in the second paragraph ("Finvenkismo has some implicit presuppositions", etc). Preferably such material should be lower down, after the innocent lay reader has gotten a chance to grasp what Finvenkismo is all about. Furthermore, any critical analysis (as opposed to reporting) without citations falls under the category of Original Research. Mainly a matter of presentation, this. All the best, QuartierLatin1968  19:34, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Structure

message: This article seems to have more information about Raŭmismo than it does about Finvenkismo, it's stated subject.  Given that almost every Esperantist ever since 1903 has heard of "La Fina Venko," I think this article is giving undue weight to a relatively minor and recent phenomenon. Macduff (talk) 03:22, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Finvenkismo or Raŭmismo ? 

message: "The name is derived from the concept of Fina Venko ("Final Victory") denoting the moment when most (or almost all) inhabitants of the earth will speak Esperanto as a second language." -- I wanted to link "second language" here. We have an article at Second language, but I thought that International auxiliary language was better in this context so I linked to that. -- 201.37.230.43 (talk) 13:01, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Linking "second language"

message: I propose merging Manifesto of Prague into this article, similar to how the Manifesto of Rauma is a part of the Raumism article. The vast majority of the Prague Manifesto page is the text of the manifesto itself, whereas the lead only briefly discusses the subject. There is also only one citation there, which is used to back up the text itself, not the article (the lead has no citations). This article already discusses the manifesto:
This sentence could easily be extended into a new subsection with the content from the Prague Manifesto article. Tymewalk (talk) 04:14, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree that there is essentially no specific commentary here that warrants keeping. Moving the text to Wikisource would seem like a better idea, then linking to the source as an external link from the Finvenkism page. Wikisource doesn't seem to have the text. Klbrain (talk) 12:47, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  Klbrain (talk) 08:08, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: I'd like to propose what I hope is a better translation of the quote of Zamenhof from the 1910 World Esperanto Congress. Fewer mini-misalignments of meaning, and 25% fewer characters. I'll wait for feedback for a week before editing the article.
Original: La celo, por kiu ni laboras, povas esti atingita per du vojoj: aŭ per laborado de homoj privataj, t.e. de la popolaj amasoj, aŭ per dekreto de la registaroj. Plej kredeble nia afero estos atingita per la vojo unua, ĉar al tia afero, kiel nia, la registaroj venas kun sia sankcio kaj helpo ordinare nur tiam, kiam ĉio estas jam tute preta.
Current trans.: The final victory, towards which we strive, can be gotten in two ways: through the effort of private individuals, that is to say via a mass movement, or by government decree. It's easiest to believe that our goal will be achieved via the first way (self-study), because in that case, our current case, world governments will come to us with their blessing, as they are wont to do, only when all the work is already finished.
Proposed trans.: The goal we're working for can be reached in two ways: either by the work of private individuals, i.e., of the popular masses, or by government decrees. Most likely it will be reached the former way because, in matters like ours, the governments ordinarily come with their endorsements and help only when all is ready.
Dotyoyo (talk) 08:16, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Certainly less stilted.  Where did either of you find "as they are wont to do" / "ordinarily"? —Tamfang (talk) 05:55, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: "ordinarily" is a direct translation of "oridinare". The phrase "as they are wont to do" is wordier, emphasizes inclination, and seemed slightly dated (or stilted, as you said). Dotyoyo (talk) 23:10, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translation of 1910 quote 

message: If the article claims that "Finvenkismo is ... dating back to ... Zamenhof", some evidence should at least be provided that he used the roots "fin" and "venk" together. The earliest citation I can find for either "fina venko" or "finvenko" on tekstaro.com is 1974.
Dotyoyo (talk) 22:41, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dating back to Zamenhof?