Talk:Arnold Meri

message: To those of you who are engaged in an edit war over nomenclature, I have the following questions:
* Is the Great Patriotic War something completely separate from WWII, making it wrong or misleading to use the latter term?
* Wikipedia articles are supposed to written for a general audience. Are readers helped significantly in their understanding if the term Great Patriotic War is used instead of the more general WWII?
* Isn't the term WWII a bit more NPOV than Great Patriotic War? (GPW to me has some rather one-sided, jingoistic connotations of Stalin's USSR single-handedly saving the world from fascism, with the accompanying claims of perpetual moral high ground for the USSR/Russia thereafter.)
I am interested in hearing responses from both sides, so that perhaps a consensus can be reached. — Zalktis 08:52, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well Arnold Meri himself calls it WWII, see his quote on the article page. Martintg 09:20, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Great Patriotic War]] vs [[World War II]] 

message: Estonian accused of post-WWII genocide dies. ΔιγουρενΕμπρος! 10:48, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  AP obituary 

message: I've removed some text regarding Meri's activity in the lead because:
#the lead should be a summary and overview of the article
#notability of the Estonian Anti-Fascist Committee is being challenged via AfD (Russavia added a notability tag to the article, go figure)
#the ref given failed verification
--Martintg (talk) 20:37, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This is notable, as it is mentioned in Dmitry Medvedev's telegram. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 15:05, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It is notable I think, I agree Petri. Also Martintg, I added the notability tag, because all unsourced articles which don't assert notability should have it on. --Russavia Dialogue 15:13, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead 

message: In , Karl Marx, Joseph Stalin, and Mao Zedong are listed side by side.  Are any of them denigrated by this company?  Possibly, but it's no matter when classifying these people.  What matters is what sources say. ΔιγουρενΕμπρος! 16:44, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, Digwuren's POV isn't a source. Plain and simple. One needs sources before they can delve into such things. --Russavia Dialogue 16:49, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

text: Got any from English sources? Or non-Estonian sources? Or even scholarly sources? Or do you only have journalistic opinions? --Russavia Dialogue 17:10, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Mart Laar is not a journalist, by a long shot. ΔιγουρενΕμπρος! 17:11, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Neither is Vladimir Zhirinovsky. I'm sure I can find a nice collection of his musings regarding the Baltic states and its politicians, where the epithet "fascist" will be the most decent one. Wikipedia:Reliable sources clearly states: opinion pieces are only reliable for statements as to the opinion of their authors, not for statements of fact. Óðinn (talk) 12:59, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Mart Laar is a reputed historian, and an expert in Soviet affairs.  Whoever gave you the idea that Vladimir Zhirinovsky might be comparable to him? ΔιγουρενΕμπρος! 14:42, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Expert? Well, I suppose some people still consider Dubya to be an expert on the Iraqi WMDs... Dubious reputations of a self-crowned king aside, is there any hope of seeing some sort of scholarly sources that originate outside of Eesti? Óðinn (talk) 15:18, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  No idea what's Mart Laar got to do with all this, but he definitely is a historian. First: he's got PhD in history. Does your favorite Zhirinovsky have secondary education? Second, according to ISI Web of science, his works have been cited by other historians in best scholarly journals for over 50 times. This is not a small number for a historian. -- So, definitely, experts on history call him an expert on history. Whatever that's got to do with the main topic. Lebatsnok (talk) 13:38, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

text:  Why would you suggest applying such a meaningless criterion?  WP:RS does not support dividing sources into goats and sheep in this manner. ΔιγουρενΕμπρος! 16:33, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Why do you think not much credibility is given to the Korean Central News Agency regarding its version of the Kwangmyŏngsŏng-2 mission? Óðinn (talk) 17:20, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Because North Korea is on the 172nd place in the Worldwide Press Freedom Index? Check Estonia's rank and try again. Ptrt (talk) 19:05, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

text: How odd. And yet here we have a reputed historian and an expert in Soviet affairs Rein Ruutsoo accusing the state-financed Estonian media of colluding with the Kaitsepolitsei whenever it picks another target for its witch hunt. How very odd. Óðinn (talk) 20:11, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  What is odd? Everybody is free to voice (and print) his/her opinion. But as WP:RS... let's only say that I really hoped we'd never see the day here in WP when Stolitsa or Kesknädal is seriously considered as source. :) Ptrt (talk) 20:54, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, this Orwellian notion that while all opinions are equal, some are more equal than the others is very odd indeed. Óðinn (talk) 03:49, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Stolitsa is the propaganda weekly of the Big Brother.  Everybody knows it. ΔιγουρενΕμπρος! 07:29, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Of course. And Ruutsoo is a paid agent of FSB and a secret agent of Nochnoy Dozor. Óðinn (talk) 08:13, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Navibox 

message: Which image should we use? I think the new photo is far better. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 08:57, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the second image, it shows him in the prime of his life when he achieved his notability. --Martintg (talk) 09:56, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The second image has quite dodgy copyright license and is in fact nominated for deletion on commons Alex Bakharev (talk) 07:16, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The image appears to be tagged as PD-Ukraine, which is valid as it is highly likely that images of Heros of the Soviet Union would have been published in the Ukrainian SSR. --Martintg (talk) 06:57, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which image?