Talk:Livonian Crusade

message: Few points I'd like to make for a conclusion at this time. To sort things out, to make sure everybody is on the same page here. "Livonian Crusade" by itself makes only sense from a “POV” that the conquered lands all together were called Livonian Confederation later on. Therefore looking at it from very far away,(Like Urban from the US back in the 50-s when he started to write about the subject) calling the whole thing that preceded the Livonian Confederation accordingly-> Livonian Crusade, makes only sense in that context.
Now, since nowadays this involves 2 countries, Estonia and Latvia, the chapters of the crusade are also separated by the primary source: Henry of Livonia, it comes down to a question do we need one article that covers everything like urban put it + one for each that would concentrate on the events in each country separately or do we need only 2 additional articles to cover the subject, one for Latvia and another one for Estonia?
Well.  Since we don’t have I think anything for each country separately at the moment. And since this already covers parts that belong to History of Latvia, how about proceeding with the plan for now like already also suggested:  calling this one right now Livonian Crusade, expanding it so that it covers everything according to William Urban. Then it could be used as a chapter in history for both countries for now. ..That proceeds with Livonian Confederation that also involves the history of both countries, Estonia and Latvia. And then, once time permits, everybody can make the country specific articles as sub-articles for this one that's called the Livonian Crusade in general. That’s a quick solution to get rid of this Estonian crusade that doesn’t make any sense.
Especially because  Subjugation of Livonians, Latgalians and Estonians is basically the Livonian Crusade by Urban, not the "Teutonic-Estonian War" or "Estonian Crusade" that again, doesn’t make any sense because it refs to Estonia only, not to Livonians, "Latgalians" and the link to "main" at Northern Crusades is therefore currently simply factually incorrect.
Therefore please let me know if we should proceed with the plan, calling the article "Livonian Crusade" for now that covers the history of Estonia and Latvia, would be in accordance with the Subjugation of Livonians, Latgalians and Estonians and then taking it from there until new main articles emerge for each country? Thanks--Termer 04:11, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with these proposals. The only thing I would point out is that Urban began publishing in the 1970s (according to the LOC), not the 1950s. Olessi 13:59, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Fair enough, your proposal seems valid. Martintg 10:45, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Well, I do not think that move was good idea. Those were effectively separate campaings, Estonians were attacked then Livonians and Latgalians were already subjugated. In fact Livonians and Latgalians actively participated on German side aganist Estonians. So having them on infobox at same side with Estonians is actualy quite inaccurate.--Staberinde 18:13, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

text: I am pretty sure that Latgalians, and probably also Livonians, contributed on german side actualy more. I started thinking about creating separate article for Estonian campaign but then I noticed that in this article here practically everything is about Estonian war anyway, fighting aganist Livonians and Latgalians(who did not put up any real resistance as far as i know) is here limited to three sentences.--Staberinde 12:56, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Livonian Crusade

message: Latvians did not exist in 13th century, these should be Latgalians---- Xil...sist! 18:29, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No doubt about that, but that is not relevant, I corrected Latvians I spoted to Latgalians and Balts---- Xil...sist! 16:29, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Latvians

message: The pictured armour is not of this kind, that was used in early 13th Century!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.40.110.66 (talk) 15:39, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Anacronistic armour!