User:Toddy1/Archive 1

I've edited the Eastern Europe article to rephrase it. It needed rewording however you look at it because a blunt "was occupied" not only assumes legal factors but it sends a wrong signal given the various types of occupation that exist. When a state annexes a territory, whether it be Israel Golan Heights or Indonesia East Timor, it becomes a disputed topic. Furthermore, that article isn't the place to write the history. My aim is to clarify that the Baltic lands formed a part of the Soviet Union (upon annexation) and that their incorporation is deemed by many as illegal due to technicalities at odds with conventions of the day. In reality, everyone has something to say about everything. Try getting Pro-Mororoccans and Pro-Polisario figures to agree on Western Sahara's legal status. If it were that simple, you wouldn't have one faction controlling one part and the other the rest. Complications abound: Albanian historians argue that Kosovo's inclusion in the Kingdom of Serbia in 1912 amounted to an occupation because Serbia was bound by its 1903 constitution which recognised its then-borders and because the Ottomans recognition of its lost territory in 1914 was without a face-to-face treaty between themselves and the victors, plus other things. These may be true, but we don't play the lawyer. We say that the region entered Serbia in 1913 at the Treaty of London and that's the end of it. My own edit may not be perfect and I am happy for you to amend it, I would request that you refrain from two things: 1) restoring the original edit as was - additional wording is neeed, 2) restoring the remainder of the edit which focused on other things, they were a clean-up. What I mean is, "only" half a century? We specify timeframes but we don't need qualifiers, "only" half a year, "as much as" a century, etc. and I removed the word "cultural" concerning Baltic states with the rest of northern Europe advisedly. The section was supposed to set them apart from their immediate neighbours by linking them to other nations included in Northern Europe. Estonia has ethnic and linguistic ties with Finland as well as transnational populations within Russia, this is all remote from Latvian and Lithuanian. Lithuania in turn has strong historical ties with Poland - but collectively, there is nothing cultural that the three share with Iceland which also excludes the Russians of Kaliningrad. If you decide to change anything, please reply here, thanks. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 00:05, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I don't actually know your background or your level of interest in the Baltic lands. It may be you know more than I do - in any case, I've opened a discussion on Talk:Occupation and annexation of the Baltic states by the Soviet Union (1940) which I hope will explore this situation deeper. I hope you make a contribution there, thanks. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 00:24, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Responded on my talk. Apologies. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 07:37, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Toddy1. You have new messages at Yulia Romero's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

— Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 18:48, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I archive today’s messages on my talkpage already…. Since (today) I lost the clinical look I think a Wikipedia editor should have. By archiving the messages I hope to get it back soon…. It was not that I found your messages to be unpleasant. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 22:44, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Toddy1. You have new messages at Greyhood's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

• Also, I wanted to say thanks for your mediation in the Zhirinovsky's donkey article, which allowed to make the current version stable. I like your editing and discussing method very much, but it was a bit time-consuming, and I could not allocate enough time for such a funny but little issue as Zhirinovsky's video at the moment. I could return to editing that article later, though. GreyHood ^Talk 00:31, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Bomzibar on Subhas Chandra Bose; Hawkeye on corps commanders; Nick-D on American special forces Op-ed: The Land on commemorating World War I