Jump to content

Talk:Finnic peoples

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Kwamikagami (talk | contribs) at 05:47, 30 August 2023 (→Requested move 23 August 2023: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Name

Many of our articles link to 'Finnic peoples' with a much broader scope than just the Baltic Finns. — kwami (talk) 04:24, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Those articles are made by same persons who try to force their own "Finnic" definition to this article. Tuohirulla puhu 09:08, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is incorrect

Volga Finns, Saami people and Permic people are not Finnic peoples. They do not speak Finnic languages. The creation of this page is incorrect. Finnic peoples are a synonym for Baltic Finns. These changes should be reverted. "Baltic Finns" should be renamed back to Finnic peoples, as it has previously been. Blomsterhagens (talk) 22:29, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

They are Finnic depending on which country you're in. We have room for more than one article. — kwami (talk) 22:38, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
By country you actually refer to language. This is English wikipedia. In English scientific text the word "Finnic" means Baltic Finns. Russian or other languages use of their equivalent of "Finnic" is irrelevant here. Tuohirulla puhu 09:11, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Baltic Finns which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 10:01, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Finnic peoples is a broad concept, not an ambiguous term.

This is a followup to yesterday's discussion at Blomsterhagens' talk page.

It seems to me that Finno-Ugric peoples covers the broader group, and as someone will surely eventually suggest that Finnic peoples should be a WP:Broad-concept article rather than a disambiguation page, then maybe we should just redirect Finnic peoples to Finno-Ugric peoples. wbm1058 (talk) 20:36, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

In this spirit, I have history-merged Baltic Finns (back) into Finnic peoples (revisions up to 19:21, 4 December 2015).

The previous version of Finnic peoples was redirected out of existence, to Baltic Finns, with the rationale "this entire article is a one-man crusade to create his own imaginary "ethnic" or whatever group. please anyone with time and expertise, interfere".

The problem is, if you live in Finland, you think in the context of Finnic peoples meaning Baltic Finnic peoples, but Russians think in the context of Volga Finns.

I suggest reverting to this 03:18, 24 April 2012 version, and then improving it. – wbm1058 (talk) 22:01, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Wbm1058: Done. How does that look? I removed some of the more crufty bits and details that are repeated in the main articles. — kwami (talk) 22:31, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For other readers: a large number of sources, especially those concerning Russia, refer to Finnic peoples without further specifying which they are. They may be Baltic, or Volgaic, or Permic, but often will subsume more than one, and in any case it would often be OR for us to disambiguate. This article provides a link target for such mentions. — kwami (talk) 03:32, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with this change and the creation of a larger-scope article. Thanks. --Blomsterhagens (talk) 10:57, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks guys for fixing this! Termer (talk) 22:46, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Because the term that should be use depends from the classification of languages, such terms should be used that are used for classifying the languages. Such terms can be found from the best recent general sources that deal with the classification of languages. But then the problem that arises is, that at a given time there may or may not be consensus how the languages should be classified or should they in the first place be classified to such broader grouping within the uralic language family as "finnic" (in broader sense) or "ugric" (in broader sense, or "!finno-ugric" (excluding samoyed) or should these and some orher broader groupings be used as phylogenetic gropuping or purely areal groupingd or should they be used at all. What is clear, is the existence of the smaller groups, i.e. saami, baltic finnic, mordvin, mati, permic, khanty, mansi, hungarian and samoyed. The rest is more or less debated, even thoug some groupings may be used as areal terms. --Urjanhai (talk) 19:32, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And this all must be based on sources, not likings of this or that wikipedia user.--Urjanhai (talk) 19:43, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is an ethnic concept. Nations don't appear and disappear as classifications change. Linguistic classification is largely irrelevant, apart from how it impacts people's self-identity (e.g., it appears that the Ugrians are no longer considered Finns due to linguistic classification). — kwami (talk) 21:59, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Drive by tagging

@3 Löwi: If you are going to tag the article for having these issues, you need to point out what specifically is the problem. So please do be so kind as to explain what the issues are and how the article can be improved, rather than just vaguely say ″still multiple issues″. Be specific. --TylerBurden (talk) 08:09, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why you also appear to be censoring terms you personally find offensive is also very strange, see WP:NOTCENSORED. TylerBurden (talk) 08:11, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Misinformation and incorrect terms

Well, I can only repeat what other users here have stated, and that is that this article has so many flaws that I really wonder if it's even worth improving. For example, the term "Finnic" should only be used for ethnic groups who speak Finnic languages, and the terms "Finns", "Finnish" and "Western/Eastern Finns" should only be used for Finns in order to avoid confusion. I suggest that users who are more knowledgeable in this topic should be allowed to correct these errors, otherwise it's not worth keeping. Skäggdopping (talk) 17:22, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

...the term "Finnic" should only be used for ethnic groups who speak Finnic languages... Why? A linguistically defined label is just that: a label for a linguistic construct (here: a branch within a language family). And the very same label might be used with a different scope in other disciplines, and reflect different terminological traditions. This is explicitly discussed in the article. –Austronesier (talk) 19:57, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And it is used for speakers of Finnic languages. The Finnic languages are more than just the Balto-Finnic languages, even if the word is used as shorthand for that meaning as well. — kwami (talk) 22:00, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Repeated redirection

Original heading: "Censorship, yet again"

@Wbm1058, Blomsterhagens, Termer, TylerBurden, and Austronesier: Our nationalist edit-warriors are back and deleting the article. Would appreciate a restoration from someone else so I'm not engaged in an edit-war. — kwami (talk) 17:23, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The ideal place for a discussion about whether this article should exist is WP:AfD. Please voice your concerns there if you would like to redirect or remove this article (cf. WP:ATD-R). ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:59, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Content forking article needing a blank-and-redirect

May I strongly encourage Tuohirulla, who made the first redirect attempt, also to be the first to take the discussion to WP:AfD (cf. WP:ATD-R). There is no need for having two separate articles in the English-language Wikipedia that cover the same topic, one titled "Baltic Finnic peoples", and the other "Finnic peoples". At the moment, let me add nothing to the above comments by Blomsterhagens, Skäggdopping, and Tuohirulla here – they have described specifically enough the essence of the major flaws (of which there are many) of this article's current version. Just a few general observations: the article "Baltic Finnic peoples" is in much better shape and therefore worth keeping, whereas "Finnic peoples" is better removed and redirected. Large parts of this article's content are unacceptable WP:CONTENTFORKING, including both WP:REDUNDANTFORK and repetitive WP:POVFORK forking, often lacking relevant (English-language) and WP:RELIABLE sources. 3 Löwi (talk) 11:48, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But it's not a content fork. A content fork is an article about the same topic as the main article, often emphasizing a different POV or "narrative" than that of the main article (which latter ideally should reflect the scholarly mainstream view). However, what you are contesting is the topic range that is covered by the term "Finnic peoples" in this article. Apparently, you consider the use of "Finnic" only correct for the Baltic Finnic peoples. However, this is not the only use of the term in English-language literature, which is why have this article as a kind of extended disambiguation page. Whether it's current focus on the most extensive meaning of the term (as seen in the opening paragraph) is ideal, is another question. –Austronesier (talk) 17:12, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
But it is not a disambiguation page. A disambiguation page is a list of links to different articles. This article with the current title is a directly competing with article "Baltic Finnic peoples". The solution would be a real disambiguation page and a rewrite of this article together with changing its title. Vulc (talk) 19:27, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You mean move this article to a different name, with "Finnic peoples" being a dab between the two. I don't see the point: this already serves that function. — kwami (talk) 00:58, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I did not mean a 'dab'. I meant what I said, and that was a real disambiguation page. Do you think that disambiguation pages are dabs? If you do, I disagree. See about disambiguation pages. Moreover, the disambiguation page would not consist only of the two links, all peoples who are called Finnic in Russia (and in Russian) could have a link there. Vulc (talk) 18:29, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You could create a dab page if you like, though I don't see the point. But this is a different topic than Baltic Finnic peoples, just as Baltic Finnic is a different topic than Estonian. — kwami (talk) 05:18, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Undiscussed move

I have made a technical request to revert this undiscussed move. This page is not eligible for bold moves as it has been moved and reverted in the past. An RM is needed to discuss these changes, and the disambiguation being created is not necessarily the primary topic. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 15:03, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 23 August 2023

– Aligned with the naming conventions for languages such as the Finnic languages and Finno-Permic languages. Should there be any opposition, a potential compromise could entail renaming the disambiguation page Finnic peoples (disambiguation) to simply Finnic peoples. Yelysavet (talk) 16:25, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose No actual proposal here. (Where would this article go?) Also, Finn/Finnic covers more than the Baltic Finns. If you want the ethno and ling articles to use the same phrasing, you could suggest the language article be moved to 'Balto-Finnic languages'. — kwami (talk) 19:16, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Very poor proposal, should arguably be closed straight away, article shouldn't get obstructive tags if you can't even make an actual proposal. --TylerBurden (talk) 19:36, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Also noting Yelysavet's mass removal of links to this article and unexplained changes of content from Finnic to Permians, smells like POV pushing to me. TylerBurden (talk) 19:43, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The bold page move (reverted) was to move this page to Permic Finnic Peoples and to create a disambiguation in its place. That was suitably controversial that it needed discussion, but this discussion is to move this page to somewhere unspecificed and move another page in its place, which is something quite different, and I do not see any argument as to why that should be done. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 20:16, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support and move this page to Finno-Permic peoples. These are the mainstream terms as used in modern literature. Thadh (talk) 00:48, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    There is no such thing as "Finno-Permic peoples", unless you mean the Permians, which would be a tautology. — kwami (talk) 06:13, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Finno-Permic population, Finno-Permic culture, Finno-Permic people. There definitely are, specifically, the speakers of the Finno-Permic languages. Using "Finnic" to denote "Finno-Permic" is even more outdated than continuing to believe Finno-Permic is a proven branch. Thadh (talk) 12:30, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Finno-Permic is a linguistic construct. It has been abandoned by many Uralicists, and if it proves to be wrong, the alleged "people" will cease to exist. Linguistic constructs are not be the basis for ethnic identity. The concept of a "Finn" is largely independent of linguistic models. (Ugrian Finns did stop being considered Finns because of the Finno-Ugric model, but there's no indication of anything similar happening here.) — kwami (talk) 21:16, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    In that case, why not delete this page altogether? Currently, the only information it is holding is:
    - "Finnic" can be used for pretty much any people that are considered more closely related to Finns (of Finland) than to the two other Uralic groups
    - Etymology of the word "Finn".
    The second one can obviously be move to the article for Baltic Finnic people, whereas the former is pretty nonsensical anyway: The people themselves don't refer to themselves as Finnic, and the article openly calls the term historically inconsistent and always open for change. We can just as easily give a "see also" for Volga Finns and Permic Finns and host this information there. Thadh (talk) 09:53, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't understand the chronic and often hostile attempts to delete information about the Finns. What gives? Why not delete the article on Baltic Finns, because it just duplicates information found at (Finland) Finns, Estonians, Balto-Finnic languages, etc., and so can be merged with them? — kwami (talk) 10:11, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The deletion point is moot, in any case. Deletion is not an available outcome of a move discussion. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 10:26, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I never proposed deleting any information, just merging it with other articles since, as you have pointed out, "Finns" is not so much a identity or a people, as a linguistics-based grouping. Thadh (talk) 01:21, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    No, it's not, and no, I never claimed that. 'Finn' is an old exonym for a group of people with similar cultures, like 'Celt' or 'Slav'.
    The only recent linguistic aspect of it is that the Ugrians are no longer considered Finns because their language was supposed to be related to Hungarian. — kwami (talk) 05:47, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Finnic_peoples&oldid=1172924618"