Talk:Baltic Sea campaigns (1939–1945)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Baltic Sea campaigns (1939–1945) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Poland Low‑importance

	Poland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Germany Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Maritime / Baltic states / European / German / Nordic / Polish / Russian & Soviet / World War II

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	Baltic states military history task force
	European military history task force
	German military history task force
	Nordic military history task force
	Polish military history task force
	Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force
	World War II task force

Untitled[edit]

Is such a name used in historiography? This substub needs expansion.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 19:20, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

not liberation[edit]

No it wasn't "liberation". Replacing one occupation with another occupation is not liberation. But as I am not really feeling like having long edit war over such issue I didn't use term "re-occupied" and inserted as NPOV term as possible. I dont see anything wrong with term "captured". But if you dont like it, use whatever neutral military term(captured, conquered, took) there, but not "liberation".--Staberinde (talk) 10:12, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The territory at the time of the invasion was part of the Soviet Union. The occupation of it by the Soviet Union was not a matter for Germany to resolve, nor were the Baltic republics invaded to be liberated by Germany, they were occupied. So, during the war as far as planning of Red Army was concerned they were liberating the territory and not capturing it. In any case, capture is used for people, and occupation and liberation for territory. You think conquered is neutral?! Conquest is only possible as a means of initial offensive action. Where the action is undoing the effects of the offensive, what do you call that? All the Baltic states were incorporated into the Soviet Union. You may not like that, but that is how it was.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 13:39, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aww, not this s??t again.(no offence) This occupation thing has been argued to death in Talk:Occupation of the Baltic states, and probably will be argued there in the future too. Soviet POV is that it was "liberation", Baltic POV is that it was "re-occupation". Easiest and most logical solution is to pick apolitical term and let that subject to be discussed in detail in appropriate articles. I have seen "captured" being used for towns, territories and stuff too, so I dont agree with it being limited to personel.--Staberinde (talk) 14:10, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Viipuri/Vyborg naming RfC[edit]

For editors who are interested, there is an RfC over at Talk:Continuation War about which name we should use for the town of Vyborg/Viipuri during World War II. This will affect this article, as well as quite a others on the Finnish/Soviet conflict. Some of the other articles affected include Winter War Continuation War, Battle of Tali-Ihantala, Battle of Tienhaara, Battle of Vyborg Bay (1944), and Vyborg–Petrozavodsk Offensive. If you could comment, it would be very much appreciated. The RfC thread can be found here. Regards — Mr. Stradivarius ^♫ 15:01, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]