Talk:Kven/Archive 4

Kvens and Sea-Saami one united group

Schnitler does not even separate the two groups Söe-Finner and Kvens when he presents statistics on number of inhabitants in the Finnmark 1745. There were 315 Norwegian families, 367 Söe-Finner (Sea-Saami) families and 64 Field Finner (Mountain Saami). In total 746 families lived in Finnmark 1745 and were Norwegian taxpayers, but no Kvens. Plus 152 "Finne" families who had to pay taxes to more than one nation. (Peter Schnitler report, Volume III, page 58. Oslo 1985) --130.237.165.114 09:29, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I added a refernce to this report in the article.Labongo 12:07, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, Labongo is once again referring in his own way to clear facts. Schnitler does not "beleive" that Sea-Saami and Kvens are one and the same etnhic group. He argues that IT IOS SO. He does not say: I believe that it is so. Please, refer to facts and do not interpret them and remeber: The article is not a bibliogrpahy of Kven articles. It is THE kven article.--84.216.54.122 19:48, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

In scientific writing is should be used with caution. Today it is not an accepted fact that Sami and Kvens are the same ethnic group. It is a fact that Schnitler believes the Kvens and Sea-Sami are the same ethnic group (provided that the quotes posted earlier in this forum are correct).Labongo 06:48, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeaah Labongo. You did it again. He unites them, because they speak more or less the same language and have the same traiditions. True, he did not check their DNA strings. But I assume that Labongo can refer to DNA strings, or does he believe that they do not belong to the same group? On what ground does he believe that?--84.216.54.147 20:09, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Sea-samis in the area spoke a dialect of Northern Sami (there are multiple sami languages), while the Kvens spoke, per definition, Finnish. I would assume the way of living was similar for the Kven and Sea-Sami (I don't know what the authors definition of tradition is). Please check the references for this article for the articles assumption about these groups being different.Labongo 06:26, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

So, a person who were in the region for about 3 years and spoke with some perhaps 200-600 persons could not be right when he claimed that the Sea-Saami and the Qvens spoke more or less the same language. He did not believe, he reported facts. But what facts has Labongo, when he claims "spoke"? Nothing more than sagas, rumours and stories. Labongo, you should be awarded the Nobel prize.--130.237.165.114 10:09, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes the Danish officer was most likely wrong. I think the discussion ends here unless you provide other references supporting this theory. I believe you are not Art Dominique, but your post are becoming very similar. I would suggest you check the talkpage guidelines on top of this page and stop making personal attacks.Labongo 06:17, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Clearly, anyone with that education who only visited the region for only 3 years is obviously wrong. A child can make that conclusion. Yes Labongo, Yes, you are right, also on your personal attacks on science, yes. Keep on going, you will have the nobel prize sooner or later!!!!--84.216.53.237 09:15, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I also think that the Danish officer was wrong. Based on the information hundred years later, in 1861 (see here), there are a lot of Sami people living by the sea. They are clearly separated from Finns (note that "Kven" is not used even then). Most probably the few Finns (Kvens) living in the area were 1745 grouped together with the Sami people. Otherwise we'd need to assume that the Sami people in 1861 had only recently moved by the sea, which sounds wrong. --Drieakko 09:40, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Other (and probably more correct) assumption would be that the around 152 "Finne" families in the area were the Finnish settlers. The same name ("Finne") is used for Finns in the official 1861 map. "Kven" seems to be only used in the local dialect for Finns. --Drieakko 09:55, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I believe the Danish officer is referring to the Sami people when he uses the term Finne. In the local dialect Finn was used about Samis, and Kven about Finnish immigrants. The problem is that Finne (with an e) is also used about finnish people, and both Finn and Finne in plural are Finner.Labongo 11:24, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, probably so. In the 1745 document at least most of the references to "Finner" are to Sami people, but in the 1861 document "Finner" clearly means Finns whereas Sami people are "Lapper". --Drieakko 12:17, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Anonymous user 84.216.53.237, Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. (I have also posted this in the anonymous user's talk page)Labongo 11:56, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Kvens are indigenous to today's Northern Norway

Thank you kindly, user 84.216.52.203 !

The user Labongo may not understand that the Kvens are indigenous to Northern Norway, in my view anyway, and many of the best experts seem to agree. We are not moved by the personal assumptions and/or believes of the user Labongo, but science instead, of course, as you seem to agree.

The user Labongo: Please read the related writings from this column's archive. The Norse are not indigenous to the extreme Northern Norway of today. The Kvens are. The Northern Norway's Tromsa area alone has at least 12 prehistoric Kven place names.

Historians and linguistics experts have been able to come to this conclusion, for instance based on the words and spellings that were used prior to the time - and/or during the time - when the first Norwegian/Norse immigration to Iceland took place. The relevant sources have been given in this forum, for instance KVENLAND / KAINUUNMAA, 1986, by the Professor Emeritus Kyösti Julku.

Where are your sources for counter claims, user Labongo ? Do we only have your personal narrow view point, which even appears to be based on no sources at all. If there are sources behind your views, what are they in relation to this matter for instance ?

The related and quoted experts - earlier mentioned in this forum - are not basing their views only on the writings of Ottar, or Alfred the Great, or Tacitus, or any other before mentioned or not mentioned historian, or other scientist, writer or leader alone, of course. Ask yourself for instance, who might be behind the prehistoric jewelry hidings that have been discovered only recently from Inari, not that far from the coastline of the Arctic Ocean.

Examine and read more. Only after having done that, make your own conclusions, not before, please. In the meanwhile, let the experts make their conclusions, based on all the material and sources they have available. Wikipedia is here to reveal the findings of science, not the opinions of yours.

What on earth 18:33, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

It is generally accepted that the Sami people are the indiegenous poeple of Northern Norway. I am aware of the history of this article. If you read the article you will notice footnotes such as this: . These are the references for the paragraph you are reeading. When you click on one you will get the reference list. A link is provided for most articles. I suggest you read the article being referenced, and either start discussing my interepretation of the refered article, or the content of the refered article. For the later you need to provide your own references. Labongo 07:09, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

User Labongo:

Your view is not a "generally accepted" view at all, but only your view.

We hope you agree, that it is not reasonable to request for us to have to provide evidence to everyone separately. Please check the archive for the beginners.

There is a reason why we are asking for the exact quotes and exact - easily verifiable (as Mr. Mikkalai put it) - book and page information from you. The reason is, that simply showing a list of authors and books proves nothing. Wikipedia's vandals and foul players are known to resort to exactly this sort of tactics.

Once again: The sources offered do not agree with the text written in the Kven article ! To understand this, you only have to read the last comments by the user Drieakko. As everyone can see, he continues backing up from his statements. In different ways, he goes on appologizing, while he attempts to round of his false statements. What does that prove: This is only a learning processs to him. He really doesn't have anything to contribute to this topic, except for chaos !

User Labongo/Drieakko: It is your job to show where exactly someone - a respected and known historian or other scientist - agrees with your text. The burden of proof is in your hands to show evidence. Please, include exact quote(s) and page information. That is how Mr. Mikkalai wanted to proceed, after a recent concensus was reached.

We are quite familiar with the related material in question. We have provided our sources in detail, you have not, not even a single quote with a matching book and page information. - - Steve Wondering

Please stop pretending that this article has no references.Labongo 06:38, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Show, what reference matches the current text - show even a single such source to begin with. What part of that request do you find hard to understand ? This is what has been asked by Mr. Mikkalai and others. You have attempted to change the text without showing where a respected and appropriate source would agree with you. That - of course - remains unacceptable.

It was your job to pinpoint those sources out in detail (do not forget the exact quotes and the page information, please), as Mr. Mikkalai explained, before you made the changes in question. We'll give you a change to do that now. You have so far failed to do that. We know why - because the current claims have no academic backing. It is simple to figure that out, even for you. - -S.W. - -

Kindly note that Wikipedia may not copy existing publications under copyright. It may refer to their contents, but not copy directly. I think the Kven article is very well referenced. If you have problems with any parts of it, please list here. Also note there is plenty of irritation now about your consistent incivility, nonsensical spamming and general lack of manners. --Drieakko 09:30, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Just in case Steve Wondering actually don't understand how to find the references, and is not just trolling, here is an example. From the article: "Therefore, many Kvens, preferred to be called 'suomalaiset' (finns) [1]." Refernce [1] (http://odin.dep.no/kkd/norsk/dok/andre_dok/rapporter/043041-220005/dok-bn.html. ) is a report written by someone who I believe is a linguist working at Stockholm university. Searching for the term suomalaiset in the document gives you a hit on page 8: "’Kven’ är alltså ursprungligen en norskspråkig utgruppsbenämning på den finsktalande etniska gruppen i Nordnorge. Själva kallade man sig för suomalaiset, som närmast skulle översättas med ’finnar’ (Niemi, 1991).". Then follows a discussion why the term Kven was derogatory before 1970. This should conclude the discussion about missing references. I suggest you do as Drieakko suggest and start discussing the content of the articles used as reference for this article.Labongo 10:13, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't honestly believe that the user in question has even read the article. Based on his posts in Talk:Kvens of the past, he has not read that article either. --Drieakko 10:56, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Steve Wondering, I would also like to remind you that there is aWikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Kven-users where you are an involved party. I suggest you make a statement there.Labongo 10:20, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Kven language does not support the idea that they have been very long in the north. --Drieakko 14:43, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Of course it does not, because you contributed the misleading information to the site in question, silly ! - - Steve Wondering

Kven language is one of the Western Finnish dialects with heavy Eastern influences, like other Finnish dialects spoken in the northern Finland. If you know a reference that provides evidence about its independent Iron Age development, please let me know. You can read more about northern dialects here. --Drieakko 16:17, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

The Kven language article also have references Steve Wondering and everybody else can check.Labongo 06:38, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Kvens are indigenous to today's Northern Norway (2)

As the Kvens are indigenous to today's Northern Norway, new related laws are being prepared and ratified as we speak.

Those - generally non-Scandinavians - who previously were not aware of this fact, are being informed, that the early hunters and gatherers entered the region more than 10,000 years ago and left scant evidence of their presence. For instance, the Northern Norwegian so called Alta Man rock painting dates to that period. It represents the early art works of the distant forefathers of the people today inhabiting Finland and other nearby areas.

The Sami people are no more - perhaps also no less - indigenous to Northern Finland than the Kvens are.

The settlement of today's Finland after - and already during - the last ice age largely happened via the Norwegian Atlantic coastal areas and from around the ice masses, as those coastal areas became free of the ice first. This is what today is widely accepted, not your view. If there is a historian that you are aware of, who disagrees, please provide the exact source information, including the quote(s) and the matching pages ?

If you fail to provide the above source information, please allow us all to conclude: Such sources do not exist !

This settlement route information in part explains Tacitus' remarks about the Sithons from the first century AD, which - as Professor Emeritus Julku points out (source and page information provided earlier) - clearly were given in reference to the Kvens; and Tacitus' Fennos who some in the past thought to have - perhaps - meant the Lapps (the Samis), but who now are more widely - based on much new information - seen to have been the Finns (i.e. not the Samis).

The new knowledge about the settlement in question - of course - also helps to explain the indigenous nature of the Kvens in the area and the many prehistoric Kven names in Northern Norway (at least 12 such names in the Tromsa area alone), and the recent prehistoric jewlery (elaborately made jewelry) and silver findings from relatively near the Arctic Ocean in Inari, and the archaeological discoveries made in Utsjoki, Enontekiö, Suomussalmi, etc.

This also - at least partially - explains the ninth century Ottar's ("Othar") descriptions of the Kvens, who - based on Ottar's information - ruled the areas which he travelled through. - - Steve Wondering

There has been no distinct Finnish culture before about 500 CE. It is very probable that all Finns were grouped together with Sami people or others groups before that. Finnish language as it is today known started to separate from Estonian only in the 13th century CE. Read more about Sitones here. Ottar did not say that he travelled through an area ruled by Kvens. I doubt that Kven related names in Tromsø are prehistoric, please provide evidence. Silver finds in Inari can have been left by anyone, most probably by Norwegians. --Drieakko 16:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Please, stop misspelling Sitones and Fenni. I think Steve Wondering/Art Dominique is the only one who uses the bizarre forms "Sithons" and "Fennos", apparently invented by himself.217.112.242.181 21:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Art Dominique's "new related laws are being prepared and ratified as we speak" probably refers to the fact that all these strange claims about Kvens here and there are related to an on-going political debate in Norway. --Drieakko 04:40, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

As many other things, this is also just part of "Steve Wondering"s imagination. Kvens are not recognized as indegenous people in Norway, and hence there will be no such laws. Also, the political debate in (Northern) Norway has settled down after Finnmarkseiendommen was established. But it is true that as a result of this debate some Kvens have attempted to prove that they have an equally long history as an ethnic group as the Samis have. These claims are similar to what we have seen here, and they don't seem to be supported by scholars.Labongo 06:47, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Berkara Qvenar

From the article: "Also the famous map of Scandinavia by Olaus Magnus from 1539 CE seems to show an early Kven settlement roughly in between Tromsø and Lofoten named as "Berkara Qvenar".". Is there a second hand source confirming that this was an early Kven settlement? Or is it not necessary? Also, the location description need to be changed, since between Tromso and Lofoten would be somewhere on the coast.Labongo 18:16, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

The location is on the western side of the mountain chain, roughly in between Lofoten and Tromsø. Dimensions in the old map are distorted. Might or might not be a Kven reference. Anyway I'd see that it is good to mention. People can make up their own minds what to think about it. --Drieakko 18:44, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I think that the name "Berkara Qvenar" comes from words "birkarlar Kvenar". Norwegians do not seem to have used the Swedish name "birkarl", but called all Finnish traders just "Kvens". Olaus Magnus was not aware of the origin of either of the terms and tried to fit them into his own thinking freely. --Drieakko 04:43, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

August'06 Cleanup

This article has been tagged as may require cleanup since August. Please add to the list below if there is something you think needs to be improved. Note that I am not interested in extending the article, but improving the quality of the existing content (so don't add suggestions for new content to this list). Also, feel free to make the suggested improvements:Labongo 11:40, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

• Assimilation policy: this period the use of the Kven language was forbidden in schools…land purchase: the period need to be specified.Labongo 11:40, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

• "Kven or not", "Kven vs. Sami" and "Swedish Kvens" could be under the same title "Ethnical status". --Drieakko 11:53, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

• The aforementioned sub-headings could be retitled as "Acceptance of the term Kven", "Status as non-indigenous people" and "Kvens in Sweden". --Drieakko 12:31, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

• Update demography numbers such that these are not absolute numbers for one period and percentages for another period.Labongo 18:33, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

• Based on [1], I would mention the fact that "Kven" was a dialectal local name for the Finnish immigrants, since the official name seems to have been "Finn". --Drieakko 13:48, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I did some polishing on the "Kven migrations" chapter. --Drieakko 06:36, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Kvens are indigenous to today's Northern Norway (3)

The information provided by King Alfred the Great, the utmost expert of the European geography and borders during the Viking Age, clearly points out that in north the European land boundary ends to an "ocean" called the "Kven Sea".

What parts of the contributions of King Alfred the Great in this context can be seen to have come from "Ottar" ? Answer: As historians are pointing out, the direct quotes from "Ottar" are clearly visible (based on the markings provided) in the information provided by King Alfred the Great. --Random visitor 14:03, 3 0ctober 2006 (UTC)

In Orosius, Kven Sea is mentioned as the northern border for Germany, not Europe. See it here, chapter 7. --Drieakko 14:34, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

This is what the above source of yours exactly quoting says on the page you refer to, user Driakko (the text is copied and pasted here exactly as it stands on that particular page -->): "... the ocean which is called the Cwen sea.[22] there are many nations; and the whole of this extensive country is called Germany."

On the same page your source page elaborates the following way: "[22] The Cwen sea is the White sea, or sea of Archangel. The Kwen or Cwen nation, was that now called Finlanders, from whom that sea received this ancient appellation.--Forst."

Although the quality standards of your source page appear to be bit poor (the page includes for instance clear translational, informational and spelling mistakes), this source of yours too translates the word "ocean" correctly, revealing accurately what King Alfred was describing.

Furthermore, your source is not all that wrong by talking about the "White Sea" in this context.

The "White Sea" indeed is a bay of water of the "ocean", which was called the Cwen sea at the time of King Alfred. King Alfred the Great - the utmost expert of the geography of "the known world" of his time - called this water system an "ocean", because he was talking about an ocean.

There was and is only one ocean up in the northernmost part of the continent described by King Alfred in the text in question.

"[22] there are many nations", your source text quotes the medieval source in question. The land ruled by the Kvens, i.e. the Cwen nation - or Kvenland - was bordered in north by what we today know as the Arctic Ocean. The territory west from Kvenland was scarcely inhabited by the Norse. The area inhabited by the Norse did not include the area which we today know as Northern Norway. East of Kvenland was the Bjarmaland, inhabited by the Finnic/Finnish Bjarmians.

Speculation that Kven Sea was a part of the Arctic Ocean (White Sea etc) is one of the many speculations. The weak parts of that speculation are a) Kvens are not mentioned around Arctic Ocean at all, Ottar emphasizes it several times that he met only Sami people and then Bjarmians far in the east, and b) Arctic Ocean is too far away to be the northern border for Germany. There is also no continuation at all for the name "Kven Sea" in later sources as the name for the Arctic Ocean, the name would just disappear without a trace. All this makes it improbable that Kven Sea would have been the Arctic Ocean, or the White Sea. --Drieakko 15:36, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

The here mentioned Professor Emeritus Julku's book (page 36 ?) explains why and how it has been determined that there are at least 12 "prehistoric" Kven place names in the Tromsa area alone. The words used before and after the beginning of the migration to Iceland - for instance - explain why these names can be seen to have been in use during the Viking Age, and perhaps already long before the Viking Age.

This has been discussed multiple times as can be seen in the archives. The source for the sockpuppets of the banned used Art Dominique is often this one book. Do someone know what kind of book this is. In particular, is it peer-reviewed, published by a respectable publisher, or often cited in research papers?Labongo 16:15, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

The book is written by an established author, professor Kyösti Julku from the University of Oulu 20 years ago. It is in my opinion whimsical, focused on presenting a theory and omitting all that does not fit. Another professor, Matti Klinge from the University of Helsinki, has the same habit every once in a while of making books that present high-flying theories. Julku's co-professor in Oulu, Jouko Vahtola, has tuned down Julku's theories, and Vahtola is usually referenced in other publications. However, Vahtola's moderate theory sounds too much like an internal University compromise, mainly omitting the most obvious flaws made by Julku while trying to maintain some parts of it. These theories are mentioned at the end of the Kvens of the past. --Drieakko 16:28, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

About the "prehistoric" Kven names around Troms. Ottar, who lived around the area at the end of the 9th century, describes the situation there as follows:

"He said though that the land is very long north from there; but it is all waste land, except in a few places here and there Sami people (Finnas) live, on hunting in winter, and in summer on fishing along the sea." [2] --Drieakko 07:13, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

As a side note, Kyösti Julku has also claimed that Poland was earlier inhabited by Finnic people, since he has "found" over hundred Finnic names there, presumably more than 10 000 years old. [3] --Drieakko 10:20, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

What do you find exiting or beneficial about continuing misquoting the historic writings you use as references ? As in your theory about the "kvens of the past", again you persist in setting the term "Sami" into an medieval text, whereas in reality that term - of course - does not exist in the historic writing in question.

You appear to assume that the term "Finnas"- perhaps - refers to the Sami people, whereas that view is - if not definitely false - at least highly disputed. Please allow the historic texts stand as they are. Do not use quotation marks when you tamper the original text. Please do not set words in anyone's mouth or writing.

Your tampering of the medieval texts constitutes a clear case of misquoting. Shame on you. As has been referenced here before (the sources have been provided), in light of the new findings during the last few decades - such as the recent new knowledge about the settlement routes of Finland - more historians today view the term "Finnas" to refer to the Finns, rather than to the Samis.

Thus, if you are a Sami, please try not to make this particular Wikipedia's informational page an ethno political play field. Thank you.

Art Dominique, kindly discuss about your claim that Sami people are not indigenous in northern Fennoscandia in article Sami people. --Drieakko 17:22, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

User Drieakko: The comment above offeres no view about the

indigenousity of the Sami people anywhere, one way nor another. It only

points out a clear case of misquotation by you.

Art Dominique claims that "more historians today view the term "Finnas" to refer to the Finns, rather than to the Samis"

Not true. No matter what is the personal opinion of Professor Julku, the names "Fenni", "Finnas" etc. are still usually considered to refer more often to Samis than to Finns.--217.112.242.181 19:23, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually, Art Dominique has stretched Julku's opinion that Fenni mentioned by Tacitus in Germania could have referred to Finns (which is unlikely). For some reason Art Dominique has now understood that to mean that all ancient references to Finner, Finnas etc are actually to Finns. And one retired professor has become "more historians today" to be of the same opinion. --Drieakko 19:36, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Art Dominique, there is no "clear case of misquotation" here. There is absolutely no dispute whatsoever, not even among the most nationalistic Finnish historians like Wiik and Julku, that old references to Finnas, Finner etc in the northern Fennoscandia would not be to Sami people. If you claim that they are actually references to Finns, that leaves no mention of Sami people in the north during Iron Age and early medieval times, which is the same as claiming that they weren't there yet and would not be indigenous there. I am very uncomfortable to see that kind of claims presented here. They belong to an altogether different time that has already passed, long time ago. I suggest you continue this discussion in the talk page of Sami people. I am sure they are eager to comment your claims over there. --Drieakko 19:30, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Would you not agree, that it is not inconceivable that at least in some cases those terms - which you mention above - could have referred to both of the Finno-Ugrig peoples in question - perhaps -, i.e. to the Finns and to the Samis.

And yes, there certainly is yet another very clear misquotation presented by you in your Kven text version, user Drieakko, whereas the medieval text in question does not claim the term "Finnas" to refer to the Sami people.

Despite of that fact, you are offering that interpretation of yours inside the quotation marks, insinuating to the respected fellow Wikipedia viewers that actually the original writer of the said medieval text would have made that remark, whereas he certainly did not ! It simply is a case of misquotation by you, and that misquotation - or any misquotation, really - has no room in Wikipedia.

Vadso, Norway 12:02, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Art Dominique, I don't understand why you need to create a new user for each post. Since most other Wikipedia editors (and scholars) disagree with your view, I don't see any point continuing this discussion and edit war. If you want to change the Kven articles you should participate in the ongoing request for arbitration. Labongo 12:20, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

This really is a bizarre conversation. There is no doubt that the nomadic "Finnas" mentioned by Ottar who according to him lived on the moors, practised herding reindeers and paid tributes to their Norwegians lords were Sami people. --Drieakko 16:20, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

This could sound "bizarre" to you, perhaps. However, Wikipedia's information cannot be based on your personal views and/or ethno political un-neutral theories, which you wish - perhaps, at least in part - to reflect the truth.

Scientists - including continuously increasing number of the utmost experts in the Kven related matters - happen to totally disagree with you in the relevant key points. The here quoted highly regarded Kven expert, Professor Emeritus Kyösti Julku, - by all means - is not the only one thinking so (we believe he thinks so, not to set words in his mouth).

Indeed, Professor Julku is very right in stating that recently more and more historians are viewing the Medieval references to "Fennis", "Finnas, etc., to refer to the Finns, rather than the Sami people (exact and detailed source information has been provided in this forum before).

It is possible, nevertheless, that at least in some instances those terms could have been meant to refer to both of the groups in unison. Also, many view the term "gridfinn" to have been used in reference to the Sami people in particular.

You ought to familiarize yourself with the fact that deer herding - including more reindeer herding in later times - has been an ongoing thing in the area of today's Finland (as well as the surrounding areas) ever since the end of the last Ice Age.

Just like in the present time, the reindeer herding has not been limited only to the Sami population. Both, the Finns and the Samis, have practiced hunting, fishing and herding in the areas in question. Indeed, when also fur trading is included - and farming to a certain extend in the more southern areas -, what else was there to do ? Not much, particularly in the northernmost territories of Scandinavia and Fennoscandia.

User Labongo/Drieakko: Who exactly is the "and scholars" who you are referring to above, who - according to you - disagree with the accepted and appropriately sourced Digi Wiki's Kven text in this matter (and in which other exact piece of information do they disagree, according to you ?).

We do need the exact source information for your counter-claims, including the relevant book and page information, easily verifiable as the user (administrator ?) Mikkalai requested a few months ago, also an exact quote from the historian/s you are referring to, for everyone to see on this discussion page.

So far you have not been able to provide such information, despite of multiple requests. Thus, as Mr. Mikkalai points out, you are not to tamper with the original Kven text - from the early June, this year - which reached a wide consensus among the Wikipedia contributors. For any changes, please provide sources first - in detail - , as was requested my Mr. Mikkalai. How many times do we need to repeat this consensus reached ?

For you to just lay down a list of names and/or books simply is not satisfactory. Those sources offered do not agree with you in the key points ! We are quite familiar with the sources in question. If you disagree, please point out the exact pages in the appropriate reference books of your choice. We'll be glad to double-check.

Wikipedia's information must be based on scientific findings, and research concluded by the utmost experts, instead of any Wikipedia user's own personal assumptions and/or theories in progress, regardless whether or not the research, findings and conclusions of the top scientists in the field happen to please us.

Again, the exact page information and the exact quote from the Professor Emeritus Julku has been provided here many a time already, where he points out that the terms in question (Fenni, etc.) these days are increasingly seen to have meant the Finns - and not the Samis as some speculated previously, particularly prior to the most recent discoveries of the settlement routes of the modern-day Finland.

The above fact cannot be changed by any attempts to delete comments from the discussion pages of Wikipedia. Closing the eyes from the information provided by the most respected scientists, while attempting to use one's own comments as source information for Wikipedia (user Driakko !), simply is not the way to proceed.

October 13, 2006 - Wikipedians for accurate information

In short, Mr. Driakko is terribly guilty of misquoting the historical sources, this time by forcing the word "Sami" inside the texts in question, and - worse of all - inside the quotation marks, to top the crime ! Those texts have no such word !

Let me add then 17:35, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Art Dominique, kindly try not to turn every post of yours into a personal attack. Sweden, Finland and Norway have declared Sami people as the only indigenous people in the north. There will be no pretending in this article that they would not be. Kindly discuss about your theories of Sami people on the respective article's talk page if you insist on feedback. --Drieakko 18:54, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Who has said anything about the Sami people being or not being indigenous in the areas in question, besides you ? You continue trying to set unfitting words in the mouths of other Wikipedia users, and historians alike. Also, you continue misquoting historic texts as well, as clearly shown above.

Please, do not change the discussion away from your above reported misquotations. Instead, admit quilt and change these habits which have no room in Wikipedia. If you wish to discuss the indigenousity of the Samis, please do it here: Sami people

Furthermore, you continue stating things which simply do not reflect the truth. For instance, the book KVENLAND / KAINUUNMAA (by Professor Emeritus Kyösti Julku) is not written in the Finnish language only. The book contains a rather interesting English chapter as well. Apparently, you really have not read that particular book. Nevertheless, you have the nerve to criticize the research results reported in that book, and the author as well.

--Choose a username 08:02, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Art Dominique, you headlined your own post with "Kvens are indigenous to today's Northern Norway". The issue about some Kvens claiming indigenous status for themselves is handled in the article. There is no more to say about it. Kyösti Julku's theory about a lost land in northern Finland is handled in the article about Kvenland. The short-coming of his 20-year-old publication is that he ignores and omits all the material that does not fit together with his theory, the same thing he increasingly practised when he got older with his nationalistic theories about Finns being indigenous in most of Europe. He is mostly ignored today by the scientific community. There is also no more to say about Julku. --Drieakko 08:33, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Your own theories appear outdated, and - importantly - unprecedented in the most important key points. Your reasoning does not "fit" the findings of science, in contrary to Professor Emeritus Julku's, who can be credited for being ahead of his time, sailing on top of the wave so to speak. Julku brings up all the elements by all major players, explaining in detail what is fitting and why.

Only last winter the Finnish Public Broadcasting System, YLE, aired a television documentary about the Finnish roots/ancestors in Central Europe. Most recent research results were discussed. Language - by all means - was not the only aspect tackled. Apparently, you were not watching.

It may be true that in Poland (which you mentioned above) there is no Finno-Ugric language spoken in the modern day. However, Livonian belongs to the Finnic branch of the Finno-Ugric languages and it is still spoken by a tiny group of people not that very far from Poland (in Latvia, and not that long ago also in Lithuania to some extend), despite of Stalin's attempts to polish the language out of existence from the face of the earth.

--Erroll Van Dyke 13:32, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

YLE entertainment has no source value. Apparently you have watched TV, but you should read some recent books and research articles instead.--128.214.220.254 11:52, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

It is true, that YLE - famously - has for decades been one of the major tools of finlandization and left wing propaganda in Finland. However, this program in question represented a positive new trend in YLE programming. This one was a documentary program, handling the subject from a wide range of view points.

The program revealed the latest results of the related scientific research work concluded in Finland and elsewhere in the Nordic countries. This info alone as such cannot be used for Wikipedia's information, of course. However, the information provided in that YLE program happens to agree with the Kven article which reached consensus among the Wikipedia users May and June of this year.

Thus, it is worth while to point out to anyone interested how in many ways the scientific community clearly is known to disagree with your radical and unprecedented claims.

--No misrepresentations, please 16:12, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

In prior to the Swedish-Finnish "assimilation", the Pope himself - in his letter to the Swedes - used the term Finn while discussing the Finns (of the extreme south-western corner of the modern-day Finland). He clearly was not referring to the Samis.

This all can be determined of the content of the papal letter/s in question, as has been pointed out earlier in this discussion forum. The expert sources - including the exact book and page information - have been provided here before in detail (Seppo Zettterberg, Allan Tiitta, Jouko Vahtola ?).

Please realize that repeating a lie or a misquotation four times or more does not make the lie a truth. Also, please understand that the world is full of biased and/or twisted laws, and that laws are changed all the time, and that lots of new laws are ratified every day.

Let's report the findings of science with high integrity and to the best of our knowledge and based on the appropriate sources available, instead of steering too much in what the law/s currently may stand for. Let us build Wikipedia into a sourceful and an accurate tool for lawmakers (as well as others alike) to improve legislations everywhere.

--Names of celebrities 15:00, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Where are the "expert sources" who might disagree with your biased views, such as Thomas Wallerström, Jukka Korpela, Mikko Häme etc. And, dear Art Dominique, you are in no position to accuse anyone of lying or misquotation, because you have done that all the time.--128.214.220.254 11:54, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

You state above: "... you are in no position to accuse anyone of lying or misquotation, because you have done that all the time."

We know it is needles for us to ask you to show where the above mentioned party - Art Dominique - has "lied", even only one such occasion. Quoting renown top historians of the field and providing detailed and appropriate sources for all information revealed - especially when questioned - does not constitute "lying", whether or not the findings of the referenced scientists may please your personal views and wishes.

Once again, you are being the fake and false name dropper you have been accused of being. So, once more, where exactly any of those people above support you view ? Your proceedings mount to a serious kind of misrepresentation. Those tactics simply cannot be tolerated in Wikipedia, or anywhere else really.

For clearly valid and proven reasons, you have continuously been accused of listing books and names, but at the same time failing to show where exactly those offered parties in question might support your key claims. The people you're referring to indeed happen to disagree with your views in the essential key points.

Whereas your opponents have kept providing the exact book and page information for all their key claims, you have not done that even in a single case as of yet, that we are aware of ? If you disagree, please show us such a case - a reference given by you to a certain page of a certain source book (there might be such a case, but we certainly cannot recall it) !

Everyone else must notice this huge difference in the approach of an amateur and/or a pusher of lies in Wikipedia in comparison to a more serious and honest contributor for Wikipedia. Please, straighten up your act - the sooner, the better !

Ps.: The exact page information to the sourced books and the relevant pages of the above named historians, Zetterberg, Tiitta and Vahtola, have been provided in this forum. The case is exactly the same with the other historians referred to by your opponents. These historians in question are by no means seen as controversial or radical by the science community.

--No misrepresentations, please 16:12, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Art Dominque, please stop using this talk page to launch personal attacks against all editors who disagree with you. If you want to stop wrongdoings by other editors, the ongoing Request for arbitration would be the right place to post your complaints. PS! The account User:Orlando199 you used for the previous post, altough you prefer signing with another username, has been shown to be a sockpuppet of yours as you can see here.Labongo 19:47, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I hope this puts and end to this long discussion which at the end had nothing to do with the topic of this article.Labongo 19:47, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

To me it seems that this user with many names is more interested in conflicts with other users than the actual subject of the article. --Drieakko 11:22, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Modern Kvens are provably descendants of the historic Kvens

There is no evidence that the modern Kvens would not be direct descendants of the Kvenland's Kvens mentioned in historic sources.

Art Dominique, more importantly, there is no evidence that Kvens has existed as an ethnic group since "Kvenland".Labongo 07:30, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Kvens are indigenous to the northern territories in question (4)

Please note, that the Kvens did not disappear anywhere during the centuries following the Viking Age. Following the Viking Age, they continued inhabiting much of the same areas as they did during the Viking Age, and before.

In terms of turmoil, war fare, etc., of course the time after the Viking Age was more peaceful. Less happened in those terms. Consequently, less was written. There really was not that much to report.

Kvens were granted special rights by the Swedes (e.g. "pirkkaoikeudet", "birk" rights). The Kvens got to continue their lives up north as normal. The Kvens and the Sweos got along. This sort of peaceful coexistence with the Kvens proved to be the best strategy for the Swedes, also - probably - the only one strategy that would work.

As is well known, the Kvens were able to continue taxing the Samis, trading with fur, etc., just as during many centuries before.

Migration to Kvenland, as well as the assimilation of people migrating to Kvenland (Kainuunmaa / Kainu) were - more or less - an ongoing thing for a long time lasting. Migration to the northernmost parts of Kvenland - i.e. the coastal areas of the Arctic Ocean - continued as well.

It has clearly been shown that the migration to today's Northern Norway from the 16th century up till the end of the 19th century (in some cases up to the WW2) originated from the historic areas of Kvenland. Thus, any way we look at the Kvens of today, they most certainly are descendant of the Kvens of the Viking Age and before.

Accordingly, no one has been able to point out a historian who would dispute this fact. This must clearly be pointed out in the Wikipedia's Kven related texts. Otherwise, please point out such a historian, and provide the related source information in detail for all to see, including the book and the page information and a quote of the relevant sentence(s).

It can be also safely said, that the vast majority of the people of today's Norway and Sweden are most propably related to the historic Kvens, and the vast majority of the Finns are too, of course.

The Kvens are indigenous for the areas of the northernmost Scandinavia and Fennoscandia. It is true however, that according to some experts, such as Professor Jouko Vahtola, it perhaps has not scientifically fully been proven yet (by 2003) whether or not the Kvens mentioned by "Ottar" lived on the shores of the Arctic Ocean "all year around" (Vahtola) at the time of Ottar's descriptions.

Orphan Andy 13:05, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Yet another sock puppet of Art Dominique (as shown here), this article is about Finnish speaking people that became an ethnic group due to isolation from other Finnish speaking people. None of the references used to write the article mention anything about all migrating Finnish speaking people to be from a distinct ethnic group. Actually some explicitly state it not to be so: " Det har vært en omfattende debatt om både navnetolkningen [Kven] og om kvenenes historiske skjebne ved Bottenviken i eldre tid. Selv om nyere tids kvener naturligvis ikke er det samme folket som middelalderens kvener, er det interessant at kvenbetegnelsen viser en kontinuitet i Norge like til vår egen tid." http://www.antirasistisk-senter.no/infobanken/dokumenter/samora/5-01/anstrengtforhold.html. Labongo 07:50, 2 November 2006 (UTC)