Talk:Continuation War

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article nominee Continuation War was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
October 3, 2006 Good article nominee Not listed

Heinrichs misspelled in maps[edit]

In situation maps the name of commander of the Army of Karelia is misspelled. It should be Heinrichs, not Heinrich. 2001:14BA:2FB:AA00:B532:4E20:B643:25E6 (talk) 07:39, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

You mean Erik_Heinrichs? Ruslik_Zero 18:36, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
Exactly 2001:14BA:2FB:AA00:2585:541:8668:8061 (talk) 20:25, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Finland and the siege of Leningrad[edit]

"Finnish forces did not participate in the siege of Leningrad directly, holding their pre-World War II territory on the Karelian Isthmus for two and a half years instead.[18][19][20]"

I've read Baryshnikov's book that is used as a citation, and nowhere in the book does he claim that Finland did not participate in the Blockade (ie Siege) of Leningrad, be it directly or otherwise. Frankly, part 4 of his book, dealing with the Soviet offensive in 1944 is titled "Breaking the "finnish link" of the blockade". While I haven't yet read the other two cited books, I noticed that those same books are used in the Siege of Leningrad article to prove Finnish participation in the siege. I propose removing this phrase. Barmaglyak (talk) 00:19, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Continuation War. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:30, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Proposed infobox modifications.[edit]

I have three suggestions for the infobox.

1-The overall casualties for the soviets that we have includes non-combat casualties, such as hospitalizations due to disease. The axis side does not. I propose adding up dead/missing/wounded on the Soviet side (690 000), and clarifying that those are combat losses only, so we have something to compare.
2-The wording for the soviet casualties seems to imply that the 305 000 are all dead, including the 64 000 prisoners. As we know, not all of the prisoners captured by Finland died. A better term to use would be dead and missing.
3-Also, I strongly believe that the Siege of Leningrad must be mentioned in the infobox. Ten times more civilians died there, than overall finnish losses in this war. And though I don't see a way of telling how many died due to Germans cutting off the city from the south, and how many died due to Finns cutting off the city from the north, it should at least be mentioned. I propose "excluding the hundreds of thousands of civilians in the Siege of Leningrad" or something along this lines added to the Soviet part of the infobox.Barmaglyak (talk) 18:57, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
Since you made several suggestions...
1-I disagree. If the results were clumped together then you might have a point but currently that ain't the case.
2-No problems replacing it with that.
3-I disagree since there already exists a separate article for that.
- Wanderer602 (talk) 04:35, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
1-So how about splitting the totals into combat and non-combat (thus, under totals, the axis side would have 275 000 combat casualties and unknown non-combat casualties)? Or perhaps just stating that the 275 000 are combat losses only?
3-Your argument seems to be flawed - we also have separate articles for Finnish POW's in Soviet captivity (and vice versa), yet the prisoners are mentioned in the infobox. Also, if we have something so statistically insignificant like deaths of 190 Finnish civilians due to Soviet partisans in the infobox, surely the infamous siege that killed around 3500 times more civilians deserves at least a link. Barmaglyak (talk) 07:01, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
1-To be clear I'm not quite sure how that would in any manner benefit the article.
2-So are the Soviet POWs in Finnish captivity so i see no discrepancy there. Soviet partisan activity against Finland certainly fits within the scope of the Continuation War. Slating the civilian casualties of the Siege of Leningrad - especially given the Finnish inaction in it - as a whole on the Continuation War is a much more dubious claim.
- Wanderer602 (talk) 09:25, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
I agree, it would be dubious to slate them all on the Continuation War. Less dubious than slating none, but still not acceptable. However, it's not what I was proposing. Finnish armies cut the city off from the Soviet transportation network in the north, much like the Germans did in the south. Sure, the Finns didn't advance on Soviet fortifications on the old border north of Leningrad and didn't shell the city, like the Germans did. But the main cause of death of civilians in this siege was not due to shelling, but due to being cut from the transportation network. Thus what some describe as "Finnish inaction" doesn't seem to remove the responsibility for hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths from Finland. Such a major event, in which Finland was an active participant, deserves to be in the infobox. Barmaglyak (talk) 14:04, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
Well... Technically for one thing - per WW II standards the responsibility for the besieged civilians belonged to the besieged party, not to the besieger. That changed only after the WW II [1]. But i can concede that point. I personally think it would be best just to have a link to the Siege of Leningrad article which does discuss the effect of the Finnish advance on the siege. - Wanderer602 (talk) 15:00, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
Ok, so legally it wasn't a war crime, much like say the carpet bombings of German and Japanese cities, or the 1 000 000+ civilians who were collateral damage during the RKKA's campaign in Europe in 44-45. Non-the-less it's easy to see both victim and killing agent in those cases.
I am glad we have come to a reasonable compromise on the matter at hand. Barmaglyak (talk) 13:46, 5 August 2017 (UTC)