Jump to content

Talk:Estonia/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4

E-Residents?

Hi, does the "population" count only include citizens? Should we bring out residency count separately somewhere? If so, what about e-residents? SørenKierkegaard (talk) 06:41, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

"Population" in infobox counts whole population. Also I wouldn't add e-residents there, maybe to economy section.--Staberinde (talk) 16:02, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Disruptive editing by 73.214.106.94

Please continue at User talk:EdJohnston if you believe any admin action is needed. EdJohnston (talk) 16:42, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Edit: They also use 100.6.47.47

The user seems to have been banned or warned several times before on edit wars. Any ideas on how we can handle this? Report the IP? Blomsterhagens (talk) 07:51, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

The first IP was blocked two weeks on 14 May after they edit-warred at Finnish Americans. If you are talking about recent edits, ask an admin or post on their talk page to let them know. The last blocking admin was User:Yamaguchi先生.EdJohnston (talk) 23:51, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Fringe POV about Estonia and the Nordic countries becoming "a single unit" (one country?)

I question the relevance of the extremely WP:FRINGE and WP:CRYSTAL opinion that that the "Nordic states plus three Baltic states will become a single unit" (meaning a single country?) at some point in the future. Of course it's theoretically possible that both Estonia, the Nordic countries and Portugal and Greece will be "a single unit"/country in a thousand years or two, who knows, but there are no credible sources who believe this is likely to happen anytime soon. Estonia and the Nordic countries have very little in common; their languages (I'm talking about the main languages here; Finland is already the exception to the rule and is included on account of its Swedish ties, plus all Finns speak Swedish) aren't even related, that is to say, the Nordic countries are linguistically more closely related to India and Pakistan, than to Estonia. There are also more Pakistanis than Estonians in the Nordic countries as far as I know. So based on cultural/linguistic similarity it would be more likely that the Nordic countries and Pakistan became "a single unit." Of course it isn't only language that separates the Baltic states from the Nordic countries: The culture and history is as different as they come. Estonia and the other Baltic states were part of Russia and the Soviet Union, the Nordic countries are the essence of western European and have an entirely different historical experience. Culturally, linguistically, genetically and politically their closest relatives are found in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Germany. One could say that the revisionist attempt to "redefine Estonia" as part of a western European region is in itself an example of a very, very eastern European mentality; it's simply something western Europeans such as the Scandinavians would never even contemplate, and find amusing and bizarre and sad, and... eastern European. Estonia is as "Nordic" as it's British/part of the British isles. --Gaduse (talk) 23:03, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

If there’s a fringe unsourced claim somewhere in the article, you can remove it and see if other editors agree. You don’t have to write a long xenophobic rant about it, belittling people who have never done any harm to you. Blomsterhagens (talk) 06:58, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
You misunderstood the phrase "...will become a single unit". It is written in context of international identity of Estonia and refers to prediction that Nordic and Baltic combined will be seen in future as united region just like today Nordic and Baltic states separately are seen as united regions. The phrase might be a bit ambiguous, but that's how it was worded in source and I think context quite clearly indicates that it's not about becoming one country. --Minnekon (talk) 14:29, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
@Gaduse: The article is better than it was as I remember, I think there was a whole section on this nordic identity silliness. As it is the claim is sourced to the origin of the fringe POV at least. —DIYeditor (talk) 16:38, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Oeselians & Norsemen

Hi, there are a couple editors who are claiming that the Oeselians were Norse or were not "Estonian". I claim there are enough sources which support the claim that the Oeselians were what we can nowadays call Estonian. The supporting references have now been deleted by the two editors. I'm interested in what the other editors think about this, because it also affects this page. Thank you. Blomsterhagens (talk) 18:00, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:37, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Geographic placement of Estonia

"Estonia is a country in Northern Europe." << This is the way the article has been for at least a year and it seems perfectly fine to me. It's exactly the same way on the Denmark page for example. But now someone has created a new account on wikipedia and through edit warring, has added "Estonia is a country in the Baltic region of Northern Europe" to the lead. I find this to be wrong. First and foremost because "Baltic region" is non-specific and the lead already says that Estonia borders the Baltic Sea. Also, it's wrong because the editor has a clear political POV on this, as they've expressed on their talk page. Blomsterhagens (talk) 18:28, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

  • @Blomsterhagens: "Baltic states"/"Baltic countries" is a commonly used (in English, which is what matters here; and many other languages use a direct equivalent to "Baltic states" as a geopolitical term for those countries, from baltische Staaten, paises bálticos and Baltikum to Baltian maat...) geopolitical term for the area consisting of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania (see the linked article), and thus a very helpful, and for most native English speakers easily understood, description of where in Europe Estonia is located. While Northern Europe is very ambivalent, some definitions of "Northern Europe" (such as that used in the CIA factbooks) don't include the Baltic states, while other definitions include all of Europe north of the Alps, from Ireland/UK in the west to Russia in the East. - Tom | Thomas.W talk 13:38, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
I don't agree with this and neither do other editors here. Baltic states / baltic region is not an official term, while sovereign state / northern europe is. Blomsterhagens (talk) 15:34, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
As I told you on Talk:Finland we do not go by what you consider to be an "official term", but use geopolitical terms that are well known among native English speakers, and "Baltic state/country" is such a term, just like "Nordic country" is, whether you like it or not. I don't mind having "Northern Europe" there too, but just having "Northern Europe" is much too vague (because of the many different definitions for it), considering that there are lots of English speakers around the world who know next to nothing about Estonia... - Tom | Thomas.W talk 16:50, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
To article was added "Baltic region" but you are here discussing "Baltic states". First is relatively rare description of Estonia, but second is quite common. I agree that "Baltic states" would give reader more precise area than just vague "Northern Europe". --Minnekon (talk) 07:58, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
If the goal is to give a more precise area, then "On the eastern coast of the Baltic Sea" would be a more exact placement. Although the lead already mentions geographic placement anyway. Referring to Estonia as a "baltic state" is problematic. It is not officially a baltic state, it's just sometimes geopolitically referred to like that. Blomsterhagens (talk) 10:27, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
Estonia is a Baltic state in the English language (as can be seen in that article), and to native speakers of the English language, and that's what matters here, not personal opinions or the meaning of "Baltic state/s" in other languages. - Tom | Thomas.W talk 13:52, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
There is a clear difference between "is" and "referred to". Estonia "is" a sovereign state, not a baltic state. "Baltic state" is a geopolitical term. Estonia is sometimes referred to as one of the baltic states, yes. It's also referred to as a member state of the EU for example. It's also referred to as a finno-ugric country. There are many ways how to refer to a country. In the case of the EU, it's officially a member of the EU. In the contrary, "Baltic states" is just a word, it has no legal basis. And I don't know why that particular word should have to be more important than any other word. "Baltic state" is not used more in the english language to refer to estonia than just Estonia or northern europe, or an EU member state. I don't see Poland getting defined as "Poland is a Visegrad country". Also, the lead on Germany is a good example of how a lead can be precise. Blomsterhagens (talk) 15:01, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
It doesn't matter if it has a "legal basis" or not, what matters is that Baltic state is a geopolitical term that is commonly understood by native English speakers. And sovereign state has nothing what so ever to do with it either, just like your personal dislike for describing Estonia as a Baltic state has nothing what so ever to do with it. If you start your own Wiki you can use whatever terms you want, but not here. - Tom | Thomas.W talk 15:34, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
The lead has been in its current state for at least a year - and I'm the one who started this topic here. So you can pull back on your language a bit. Your last comment is impolite and rude. Wikipedia can be edited without getting personal. You didn't answer to what I wrote - you're just repeating what you already wrote before. Again - the leads on Germany and Poland seem to be doing just fine. If the issue is not being "specific enough where Estonia is", then that can be solved better in other ways than slapping on an ambiguous, equally unknown term to it. Why do you think the lead on Poland doesn't say "Poland is a visegrad country"? "Baltic state" is clearly not the most popular way of referring to Estonia in the English language. Blomsterhagens (talk) 16:28, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
Edit: "Estonia is a country on the eastern coast of the Baltic Sea in Northern Europe" would be specific and neutral for example. Blomsterhagens (talk) 16:32, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
I agree that describing Estonia as a "Baltic state" or "part of the Baltic region" in the first sentence seems inappropriate. The second sentence provides a clear description of the location of Estonia, and I see no value in describing it as a "Baltic state" when that term is used only minimally in the article. A reference to its relationship as one of the Baltic states could maybe be described later in the lead as a summary of the "Foreign relations" section as per WP:LEAD. – Wallyfromdilbert (talk) 16:41, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
I agree, this sounds like a good plan. If needed, "eastern coast of the Baltic Sea" can be added as well to address any future topics on this. Blomsterhagens (talk) 16:44, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
"Baltic state" has nothing to do with foreign relations, it's a geopolitical term... - Tom | Thomas.W talk 16:49, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
The "Baltic state" designation is connected to Estonia's membership in the Baltic Assembly. Yes, by being a political term, it's directly connected to foreign relations. Exactly the same way as the Nordic Council is. With the only difference that while the Nordic countries also form an official union, the Baltic Assembly members do not. Not least because there's no popular will among the nations themselves to see that happen. Blomsterhagens (talk) 16:52, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
@Thomas.W: Geopolitics is a term directly dealing with foreign relations. With all due respect, if you have no knowledge of this topic area, then you may want to focus on areas where you have a better understanding as per WP:COMPETENCE. – Wallyfromdilbert (talk) 17:04, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
@Blomsterhagens: The Baltic Assembly was created in 1991, while the terms Baltic states, baltische Staaten, paises Bálticos, Baltikum and so on have been used for centuries, so no, the term "Baltic states" has no direct connection to the assembly. @Wallyfromdilbert: "Baltic states"/"Baltikum" is a very old geographical term that has also become a geopolitical term in some contexts, but in most contexts still stresses the "geo" bit far more than the "political" bit. I bet I have far more competence within the vast majority of fields than you do, BTW. - Tom | Thomas.W talk 17:36, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
I believe there have already been two specific proposals here. One: "Estonia is a country on the eastern coast of the Baltic Sea in Northern Europe" ; Two: Adding a mention of belonging to the Baltic Assembly somewhere and/or sometimes referred to as a "Baltic state" in the foreign relations section in the lead. These two updates seem more than fair. Blomsterhagens (talk) 17:51, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
No one has proposed mentioning the Baltic Assembly in the lead, with the reason that I haven't mentioned it being that it's totally unknown among native English speakers, and thus of no help what so ever to most readers (who want the lead to be a quick summary of what the subject of an article is, and where it is/can be found, in easily understood and commonly used terms...). - Tom | Thomas.W talk 18:01, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
What is the problem we're trying to solve? "Estonia is a country in Northern Europe. It is bordered to the north by the Gulf of Finland with Finland on the other side, to the west by the Baltic Sea with Sweden on the other side, to the south by Latvia (343 km), and to the east by Lake Peipus and Russia (338.6 km)." This is what's currently on the page and it sounds quite clear to me in terms of where Estonia is. If "northern europe" is too vague, then adding "on the eastern coast of the Baltic Sea in Northern Europe" will solve that issue. Blomsterhagens (talk) 18:13, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

I don't know if Baltic states necessarily have to be mentioned, but arguments made against it are weak in my opinion. Baltic states supposedly not being "official" or "legal" term - what does it mean and how it matters for Wiki? "The "Baltic state" designation is connected to Estonia's membership in the Baltic Assembly" - no, "Baltic states" is more known and at least 50 y older concept than irrelevant institution of Baltic Assembly (created 1991). It was political decision by Estonia to participate in Baltic Assembly, but Estonia is not considered geopolitically in Baltics or in (Northern) Europe because government decided so. These are different things. Anyway, Wiki article should follow reliable sources and how they most often describe Estonia. Where is evidence that reliable sources prefer "Northern Europe" to "Baltic states" or to any other description? For example Britannica mentions "Europe" and "Baltic states", but not "Northern Europe". --Minnekon (talk) 07:05, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

We can mention somewhere in the lead that Estonia is sometimes referred to in context of the Baltic states. For example in the foreign relations section. But also, there's a distinction between "baltic states" as plural - when talking about all three countries together - and "baltic state" as a singular entity, only talking about Estonia. The latter is not so common at all. Blomsterhagens (talk) 15:56, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Estonia and Latvia are the original Baltic countries. Lithuania is not

Estonia and Latvia are the original Baltic countries. Lithuania is not. The term Baltic states comes from the names of the Baltic provinces. There were three Baltic provinces located in what is now Estonia and Latvia: Estonia, Livonia and Curonia.

Lithuania was not one of the Baltic provinces because of its historical ties with Poland. thus, Lithuania has never been the original "Baltic" country. The Baltic languages (the Lithuanian-Latvian language group) were l a t e r named "Baltic". The name was given to the same Baltic provinces. Thus, the claim that Estonia is not a Baltic country and Lithuania is a Baltic country is nonsense.

The user Blomsterhagens, who is partly Estonian of Swedish origin, is once again trying to raise the old theme that Estonia would not be portrayed as a Baltic state. These attempts are ridiculous and claiming that Estonia is not a Baltic state is as totter as claiming that Sudan is not an African state. Be aware of Blomsterhagens exaggerations and lies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rot20mis (talk • contribs) 21:22, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Happy 103rd birthday Estonia

Just wanted to wish you guys a happy independence day, congrats guys. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smoceany2 (talk • contribs) 18:52, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Clearcutting part

There appear to be some sections in that article that seem to focus on propaganda. The clearcutting part gets a lot of attention in the Biodiversity section, and it is almost the only thing that gets any attention there (i.e there is hardly anything written about the biodiversity in Estonia or lack of it... only about some forest managing practices and that isn't done on the most neutral way either). Not to mention that part like "there are now proposals put forward by the Estonian Ministry of Environment to slash water body shoreline protected zones to 20 meters" that is not something that should be even considered to be mentioned in the article "Estonia". Yes, there is a proposal in the parliament to change the extent of current shoreline protected zone areas, but even that is just a proposal (and not something extraordinary by any means even when it would be passed... if it would be passed). Ivo (talk) 16:59, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of "Template:Largest cities of Estonia"

Template:Largest cities of Estonia has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 10:07, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Estonia wants into Nordic propaganda. The article attempts to make Estonia appear more Scandinavian than it is

It can be clearly seen here that quite a few places in the article attempt to show links with Scandinavia and Finland stronger than they actually are. Thus, quite a few places in the article are neither objective nor quality. It appears that the article has been edited by the Estonian Nordicists, who are trying to advance their "Estonia wants into nordic" project. Just such: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Estonia_cannot_into_Nordic.jpg Of course, such stupid propaganda is deliberately aimed at fooling the public. It would be necessary for articles to be written by objectively thinking people. No propaganda is needed. It would be desirable for articles to be written by objective foreigners. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rot20mis (talk • contribs) 21:18, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

add a border around the flag

The bottom bar of the flag blends in with the background of the infobox, someone should replace it with a version that has a black border. or make the infobox a different color.

Poopykibble (talk) 21:41, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Digitalization

https://theconversation.com/estonia-is-a-digital-republic-what-that-means-and-why-it-may-be-everyones-future-145485 Xx236 (talk) 09:52, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/08/how-estonia-became-a-digital-society.html Xx236 (talk) 09:53, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/12/18/estonia-the-digital-republic Xx236 (talk) 09:54, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Stateless population in Estonia

I was surprise the stateless problem was not addressed in the page. Their is page like Russians in Estonia and Estonian alien's passport that address the subject a bit but I think a section in the Estonian page would be a great addition. The UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) recently produce a very detailed report on the current situation and progress, should be a good source: https://www.refworld.org/docid/5a338b5c4.html

Now in which section to put this? Politics? Demography? Gagarine (talk) 17:44, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

An entire section will be too much, because it would be a non-neutral approach then. But a couple sentences under demography would be fine - but make sure to stay neutral and only refer to which is directly written in the report. Blomsterhagens (talk) 09:37, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
Estonian alien's passport owners can travel visa-free in both EU and in Russia, which is something that Estonian (or Russian) passport owners can't. For that reason, some people have preferred to stay in that limbo, but even then their numbers are coming down relatively fast. As of that is more of a weird curiosity from 1990s, that is slowly going away, and not an mayor problem to talk about. Ivo (talk) 17:40, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Rights of minorities have never been a minor problem 176.99.224.157 (talk) 07:53, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Baltic

The Latvia and Lithuania articles mention that they are Baltic countries, yet this article just says that Estonia is in North Europe. It’s not even mentioned anywhere that Estonia is Baltic, which I think should be mentioned. It seems this article has been ”Nordicwashed” i.e only showing links to the Nordic countries and shying away from anything Baltic, though most people know Estonia as Baltic. Finlandestonia (talk) 13:15, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

The following is actually written in the article (please take your time to read the article beyond the first few paragraphs, further down, in the appropriately called section 'Geography of Estonia' one can read): Geopolitically, Estonia is often considered to be one of the three Baltic countries or "Baltic states" — an unofficial geopolitical grouping which also includes Latvia and Lithuania. However, the term "Baltic states" ("countries", "nations", "lands", or similar) cannot be used unambiguously in the context of cultural areas, national identity, or language. While the majority of the population both in Lithuania and neighbouring Latvia are indeed Baltic peoples (Lithuanians and Latvians), the majority in Estonia (Estonians) are culturally and linguistically Finnic.83.48.15.36 (talk) 11:00, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
@Finlandestonia This is not unique to this article, there appears to be a subset of Estonian editors doing this across numerous articles mentioning Estonia. In particular, they are erasing "Baltic states", which is certainly a WP:DUE term since it's even referred to as such in official UN sources, seen here and here for example. There should be no issue with having this term in the lead. TylerBurden (talk) 19:45, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Estonia is a Baltic country so why can’t it be mentioned anywhere that it is? Apparently adding it is not an ”improvement”. Finlandestonia (talk) 20:44, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Most people also know e.g that the Netherlands is a Benelux country. However trying to add this (not the most important bit of information) it to the first sentence(s) of the Wikipedia article "Netherlands" would not be an improvement -- Benelux is mentioned multiple times later on in the appropriate parts of the article's body text, as it should be. Exactly the same logic applies to Estonia, and inserting the "Baltic states" (less important factoid) into the lead paragraph: it would not be an improvement, but quite the contrary, would just add clutter and confusion -- note that the Baltic Sea (a far more important geographical fact) is already mentioned twice in the first paragraph anyway.3 Löwi (talk) 00:38, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
Again, both Latvia and Lithuania (both Baltic countries just like Estonia) have Baltic in the lead, yet Estonia doesn't. All the Nordic countries (Finland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Iceland) have Nordic in the lead. I think it is pretty important to name the term Estonia is almost always internationally referred to as, Baltic. And again, the Baltic sea doesn't have anything to do with being Baltic. Are Sweden and Poland Baltic countries since they border the Baltic sea? The Latvian and Lithuanian mention both and they aren't cluttered or confusing at all (Lithuania: It is one of three Baltic states and lies on the eastern shore of the Baltic Sea.) and (Latvia: is a country in the Baltic region of Northern Europe. It is one of the Baltic states;). Finlandestonia (talk) 17:10, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

I disagree. Sweden is on the Baltic Sea but is not a Baltic country, thus the mention of the Baltic Sea is not a stand in for a Baltic country. All the Nordic countries are described as Nordic in the lead, same with the Baltic countries (except for Estonia). Benelux is a different thing, as that is a much more recent and lesser known term, that is mostly about government co-operation. The Estonia article mentions nowhere that the country is Baltic, though Latvia and Lithuania do. It is pretty clear why some have edited that out. Finlandestonia (talk) 14:45, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

User Finlandestonia is factually incorrect: Benelux is a well-known term, used since 1944; and in 1944 the term "Baltic countries" typically included Finland as well. Just like Benelux, the term Baltic countries now, in the 21st century, is mostly about intergovernmental co-operation. Of course, another historical (sic! not current) out-of-date definition of the Baltic states was (in the second half of the 20th century) the three countries occupied by the totalitarian Soviet Union (1944-1991). 83.48.15.36 (talk) 10:47, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
It is not at all out of date to refer to Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania as "Baltic states" or "Baltic countries" as TylerBurden showed. For a long time there has been attempts to change the article so that it says that Estonia is a Nordic country, but these attempts have not followed consensus and have been reverted. I interpret the arguments against writing "Baltic" in the lede as a continuation of that attempt to change how Wikipedia describes Estonia. Sjö (talk) 06:31, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:00, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Eastern Europe

Estonia is categorised as a part of Eastern Europe/Central and Eastern Europe by several sources. e.g.

  1. "Estonia". The World Factbook. Central Intelligence Agency.
  2. Saleem, Salman; Larimo, Jorma Antero; Ummik, Kadi; Kuusik, Andres. "Cultural and paradoxical values in advertising in Eastern Europe: Evidence from Estonia". Baltic Journal of Management.
  3. Krillo, Kerly; Masso, Jaan. "The Part-Time/Full-Time Wage Gap in Central and Eastern Europe: The Case of Estonia". {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  4. Kitsing, Meelis. "Explaining E-Government Success in Estonia" (PDF). This paper offers an evaluation of e-government in Estonia, which is usually seen as the most outstanding exemplar in Central and Eastern Europe. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)

Because of this, 'Eastern Europe' should mention on this article's lede. I think editors shouldn't cherry pick 'Northern Europe' and ignore those sources that describe Estonia as a Eastern/Central and Eastern European country. 117.53.77.84 (talk) 14:23, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Apologies for the comment about repeatedly adding the category 'States and territories established in 1991'. I see you've only added that once. Again, sorry. The message left on your talk page by me wasn't for breaking the WP:3RR rule, it was for a back-and-forth edit war beginning on 19 November. You have a history of blocks and warnings for edit wars. ExRat (talk) 20:31, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
@ExRat: I understood. Anyway, I think WP:RfC is needed for decision that how to describe Estonia and Latvia's geographic locales. What's your opinion on starting RfC? 117.53.77.84 (talk) 20:47, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
I'm fine with it. That's how Wikipedia works. ExRat (talk) 22:07, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Why can't we just call them Northeastern Europe?

Jesus christ, is that too hard? It will solve the North Europe or Eastern Europe issue. Undashing (talk) 22:01, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

RfC - The geographic locale of Estonia

Although this article describes Estonia as just a Northern European country, several sources categorise Estonia as a part of Eastern/Central and Eastern Europe. For example;

  1. "Estonia". The World Factbook. Central Intelligence Agency.
  2. Saleem, Salman; Larimo, Jorma Antero; Ummik, Kadi; Kuusik, Andres. "Cultural and paradoxical values in advertising in Eastern Europe: Evidence from Estonia". Baltic Journal of Management.
  3. Krillo, Kerly; Masso, Jaan. "The Part-Time/Full-Time Wage Gap in Central and Eastern Europe: The Case of Estonia". {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  4. Kitsing, Meelis. "Explaining E-Government Success in Estonia" (PDF). This paper offers an evaluation of e-government in Estonia, which is usually seen as the most outstanding exemplar in Central and Eastern Europe. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)

Because of this, I propose to add 'Eastern Europe' mention in the lede. My proposal is;

"Estonia, officially the Republic of Estonia, is a country by the Baltic Sea in Eastern and Northern Europe."

Also, Italy article mentioning both Southern and Western Europe when describing Italy's geographic locale. In my point of view, this article should follow the similar way to Italy article. 117.53.77.84 (talk) 23:46, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

  • Oppose — Just looking at maps of the area, Tallinn seems to be closer to Helsinki than to any other European capital city. Even the old Russian capital city, St. Petersburg, is further from Helsinki. Certain Estonian islands are even nearer to Finland than is Tallinn. The E.U. considers Estonia part of Northern Europe. [1] So does the U.N. — Neonorange (talk to Phil) (he, they) 03:40, 21 November 2023 (UTC) —
    The United Nations geoscheme has several major flaws. For example, it considers the British Isles as part of Northern Europe, Iran as a part of South Asia, and Bouvet Island as a part of South America. Also, the United Nations Statistics Division notes that "the assignment of countries or areas to specific groupings is for statistical convenience and does not imply any assumption regarding political or other affiliation of countries or territories". Because of those factors, I think the UN geoscheme is an inappropriate tool to determine the geographic locale of a country or territory. 117.53.77.84 (talk) 04:23, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
All of which is WP:original research, no offense. On this project, when it comes to how to describe an encyclopedic topic, the question is what the WP:reliable sources say, and what WP:weight they give to specific perspectives. Our own logic in how we think the subject should be empirically defined is irrelevant, no matter how rational and well-reasoned we believe it to be. As such, your measurements of distances between capitals isn't really useful for resolving this editorial issue, unless the sources generally also happened to adopt the position that such metrics excluded Estonia from being a part of Eastern Europe--which I see no evidence of. SnowRise let's rap 05:44, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
By your own statement, 117.53.77.84's rationale for dismissing the United Nations geoscheme is WP:OR. Simply because they personally feel it is "flawed", doesn't make it so, as it is a reliable source. ExRat (talk) 06:10, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
That's correct: that element of the IP's argument was also OR. But that's immaterial to whether or not the !vote they were replying to was also predicated heavily on OR, which (again, meaning no personal offense to Neonorange), it heavily (indeed, entirely and paradigmatically) was. SnowRise let's rap 00:42, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Support. (Summoned by bot). There seems to be at least some support among some fairly major sources (primary and secondary) for the "eastern" label, in various contexts. Since the descriptors are not mutually exclusive in this context, I see no reason not to include both. If we wanted to add some finesse, we could make it "Northern European, and sometimes regarded to belong to Eastern Europe" with attribution, or something to that effect.
On a side note, to the OP/IP opening this discussion, please read WP:RFCNEUTRAL before your next RFC: the prompt/inquiry of the discussion should be a neutral description of the dispute and the options, and any arguments for why one approach or another is appropriate should then be put in a separate post that constitutes your own !vote. This separates an objective description of the editorial dispute/issue from your own perspective on how to resolve it. SnowRise let's rap 05:37, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Support, per nom, if many reliable sources describe Estonia as Eastern we cannot ignore it. Marcelus (talk) 05:50, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
    Comment: @Gitz6666, I'm not against your proposition, but do we have a source that describes Estonia as a country of [[Baltic region]? Marcelus (talk) 15:08, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
    Well, Baltic States is obviously well established and widespread (see e.g. Britannica) but also Baltic region is not uncommon or awkward, e.g. EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region and chapter The Baltic Region: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania in The Encyclopedia of European Migration and Minorities (Cambridge University Press). More references to the Baltic Region on googlebooks include titles such as Baltic Region—The Region of Cooperation, Environmental Challenges in the Baltic Region, Birds of the Baltic Region: Ecology and Migrations, The Baltic Region: A Study in Physical and Human Geography, etc- Gitz (talk) (contribs) 15:20, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Oppose, the classification of Estonia as an Eastern European country is controversial, as shown by source analysis. See in particular this source on various Latvian and Estonian politicians commenting on the UN decision to classify Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania as Northern European countries: "This is where we belong". Per MOS:OPEN the "first paragraph should define or identify the topic with a neutral point of view". We should follow the example of Lithuania, which is a country in the Baltic region of Europe. It is one of three Baltic states and lies on the eastern shore of the Baltic Sea. I would avoid mentioning the controversial notions of "Eastern Europe" and "Northern Europe" in the opening paragraph and would only be concerned with letting the reader know where the country is geographically located. Gitz (talk) (contribs) 09:57, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
    Comment How is the desription of "Northern Europe" controversial? The controversy seems to be the description of "Eastern Europe" – and that controversy seems to be with editors, not from actual sources. I haven't seen any sources where umbrage is taken with Estonia being placed in Northern Europe (Nordic is different thing). ExRat (talk) 15:16, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
    I mean, the fact that the UN "reclassified" these states from Eastern European to Northern European demonstrates that there is considerable variation in perspectives here, which should be captured by the lead. I personally am strongly opposed to omitting either descriptor and, no offense to Gitz, I think they've turned WP:NPOV on its head there, because what that policy (and related guidelines) actually tells us to do when there is a controversy is to present said controversy and the competing perspectives, not hide it for expediency and a simpler narrative. Now maybe there is an argument to be made for having that conversation lower in the article and using "Baltic" as the sole descriptor in the lead, but it wouldn't be my first choice. That said, using just Baltic is preferable to using just "Northern European". SnowRise let's rap 18:51, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Oppose and support Gitz's suggestion to follow the example of Lithuania.--Cukrakalnis (talk) 12:55, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Oppose and support "Lithuania solution": "Estonia is a country in the Baltic Region of Europe". Tammbecktalk 14:45, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Oppose. There seems to be a lot of people mixing (outdated, IMO) geopolitical ideas with physical geography. As I stated above, UNESCO, EuroVoc, National Geographic Society, European Commission, Europol, Committee for International Cooperation in National Research in Demography, WorldAtlas, the STW Thesaurus for Economics, European Space Agency, U.S. Department of State, the Republic of Estonia itself, etc., all place Estonia geographically in Northern Europe. Many journals using "Eastern Europe" do so in geopolitical terms. The description in the lede is supposed to describe the country's physical location, not some geopolitical construct. The only sourced controversy in the two descriptions (Northern and Eastern) lies with the term Eastern. I can find few, if any, sourced "controversies" about Estonia being described as Northern European (sourced, not people arguing on Reddit or Quora). I vote it remains Northern Europe, which it is, geographically. ExRat (talk) 15:31, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
"As I stated above, UNESCO, EuroVoc, National Geographic Society, European Commission, Europol, Committee for International Cooperation in National Research in Demography, WorldAtlas, the STW Thesaurus for Economics, European Space Agency, U.S. Department of State, the Republic of Estonia itself, etc., all place Estonia geographically in Northern Europe.
Well, there's some problems with your curated list there: it's mostly WP:PRIMARY sources, which are not ideal under policy for resolving issues of controversial labels. And specifically, most of those are bodies that are going to have a pretty profound bias against the "Eastern European" for historical and political reasons.
"There seems to be a lot of people mixing (outdated, IMO) geopolitical ideas with physical geography. . . Many journals using "Eastern Europe" do so in geopolitical terms. The description in the lede is supposed to describe the country's physical location, not some geopolitical construct.
The thing is, geography is inherently cultural and political when it comes to internal borders and divisions: no land mass of any significant size is spherical, such that you can divide it into neat quadrants or have one empirical rule for how to align an axis perfectly, and into this ambiguity, humanity has always pushed social, political, and cultural influences to make meaningful distinctions. This is heavily reflected throughout our article on Geography incidentally, the lead paragraph of which ends with "Geography has been called 'a bridge between natural science and social science disciplines.'"
More to the point for our purposes here and conformity with policy, we don't get to decide what metrics to employ in determining what the "correct" labels are, any more than we are permitted to directly decide which labels are more reasonable for any other reason. That's the job of the sources. Here, there sources are unquestionably divided, even if there is something a of a lean towards "Northern European" (in contemporary English sourcing anyway). As such, we should be describing the subject and the debate accordingly. Using all three labels in the lead is probably the most policy-consistent solution in my opinion, but Gitz's "Baltic as the sole label" proposal is the next best thing. SnowRise let's rap 19:12, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Abstain and keep the current wording "(Estonia) is a country by the Baltic Sea in Northern Europe (footnote)", i.e., for lead reading ease, proposing to add a footnote there that, geographically and geopolitically, Estonia is sometimes also considered part of Central Europe and Eastern Europe by several sources — both facts are already well referenced in respective Wikipedia articles (please see Geographical centre of Europe as well). Additional comment: "country by the Baltic Sea" is more precise in terms of physical location, more encyclopaedic and less ambivalent wording than "country in the Baltic Region". I vote Estonia remains Northern Europe, which it is, and the Baltic Sea remains Northern Europe, which it also is, geographically. 85.49.210.161 (talk) 21:22, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
Farewell. This is the last edit on Wikipedia. After having received physical threats from (non-Estonian, non-Northern European) individuals, a serious word of caution to anybody who can read this: unknowingly revealing your IP or any other contact details can be dangerous. 85.49.210.161 (talk) 12:53, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
  • Oppose because Estonia and two other Baltic states: Latvia and Lithuania are classified as Northern Europe by the United Nations geoscheme for Europe (I think this is the top-level classification and other sources are less important). The only possible compromise could be "country in northeastern Europe" (as stated in the Encyclopedia Britannica, which is a WP:RS). What is absolutely certain: all three Baltic states are not located in Eastern Europe. -- Pofka (talk) 21:07, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
    Comment: @Pofka: Do you consider the United Kingdom and its Crown Dependencies and the Republic of Ireland as Northern European countries or territories? They are also classified as Northern Europe by the United Nations geoscheme for Europe. 117.53.77.84 (talk) 22:41, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
    Comment. The United Nations geoscheme is a reliable source. Simply because you personally disagree with their categorization doesn't make it not a reliable source. The United Nations geoscheme isn't the only body that classifies the UK and Republic of Ireland as Northern Europe. ExRat (talk) 22:56, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
    Comment: I mean the UK and Ireland classified as Western Europe or the unique Anglosphere region by the majority of sources. Maybe the UN geoscheme is a reliable source, but it's not the absolute source, and it has several major flaws, like classifying Iran as a part of South Asia, and Bouvet Island as a part of South America as I previously mentioned. Pofka said that he/she thought the UN geoscheme was the top-level classification and other sources were less important. That's why I left that reply. 117.53.77.84 (talk) 23:18, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
    I see no big problem to classify United Kingdom and Ireland as Northern Europe because they are as much in the north as Denmark (only the southern part of England is below Denmark). Scottish capital Edinburgh is more to the north than Danish capital Copenhagen. Overall, United Kingdom probably is a Northwestern country, but large part of it (likely the larger part) is in the north. By the way, I would support Lithuania's solution in Estonia's case as well (to include a note with different evaluations of its geographic location per different sources). -- Pofka (talk) 20:02, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
    The UK and especially Ireland are both proportionally further west of the central point of continental longitude than they are north of the continent's central latitude. So you see why we can't rely on these "eyeballing" sorts of assessment and idiomatic arguments, right?
    More to the point, even if your reasoning were rock solid and everyone here agreed with you that you had found the most important metrics and developed them flawlessly, it would still be immaterial to resolving the editorial issue here. Because even if we did all agree with you down to the smallest detail, all of that you just argued above would still be WP:Original research. It might be most rational and well-considered conclusion in the world, but if it comes from your own reasoning, rather than the sources, it's still OR. Conversely, even if we found the bulk of sources on the topic to be filled with logical errors, or bad priorities, or foolish arguments, we'd still have to go with presenting those positions/labels in accordance with the WP:WEIGHT they appear in, in the WP:RS. SnowRise let's rap 03:20, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Oppose - (Summoned by bot) Largely per what Gitz has said. I think it should be mentioned in the article somewhere with appropriate contextualization but not in the lede itself. - Aoidh (talk) 18:26, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
    Comment: @Aoidh: Shall we count your opinion as supporting "Lithuania solution"? 117.53.77.84 (talk) 19:09, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The Lithuania solution seems best. DrowssapSMM (talk) (contributions) 22:21, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Comment. The article seems to discuss influence from Northern Europe more than Eastern Europe. Senorangel (talk) 00:06, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Oppose - and support the 'Lithuania' model proposed by Gitz avoid mentioning the controversial notions of "Eastern Europe" and "Northern Europe" in the opening paragraph and … only be concerned with letting the reader know where the country is geographically located. The competing 'regional descriptors' seem so vast anyway as to be insufficient geographic or cultural locators - including both would only worsen the generality. Pincrete (talk) 13:10, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
  • Strong support Estonia is, like Latvia and Lithuania, a post-Soviet state. The fundamentals are all derived from the East, from the demographic and government structure to the fact that the biggest highlight of Estonia's capital, Tallinn, is an Eastern Orthodox church. I don't deny that Estonia is part of Western civilization but it is simply not Northern Europe. Unless... :) We stop considering Russia itself to be Eastern Europe and recognize it as Northern Europe instead! With Eastern Europe then disappearing like a mirage... :P just kidding
79.191.153.61 (talk) 06:07, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
By that same logic we could also say that Finland should be categorized as Eastern Europe because it used to be a part of Russia. Saying that a country should be categorized as Eastern Europe because it used to be a part of Soviet Union makes no sense. Countries are classified by where they are geographically, not whether they used to be a part of that monstrosity or not. This argument is ludicrous. Even more, Russia is very hard to categorize as it's a humongously massive country making this argument even more ridiculous. MylowattsIAm (talk) 16:21, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
  • Support. While there seem to be dispute over the classification, it does not seem such a contentious topic that we somehow need to avoid it entirely in the lede. Grouping countries into this kind of categories is pretty arbitrary anyway, if multiple reliable sources classify them differently, we can just include both in the description. Honestly, omission seem rather an insincere way to approach this topic. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 21:41, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
  • Oppose I'm in favor of the Lithuania solution. Nemov (talk) 15:46, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
  • Comment. So...Latvia, a country directly south of Estonia, is Northern Europe. Yet, Estonia is not. Yeah, this made it all so much better. ExRat (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
    Just call them Northeastern Europe and move on. Undashing (talk) 06:39, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
  • Comment. (I'm didn't want to involve / take part here in this RfC, however,) regarding multiple unilateral changes by @Undashing:Undashing (talk) especially this Estonia article which RfC still ongoing and not closed yet, Undashing unilaterally change without RfC closure, Undashing please don't change without waiting for RfC to be completed. Thanks. --- Cat12zu3 (talk) 07:50, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Since most organizations, including the most important global organizations, some of which the Baltics are a member of categorize Estonia as Northern Europe then it would make the most sense to leave Northern Europe as the primary classification. And then there is the clickable thingy next to the statement where you can see that some also classify it as eastern for some reason. So the lead sentence says Northern Europe and you can click the thing and see the additional info, that's what I mean. It makes sense why the Baltics are categorized as northern europe, since they're literally on the same latitude as southern Sweden and Estonia itself is even above Denmark which is classified as northern. So the Baltics states are, without a doubt, primarily Nothern and so the lead sentence should say northern. --- mylowattsIAm (talk) 19:50, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

"Palojärv" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Palojärv has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 22 § Palojärv until a consensus is reached. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:09, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Change tab "Independence from Russia and Germany" to Formation

Following the example of the article about Lithuania, change the tab "Independence from Russia and Germany" to "Formation" and by adding the first mention of Estonia as Aestii with the addition of a link to the tab 'Early Middle Ages' in the article 'History of Estonia. Pronto20 (talk) 23:04, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Estonia/Archive_4&oldid=1236198344"