Talk:Guerrilla war in the Baltic states

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Requested move[edit]

Renata3 has proposed moving this article to Forest Brothers, saying that these article are identical. Well, whereas the Forest Brothers article is about the insurgents themselves, this article is about the insurgency itself, so in this article I was intending to expand it to discuss the wider war, taking into account the Soviet anti-insurgency policies and Western viewpoints. --Martin (talk) 20:23, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

You are splitting hairs here. While Forest Brothers is named after the insurgent themselves, it covers the war itself also. Renata (talk) 22:06, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
I can't say that I am convinced by your argument. Yes, Forest Brothers covers the war too, but is it the appropriate place? And how can you say this article is "identical" to the Forest Brothers when this article is a stub. As I said, I was intending to include information on the Soviet anti-insurgency tactics, I recently purchased Alexander Statiev's book The Soviet Counterinsurgency in the Western Borderlands which goes into considerable detail. I'm sure the topic is big enough to be covered by a number of articles. --Martin (talk) 07:55, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
Yes, it is an appropriate place. The two article would have almost identical scope (i.e. what they should include). It is impossible to separate this kind of war from the fighters. The two would essentially duplicate each other. The war, the tactics, the fighters, the politics, etc all belong in the same article -- and it's better to work with Forest Brothers as it is an older and more established article. Don't be shy to re-write Forest Brothers as you see fit -- it needs work. Renata (talk) 02:11, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Well Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Content guide suggests that articles be structured as War, Battle, Unit or Formation, Firearm and Base or Fortress. While these types are of course not binding, it does make sense. I had envisaged that Forest Brother be of the Formation type of article while this article be of the War type of article. Would Template:Infobox military conflict/doc in this article be appropriate to the Forest Brothers article, or would Template:Infobox war faction/doc be more appropriate? For example the Viet Cong article is a Formation article while the Tet Offensive is a Battle article, their respective info boxes reflect this. How would you merge the ledes, or is comparison to the Viet Cong objectionable? I note that Lithuanian partisans is substantially identical to the Forest Brother article. But you evidently feel strongly about this you can go right ahead and merge the article. I won't take up your invitation to rewrite the Forest Brothers article as I feel somewhat deflated. Regards, Martin (talk) 10:30, 27 March 2011 (UTC).
I am sorry! I did not want to deflate your enthusiasm :~~( Please don't feel discouraged! I just raised the question of the better place where to present the information. If you have a vision to clearly separate the two articles (war vs formation), then please do go ahead. My major objection is that Forest Brothers is in a bad shape and could certainly use some re-write/expansion rather than creation of a brand new article with substantially the same scope. Lithuanian partisans was a copy-paste creation of a blocked sock. It needs re-write and it's on my never-ending to-do list... Renata (talk) 15:23, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I'll work on the two articles together so they cover different aspects of the same conflict, the Forest Brothers focussing on the formation, discussing notable commanders and their units, etc, while this article can discuss the war in terms of the battles etc. How should I treat the Lithuanian partisans article? --Martin (talk) 20:14, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

I think Renata3 is correct in saying that this article should be merged with the Forest Brothers. Weren't the Soviet partisans also waging a guerrilla war in the Baltic states? Zloyvolsheb (talk) 23:38, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
They did, but that was between 1941 to 1944 during the Nazi occupation. This article spans the years 1944 to 1956. --Martin (talk) 02:03, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
I also think that the article should be given a chance. Forest Brothers may actually also refer to insurgency outside the Baltics (I've encountered the term in the context of Belarus of the 1920s, too). And choosing a somewhat different scope, e.g. paying more attention to the Soviet tactics might be a good idea (as Martin has noted he's ordered I book on that topic). Let us keep the separate article right now. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 16:49, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Then it would make a little more sense to call this article something like Soviet counterinsurgency in the Baltic states because The Soviet Counterinsurgency in the Western Borderlands is the actual title of the book used to source the opening statement that "Guerilla war in the Baltic states refers to the armed struggle against Soviet rule that spanned from 1944 to the mid 1950s.[1]" (No page numbers are actually provided in the citation provided as a reference for that claim, so I can only make the assumption that the entire book is supposed to be used as a reference.) The present title is very ambiguous - many readers might think that it refers to the Soviet partisans' war, or even guerrilla activity in the Baltic states in general. I guess that the Forest Brothers insurgency would be even better, as that would encompass the Soviet response.
In addition, I think that one more problem is that this article will essentially become a content fork for the much more thorough Forest Brothers article as it expands, as the content relevant to their scope is basically interchangeable. Zloyvolsheb (talk) 21:13, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

How can you predict it will be a content fork of the Forest Brothers article when this article is currently a stub. As I stated above, Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Content guide suggests that articles be structured as War, Battle, Unit or Formation, Firearm and Base or Fortress. I had envisaged that Forest Brother be of the Formation type of article while this article be of the War type of article. See Template:Infobox military conflict/doc used in this article and the Template:Infobox war faction/doc used for the Forest Brothers article. For example the Viet Cong article is a Formation article while the Tet Offensive is a Battle article, their respective info boxes reflect this and overall those articles conform with Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history guidelines. The intent is to do the same with Forest Brothers and this article, so the content will be orthogonal. As far as possible confusion with Soviet partisans' war, as far as I understand it, it was pretty well non existent in the Baltic states so I don't think there is any chance of confusion. --Martin (talk) 08:50, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

How about letting Martin do his thing and then decide? I take back my suggestion. Renata (talk) 02:44, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

It still seems like an unnecessary duplicate to me. It doesn't even mention the Forest Brothers...H2ppyme (talk) 09:37, 24 April 2016 (UTC)