Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 13:57, 30 May 2009

Hi everyone

Hi everyone:) Feel free to add comments about my edits and do whatever you like on the page. FeelSunny (talk) 19:06, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Current events disputes

Re: Portal:Current events/2008 October 26

In the quote/POV instance, I didn't realize the apostrophes meant a direct quote. Usually quotation marks are used unless quoting inside another quote. I apologize for that misunderstanding.

"News stories" refers to the sources, as that's what everyone clicks to learn more about the event. If it's in Russian, readers of the English Misplaced Pages who don't read that language won't understand it. While non-English sources are allowed for article fact verification where an English reliable source is unavailable, Current events is only a short blurb, the linked WP articles are often not updated, and thus its sources should be solely in English. If you find an English-language source, please replace it with that. Otherwise, I would support removing the item.

The "killing 8 civilians" has only been stated by the Syrian government. Everyone else who has stated that is quoting the Syrian government. Thus, just as if the American government stated something which has not been confirmed by independent sources, it should be attributed to its original source. How about this wording? This is the current first 2 sentences of the 2008 Abu Kamal raid article, minus the date. If you'd like, I can replace the current sources with the ones supporting those sentences.

TransUtopian (talk) 13:46, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

I made a null edit requesting no further reverts until consensus is achieved, directing people to your talk page, so please reply here rather than on my talk, FeelSunny. By the way, I replied based on some of 85.202.113.34's comments in edit summary, such as "As to the 'occupational forces' - this was not a POV here, this was a quote, link. A '' <= quote sign tells this. Please USE TALKPAGE before you delete articles here." Did you write that? If you didn't, I apologize and I'll write a reply on their talkpage. TransUtopian (talk) 15:28, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Nice to see you here, TransUtopian, I hope we will come to a better understanding of what we should do in News Portal.

I fully understand that it's quite annoying to have a source in a language you can not read. I agree that Russian is not quite the best language for sources on English Misplaced Pages, and where I can find a source with the same text in English, I include it in an article, not Russian language one.

However, I would say that the rules on the portal do not state only English sources are allowed. The problem with source language is that you will narrow your choice of sources greatly if you make only English allowed. Another problem is that you will have a very strong bias in a case when one side of the conflict translates it's medias, and others do not.

On South Ossetia, I can see many news in English made in Georgia these days, and I fully support Georgians in doing this, for I am really interested to know how they see the war.

Unfortunately, I do not see many sites and newspaper articles in English, made in S.Ossetia or Abkhazia, or Russia. And I know many people will not know how we see this war. If we do not use other language sites as sources, you would never know there is another point of view, but Georgian on cross-border shootouts.

I bet you will not find a Georgian source that will tell you, for example, that an Abkhazian high-ranking counerterror official was killed on the border days after he started investigating Georgian paramilitary attacks there. Maybe in Georgian, not in English. But one may find such information in Russian. Another example: one of Saakashvili former closest allies, famous Georgian politician, former Parliament Speaker, recently created an opposition party calling the regime of Saakashvili 'authoritarian' - here is a translated quote: 'instead of a democratic state, we have got an autorithorian regime'. She is not marginal. She is very much like Julia Timoshenko in Georgia. I searched all the English internet - nothing. But in Russian language, this is link #5 or 6 in Google for 'Burdzhanadze party opposition' query.

Again, portal rules do not encourage using sources in other languages, but also do not prohibit this. They tell 'news stories' in English only, quite clearly - not quotes.

As to civilian death toll in Syria, you say one Syrian source is not enough, that we should consider the body count was made by Syrians only. I agree, that one souurce is not much - but who else could have provide the number? We have to beleive the victim side body count, unless we have any sources proving them wrong. If even the US military provide another body count, I would include it in the article.

Of course, we can include 'The Syrian government states' here. But, firstly, I see no reason to quote Syrian views (does anybody else think it was not a criminal agression?), and, secondly, I see no reasons why we should doubt Syrian count if no source does.

I would propose another edit, slightly restyling your last one:

I just think that it is shorter and more comprehensive, than naming two agencies. Also I would not quote an ongoing warfare page.

I will check my edits IP and the edits history. In case I violated the 3 edits rule, I let you know. I am afraid that I posted from my work pc without logging in, but I will need to check IP address on my work.

Thank you also for discussing here.

On the usefulness of non-English language sources to readers (like myself) who don't understand that language, I can't find more information about the news item if I don't understand the article, and thus the brief 1 or 2 sentences is all I read. I assume good faith, but I have no context to understand how this event really fits in with the big picture. Thus the item is either meaningless or misunderstood. In a Misplaced Pages article, a fact supported by a non-English source is surrounded by other facts to place it in context. In Current events, it's one news event among several unrelated ones that occurred that day. Even if part of a larger canvas like the Georgian–Abkhazian conflict, the reader has to try to place the meaning of the event into that conflict without the benefit of the source.

For that reason -- and I thought I'd seen several previous non-English news sources removed before by others but couldn't find evidence on a limited browse, I believe that "news stories" refers to the source links. But I'll bring it up to the Current events editors when I have more time to discuss and research.

As for finding English versions of non-English news stories, have you tried searching Google News, or just Google (Web) Search? This Google News search results in this.

Since no one else has weighed in on the Syria wording, I'll change it to your proposal. However, I would prefer "The Syrian government states". Would that be acceptable to you?

It's not because one source is not enough, but because every source attributes the Syrian government to that number regarding an often hotly discussed event. It doesn't increase word count much to specify the original source.

You didn't violate the 3RR rule, though -- if I am understanding correctly that you are that IP -- you did revert 3 times in a day. By that way, I would have let you know of the conversation linked below as suggested, but was engaged in Real Life by that time. However, I am pleased we are now working this out without reversions. TransUtopian (talk) 07:55, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

TransUtopian, hello again. Thanks for checking the 3RR possible violation, I will not go to work specially to check their IP then (I am on vacation now). I am almost sure that the IP in question was my work computer.

On Russian links - this is a very interesting question. I understand that they are worse as sources than English language ones. I understand also that there is no possibility for non-speaker to place several sentences in context. You also see that we will have strong bias toward the side translating it's information, if we only use English language sources, and narrow events choise for news page seriously.

AFAIK, there are several users with strong command of Russian language (Samogitia, for example), that are absolutely not pro-Russian about war in Georgia. They can be a guarantee of an adequate translation of sources into WikiNews - otherwise these news would not survive their edits. In case the user is really interested in reading content of a source, he may use an online translator.

Overall, I think we may discuss this question very long and not come to a solution. I would propose sticking to the rules, literally understanding what they say about language:

1. list items with news sources
2. News stories must be in the English language; no other languages please.
3. please update the most relevant linked article if it is appropriate.
4. international interest.
5. Do not list the ordinary deaths of prominent persons
6. do not link to subscription-only sites such as AOL or WSJ (except in the unlikely event that a story is covered substantially better there than anywhere else).
7. Please avoid Yahoo! news links, as those URLs are temporary and die quickly! (You can use a search engine to get the original source.)

You see that the rules say nothing about source language. And we have negative freedom in WikiPedia, and a presumption of innocence:)

Plus, let me point the #6 article. It directly allows you to post closed/ subscription (!) links if no other source is possible. Not considering the difference of the nature of the barriers, we have the same case: some can read, some can not, however we post it to make sure we do not narrow our choice of events.

I would not mind you stating Syrian government in the article. But let me say that if you link a report to a person or entity that evokes negative associations, you make the report itself look very much untrustworthy. Syrian government in the West evokes negative associations. Just imagine the difference between 'villagers report', 'Syrian media (which SANA is) reports' and 'Syrian government states' here.

I think writing like that (Syrian government, Afghani government, Iraqi government etc.) is really extenuating the responsibility of the agressor side. Imagine 'U.S. government states that about 3 thousand people died during 9/11 attacks'. Who would need the 'U.S. government' here?

I just thought there is another thing. I think when we start to study several independent sources looking for the initial source of report we are actually doing the original research. Actually we have 10-15 independent sources telling one and the same - 8 dead, all civilians. We should not do the journalists job, I think, only cite sources here. However, I do not mind choosing the variant you proposed, as it seems to reflect the real event.FeelSunny (talk) 10:18, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Good point about #6. I still differ with your view about what "news stories" mean, but I'll try to gain consensus on its meaning later.

The reason I think "Syrian government" should be specified is because all news sources state that the number and civilian nature of deaths originate from there, thus not original research. TransUtopian (talk) 16:02, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

You were discussed

FeelSunny, out of courtesy I would like to let you know that you (among others) were discussed here. Let me know if you would like further info, it quite self-explanatory though.--intraining 20:15, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Your edit

Soviet political repression: please keep in mind that your edit may be considered disruption of wikipedia. HOwever if you think you have points, please explain them in the article talk page in detail. Timurite (talk) 16:12, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Whoa)) I have in fact discussed them on the talkpage, however I did not see a word from you on that matter. You should check this. AFAIK, you have just reverted all and other edits saying they are too liberal???? What you do actually amounts to vandalism FeelSunny (talk) 12:16, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

deletion?

Your edit here reverted the addition of a name, not a deletion. --Xeeron (talk) 20:16, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

But where is the source, anyway? FeelSunny (talk) 08:49, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Good question. Also very true for the 2008 South Ossetia war infobox. --Xeeron (talk) 09:24, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Anonymous IPs just come, edit, and then go. No sources, no explanation, just nothing. "Be bold", this is the WP:) FeelSunny (talk) 17:50, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

SEE!

Bet you didn't know... — Mariah-Yulia (talk) 22:19, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

He's the cutest in the world Ukrainian nationalist then:)) FeelSunny (talk) 11:02, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Hey, I need you to help me out on making some changes about the casualty box in the South Ossetia War article.

I'm kinda newbish to editing Wiki. Thank you. 68.167.1.235 (talk) 21:13, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Edit-schmedit help on SO War article

Hey, I cannot figure out how to make the locations clickable. For location I placed "South Ossetia...Roki Tunnel" but I want to make them clickable, blue not red, and cannot figure out how to do it. I have a B.A. in military history, not Misplaced Pages editing. Thank you! South Ossetia should lead to South Ossetia, Georgia Proper to Georgia, Abkhazia to Abkhazia, and Roki Tunnel to this http://en.wikipedia.org/Roki_Tunnel. HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 05:57, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Done. Here is a good guide for working with links, and making them clickable. It makes life easier. Good luck with editing! FeelSunny (talk) 07:06, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank You! HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 09:23, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Arbitration, etc

I believe that certain people on Misplaced Pages are misinterpreting the Google Rule. Where would I go to clarify what the Google the Rule is? HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 22:49, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Here is a link to WP policies. Naming of articles is explained on this page. Good luck! FeelSunny (talk) 07:33, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Can you take a look at the 2008 South Ossetia War article

There is criciticism of the ISDP source, and a discussion on it, and some editors making edits without even borthering to discuss them first. Thank you. HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 22:12, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Finnish War Crimes

Well the Finns have committed a war crime by blocking a city, in order to prevent American food from coming in. Basically the Americans were willing and able to deliver food to Leningrad, but for the Finnish blockade, which could have saved over 600,000 Russians living in Leningrad. Finland is just as guilty as Nazi Germany for these deaths. However, they haven't had an equal amount of blame as Nazi Germany. Maybe, one day someone could write a book on that. However, until then, an article on Misplaced Pages would be too small on that. Perhaps adding a section about Finnish War Crimes in the World War II article on Civillian Casualties, or something like that. Let me see what you have on Finnish War Crimes thus far. HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 07:17, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Comeback! We need for the 2008 South Ossetia Article

Also, I think some of your edits have been undone. HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 00:57, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

SO War reverts

Are you sure you reverted the right edits? ( and ) Looks like you did the opposite of what you wanted to? Offliner (talk) 00:02, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

You're right)) There seems to be some kind of software mistake or I just need to go to bed already. Thanks anyway!FeelSunny (talk) 00:09, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

No prob, it was quite funny. :) Offliner (talk) 00:31, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Sure it was:)FeelSunny (talk) 12:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

South Ossetia war title vote

There is a vote up again at Talk:2008 South Ossetia war#Article name vote. Offliner (talk) 22:10, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Your recent post

Please stop making subpages within my userspace to post incivil comments.--Kober 04:22, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I just chose the wrong section to post it to. The comment was in no way incivil. I won't talk to you ever again on your talkpage, be sure.FeelSunny (talk) 08:29, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

March 2009

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Vladimir Hütt. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 09:02, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Your logic in calling me a vandal after you started the edit war by deleting soursed materials and repeatedly inserting a weasel word "few" are beyond comprehension. So - no comments. FeelSunny (talk) 20:14, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

What's your source on People's Front of Estonia being "nationalistic"? Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 16:42, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

The Anatomy of independence, p.326, and NYT article here. FeelSunny (talk) 06:28, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Misplaced Pages better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 20:03, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Congratulations, from me, too. Do you realize, that South Ossetia war page just won't survive without your efforts? How come you didn't think about that before marrying? That was very irresponsible of you, indeed! A person with two academic degrees should have known better! =)) Мда... вот так вот лучшие люди и покидают нас... =)) Ну да это все неважно, главное чтобы у вас было СЧАСТЬЕ, ЛЮБОВЬ и СОГЛАСИЕ! Желаю всего этого вам! =) ETST (talk) 15:28, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

linguistics tangent

You're a linguist? FeelSunny (talk) 07:09, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

I hope to become one. ;-) I study general linguistics and pure mathematics. sephia karta | di mi 09:40, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Right choice:) Studying linguistics makes you see many things you have never noticed before. Try the discourse analysis, the modern applied linguistics theory. Where do you study, btw? FeelSunny (talk) 11:46, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Linguistics at Leiden University and Mathematics in Leiden and at the University of Padua. Are you by any chance also a linguist? sephia karta | di mi 21:38, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

I have a MA in sociology, but I wrote thesis on sociolinguistics - Russian TV News discourse analysis. They are really wonderful as an object of research, you know. How comes you take courses in two places in different parts of Europe at one time? It must be painful to travel all the time between two universities? PS. I propose to get this discussion to my talkpage - this definitely does not have much in common with Sukhumi:) FeelSunny (talk) 06:59, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree. :-) I don't take courses in both places at the same time, linguistics is taking a break while I am in Padua. Where did you get your MA from? And do you know the Language Log? I highly recommend it. sephia karta | di mi 08:50, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I got an MA from MGU in Moscow. I was born here and wasn't smart enough to go to Europe when I was 16 to get an education there:) And where do you come from? And are you a boy or a girl?:) You're a structuralist?

I have heard of the language log - but never actually read it, will try to take a closer look:) I definitely like this: Eggcorn. Well, I would really like to get back to a science work, but I need to pay my bills yet:( FeelSunny (talk) 09:37, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah, MGU. I always wondered whether it has as Caucasology department, do you know? For syntaxis, we've mostly been doing Generative grammar (specifically the Minimalist program), for phonology Optimality Theory, which I really like as a system. I'm from the Netherlands, and a guy. I read you recently married, congratulations. :-) sephia karta | di mi 10:00, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Not sure MGU has one. Most of the country's diplomats come from the MGIMO or ISAA faculty of the MGU. They seem to train specialists for Caucasus region too. IMHO, the problem with "caucasology" is that the Caucasus region is quite as complex as the whole Europe (many religions, dozens of ethnoses, languages, completely different mentalities, complicated politics, etc) - how can one be trained as Europeologist?:) And how comes Caucasus is one of your fields of interest?

On Generative grammar et al.: yes, structuralism:) I like the way of structuralist thinking, all clear and logical. But anyway I prefer Functional grammar. I was working much with Discourse analysis and Rhetorical Structure Theory. BTW, functionalism was much influenced by your fellow countrymen, Simon C. Dik, Teun A. van Dijk:) Just like structuralism was much influenced by Russian formalists - Viktor Shklovsky, Yuri Tynianov, etc. FeelSunny (talk) 10:42, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I understand well what you mean. Maybe then something like this: Human rights in the People's Republic of China, Human rights in Israel, Human rights in Turkey, Human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran, etc. There sure can not be any objections to the neutrality of the title. FeelSunny (talk) 09:13, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Discrimination of Russians in Estonia

I know that you don't have much time to edit, but what is your opinion of this: ? I think the discrimination claims seem to have some credibility. For example, Amnesty International also thinks the discrimination is a reality. But it's impossible to add material about this subject to History of Russians in Estonia, because it gets immediately removed by a certain group of users. They usually cite WP:UNDUE as the reason for the removal. Therefore, I'm thinking of creating Discrimination of Russians in Estonia. In a separate article the issue could be more thoroughly handled, and it would be more difficult for the group to remove well-sourced material. What do you think? Offliner (talk) 23:58, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Offliner is not entirely telling the whole story. The only bit being removed is the fringe claim that this alleged discrimination is criminal, see the article talk page discussion. The article Offliner cites is full of errors, like Bäckman being a "Historian" and a "professor", which is not true in either case. I think it would be highly likely that Discrimination of Russians in Estonia would be immediately nominated for deletion as a POV fork. --Martintg (talk) 02:09, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

You start it, Offliner, and I will help with my five kopecks. But I would rather propose to start a Discrimination of ethnic minorities in Baltic states article. To be clear, it is not monoethnic minority, neither Russian nationals. They are Russian speakers, which are supposedly denied the right to education on the mother tongue, and the right to work and communicate with the authorities without using a translator.

Martintg, there's actually no need to advocate any of the sides, as I perfectly know what are POVed articles and groups of poved users. I also do not think I am not POVed, and strive to articulate my POV (sourced, of course) only where the article is disbalansed or may become disbalansed. Many Baltic articles actually are disbalansed, really. Anyway, I'm thankful for another point of view on this. FeelSunny (talk) 09:37, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

My five kopecks in advance:

Education level \ Ethnic group	Estonians	Non-Estonians
Higher, %	15	15
Specialised secondary, %	20	23
Secondary, %	34	37
Basic , %	23	18
Primary, %	8	7
Total, %	100	100

Income level \ Ethnic group		Estonians		Non-Estonians
		Estonia	Tallinn	Estonia	Tallinn
Higher (5,000+ Estonian Kroons), %		16	25	11	15
Middle (up to 5,000 EEK), %		37	41	37	37
Low (up to 2,500 EEK), %		37	25	42	31
No income, %		10	10	10	17

Source: LEGAL INFORMATION CENTRE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS, "ESTONIAN MINORITY POPULATION AND NON-DISCRIMINATION REPORT 2006", http://www.lichr.ee/new/docs/cerd-final.pdf, pp. 49-52FeelSunny

There is also plenty of interesting data on Estonian economy in terms of ethnicity of workers in different areas, etc. (talk) 10:36, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Interesting data, but there can be many interpretations. for example, looking at the education levels, one could say that since non-Estonians have a better overall level of education, this is evidence that Estonians are discriminated against in the provision of education by the state, but despite this apparent educational dis-advantage suffered by Estonians, the fact that a larger proportion of Estonians have higher paying jobs is evidence that non-Estonians do not have as strong a work ethnic nor as highly motivated as Estonians to succeed. How's that? --Martintg (talk) 23:59, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I am quite sure that education levels correspond to the structure of the Soviet Estonia economy: some non-Estonians, who came into the country from other republics to work in science, industry, transport, etc., received before that, of course, better education than the ethnic Estonian average level. So, this is hardly because of discrimination of Estonians in modern Estonia:)

Anyway, definitely the education levels (3-4% difference) do not differ that much as the salary levels do (up to 10-15%). What's worse, a better-educated language minority gets much lower wages. That may also be sourced by some Estonian sources, both in Russian and English languages. And that may be a good illustration that unequal opportunities exist in the state for different ethnic groups.

PS. The argument "non-Estonians do not have as strong a work ethnic nor as highly motivated as Estonians to succeed" is hardly acceptable in any democratic country. FeelSunny (talk) 15:02, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

The argument might indeed be not acceptable in the sense of political correctness, but this does not mean that it can be discarded as a per se invalid thesis. In fact, differences in work ethics have consistently been found amongst different immigrant populations in the US. We all have cultural background and innate IQ, and these things tend to differ in different groups of people.
As for the Russian-speaking minority in Estonia, it's more like the phenomenon described by authors like Valentin Rasputin - the troubles of rootlessness. Miacek (t) 15:33, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

See also: Protestant work ethic. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 13:00, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Dear Διγουρεν, if in XXI century you support Weber's early XX century view on "why" protestants became so successful until the Victorian era, I propose you to broaden the sources sample with the works of Francis Galton, FRS, from the Victorian era itself. A perfect theory on why protestants should not marry some inferior peoples, e.g. Italians, Indians and so on. Racial hygiene, you know. Then please go and explain why are the protestant USA totally owned by the much less protestant People's Republic of China. Please also explain why there are 9 protestant states in the list of 20 with the highest rate of debt vs. GDP? Finland included. And Estonia - in June 2007 - had 86.51% of external debt vs. GDP. Just like Latvia. Russia had 17%. Maybe the reason is not at all protestant work ethic? FeelSunny (talk) 18:17, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

PS. Sorry, the USA are not totally owned, only 99.95%. Though the Great Britain is owned 3,5 times. And, according to the late 2008 data, Estonia's external debt is 145%. Going in the right direction, huh?

Bah! You're just jealous for not being one of those industrious Protestants!

You know what. I'll let you into a secret. I'm not really a Protestant, I'm an atheist. But I still won't marry you. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 13:57, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

My point was that there can be any number of interpretations of the employment numbers, spanning from discrimination to lower work ethnic, but the real reasons lay somewhere in between. Your explanation of the difference in education levels, i.e. "correspond to the structure of the Soviet Estonia economy: some non-Estonians, who came into the country from other republics to work in science, industry, transport, etc., received before that, of course, better education than the ethnic Estonian average level" points to one reason why the employment figures are different: the collapse of the Soviet Union saw the collapse of Union level enterprises that these non-Estonian were imported to work in, leading to a large number of highly qualified specialists forced to work in lower paying jobs outside their area of training. A second reason for the difference is more contemporary: many Russian-speakers had found work in the transit trade business between Russia and Europe, due to their natural language skills, but Russia through a combination of trade sanctions and redirected transit of goods through her own ports, has meant these non-Estonians have been hit hard as the transit trade business in Estonia collapsed.

As you can see, there are a number of reasons for the difference in employment numbers:

1. the collapse of union level enterprises,
2. the collapse of the transit trade business,
3. insufficient language skills,
4. a sense of rootlessness leading to lower motivation

This is why the Amnesty International report was criticized as a bad piece of work, because it simplistically looks at only one reason, while ignoring the other equally valid reasons. --Martintg (talk) 02:45, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

FeelSunny, if you start the article, follow the format of this article and it won't get deleted: http://en.wikipedia.org/Racism_in_the_United_States. If people try deleting it, ask them to also delete this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/Racism_in_Russia_during_the_2000s. I predict hilarity. Also, Martintg, don't you dare use the argument that one race is better then another in any way, shape or form, or else you'll get reported for racism. Saying "the fact that a larger proportion of Estonians have higher paying jobs is evidence that non-Estonians do not have as strong a work ethnic nor as highly motivated as Estonians to succeed" can get you warned right off the bat for racism. What you are saying is that one race is better then another race.

FeelSunny, I don't actually have time to do all the searching for that article, but I can go to the talk page and check all of the "POV Warriors". With patience, we can do it. And the most important thing, congratulations on getting married!!!HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 02:55, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

I never suggested any such thing, I was merely demonstrating how easy it is to contrive all sort of different reasons from a set of numbers. --Martintg (talk) 04:56, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for clearing it up. HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 01:49, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree, Martintg. At the same time, statistics like this are a much better and more objective source for demonstrating inequality exists, or does not exist in any given country. FeelSunny (talk) 06:51, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

About the article name, you suggested Discrimination of ethnic minorities in Baltic states, but I only have material about Estonia, so I'd call it Discrimination of ethnic minorities in Estonia for now. Maybe it can be renamed or expanded later. Offliner (talk) 10:06, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Offliner - ok, Estonia may well become a subarticle of a larger, mother-earticle. I will help with the work as much as I can.

HistoricWarrior007 - thanks for the congratulations!!:)

Overall, I do not beleive this has something to do with racism. I will explain why:

When we speak of racism in Russia or the US, we mean there are several righ-wing radical marginal groups, who beleive white race, and Christians, are better than the others. Both articles given are about non-official, oppressed, and small groups.

Concerning Estonia: racism is not the case. Actually, if you check the ethnic history, you will see that Estonians are (linguistically, ethnically) Finno-Ugric people, which places them much quite far from the racist ideal of the "White Nordic Race".

In Estonia minorities face oppression on another level: official, state-driven and on a larger scale:

1. The right of native language use is denied across the country, which is not the case of Russia or US,
2. The right for work and decent payment is restricted to Estonian-speakers, which is not the case of Russia and US (less jobs than share of R-speaking population)
3. The right to receive education is restricted (less places for Russian-speakers than necessary), etc.

This is not racism, more like a discrimination, just like gender discrimination, age discrimination, etc.

So, in my opinion, the name "Discrimination of ethnic minorities" is better itself, may be sourced better, and corresponds to the WP naming policies better. FeelSunny (talk) 12:03, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Well discrimination in the United States was government driven. It wasn't driven by the national government, but rather by the local governments. In Estonia it's driven by the national gov't. However Russian is a race. The national government of Estonia is discriminating against, (although I do want to see the evidence here) against the Russian race. Hence it's racism. Also, racism articles already exist, like the US one I linked to, so it'll be easier to establish using precedent. Your proposed title doesn't exist, so it will be establishing a new precedent. Do you see what I'm getting at? HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 01:49, 30 May 2009 (UTC)