Misplaced Pages

Talk:Bronze Soldier of Tallinn: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 11:21, 1 May 2007 editCamptown (talk | contribs)9,798 editsm →Arguable relevance of sections 3.2-5 and their excessive POV← Previous edit Latest revision as of 05:07, 12 February 2024 edit undoCewbot (talk | contribs)Bots7,280,125 editsm Maintain {{WPBS}}: 7 WikiProject templates. Keep majority rating "B" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 5 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Soviet Union}}, {{WikiProject Estonia}}, {{WikiProject Russia}}, {{WikiProject Architecture}}, {{WikiProject Visual arts}}. Remove 6 deprecated parameters: b1, b2, b3, b4, b5, b6. Keep 1 different rating in {{WikiProject Death}}.Tag: Talk banner shell conversion 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header}}
{{WikiProjectBanners
{{ArticleHistory
|1={{WPSU}}
|action1=GAN
|2={{WikiProject Estonia}}
|action1date=1 May 2007
|3={{WikiProject Russian History}}
|action1result=not listed
|4={{WikiProject Russia|class=B|importance=mid}}
|action1oldid=127554701
|5={{architecture|class=B|importance=mid}}
}}
{{talkheader}}


|action2=PR
{{FailedGA|oldid=127323500}}
|action2date=21:42, 16 July 2007
{{Archive box|]}}
|action2link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Bronze Soldier of Tallinn/archive1
|action2result=reviewed
|action2oldid=145073097


|currentstatus=FGAN
== Excavations ==
}}

{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|1=
"Amid political controversy the Estonian government started excavations of the buried people."
{{WikiProject Soviet Union|importance=Low}}
Did they? As far as I know, it was postponed until the situation calms down. Or am I just behind with the news? --] 22:06, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
{{WikiProject Estonia|importance=Mid }}

{{WikiProject Russia|importance=Mid|mil=yes|hist=yes|pol=yes|art=yes}}
:: You are right. The excavations were postponed after the riots started. ] 22:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
{{WikiProject Architecture|importance=Low}}
:::I understand that - so far - only the bronze statue has been moved to a secret location. Are there plans to move the stone wall as well, or is it going to be demolished? ] 22:43, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
{{WikiProject Visual arts|public-art=yes}}

{{WikiProject Death|class=C|importance=Low}}
::::Both the statue and its foundation have been removed. This is what the tent currently contains: http://etv24.ee/failid/73926_01.jpg Picture courtesy of the Estonian National Television <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (]) 22:57, 27 April 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->
{{WikiProject Military history|class=Start|b1=n|b2=n|b3=y|b4=y|b5=y|Memorials=yes|WWII=y|Russian=y|Baltic=y}}
::::::nice picture. ] 23:16, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
}}
:::Who these buried people are? How they died? Were they fighting a) against German forces (which started war against Soviet Union) or b) were they fighting to occupy state of Estonia? As it's said, Estonians made guerilla attacks against Soviets by ] during 1944-1948 even when German troops were withdrawn from Baltic countries. Maybe they died during those days? Latest Estonian soldier who was fighting against soviets was discovered and killed in 1978!! So lot's of things for historians to investigate.
{{Archives|small=no|auto=long}}

=== What shall we call this? ===
''"Excavations" - "Removal" - "Relocation" - "Demolition"'' - what shall we call this?

I would call it ], as it <s>is</s> was a ], and thus can not be "relocated". The Estonian government initially called their ] operation "]s", but it was clear from the begining that the intention was to ] and later possibly ] the statue (minus Soviet symbols?).

What eventually happened (after the nightly emergency meeting) was demolition. This is the word used by Estonian Minister of Defense ] in the statement broadcast (and translated) by ]. -- ] 23:35, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

:What was the Estonian word? All I heard used was "teisaldamine" and "osadeks võtmine", which mean relocation and dismantling, respectively. Either way, someone mistranslating or misusing a word does not change the fact that nothing has been demolished, the masonry was dismantled and removed with the intact bronze statue, to be relocated to the Military Cemetery in Tallinn. Demolition implies irreversible destruction, and other than your esoteric notions of materialist mysticism, nothing has been destroyed (apart from countless window panes, but that's neither here nor there). ] 05:48, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

:And, a few hours ago Ansip again said the statue was in one piece. --] 17:38, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

::As long as the statue is in one piece or in such a state that it can be restored to its original condition it has not been demolished. It has been '''removed''', it is being '''relocated''', and '''excavations''' is to be conducted at the site. That is at least how I see it. ] 11:33, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

== My edits to intro - who's point of view? ==

I made some edits to the intro, including exhanging the order of '''Monument to the Liberators of Tallinn''' with '''Tõnismäe Monument'''. The statue is something revered by a group of people, one could even say it was a ]. When writing about ] objects and people (]s) one should primarly cover why they are important to the people who worship them. Atheist should not have their criticism of religion placed first in the introduction of articles on churches and religion. Critisism should be included, but only after the issues primary importance is explaned from point of view of those that find it important. -- ] 00:24, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

:"One could even say". Well, yes, you've been saying it a lot. Your ridiculous pet theory isn't grounds for encyclopedic content. The official names for monuments are decided de jure by the governments under whose internationally recognized sovereignty they lie, not by appeals to dubious politicized reinterpretations. If you want an edit war, you're on. ] 01:04, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

::As the monument no longer exist, it is irrelevant what the Estonian goverment decided to call it. -- ] 01:23, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

:::That's your POV. The monument wasn't destroyed, it is being relocated. Consult a dictionary. ] 04:03, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

=== Increased levels of violence? ===
] removed the phrase "increased levels of violence" from the intro, replacing it with references to alcohol consumption. The reports () from tonight include the use of:
# ]s
# ]s
# ]
I definitely belive these are an escalation of violence. -- ] 02:14, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
: The BBC article seems erroneous. Molotov cocktails and water cannons were used and deployed but not used respectively on Thursday and the image seems to be from Thursday night as well. Neither the Estonian nor the Finnish press has reported Molotov cocktails, nor have I seen anything of the sort in any of the TV news coverage. Regardless of the accuracy of the article, there was certainly not an escalation of the violence, as there were: a) less protestors b) less police clashes c) no deaths or serious injuries d) a dozen stores looted instead of the 99 on Thursday e) order was restored an hour earlier. As far as alcohol consumption goes, the demographics of the rioters are reportedly teenagers and young adults instead of the more widely age-variable group of political protesters seen on Thursday, and instead of overt political protests the majority of them preoccupied themselves with breaking into liquor stores and setting fire to trash cans. ] 04:03, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

::I find BBC most reliable, aas they have been reporting live from Tallinn through out the night. I will check on the dates of Molotov cocktails. This I know: They were not reported yesterday. neither were rubber bullets. Also use of water cannon was denied and removed from article. Tonight I have seen TV coverage of both rubber bulllets and watercannon. -- ] 05:42, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

::: "This I know" is a really shoddy argument. Your claim that violence escalated is baseless regardless of whether the cops used truncheons or rubber bullets. Less people, less violence, less damage, and less injuries overall != escalation. ] 05:57, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

::::In the meantime, I once more saw the BBC report from this morning. It makes clear that 1, 2 & 3 were used on 28 April. It also mentiones the use of stones. On 27th the protestors only broke windows. On 28th they used Molotov cocktails. This is a ], making this an instance of ]. You can of course say that this is not protest or resistance, but drunkenness. Whatever, it is more violent. -- ] 06:27, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

:::::Please, tone down the hyperbole and misuse of the English language. On both nights they used stones against police, also bottles. These are all weapons. And what exactly were they "resisting"? The efforts of the police to stop them from breaking into stores? Let me get this straight, if I break into a store, and the cops try to stop me, and I throw heavy objects at them, I'm engaging in "armed resistance"? ] 06:49, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

::::::If you take up arms for a political cause, then it may be. What might the political cause be? Up to now it would have been citizenship for everybody. Today the protesters seem to shouting "]! Rossija!", so I do not know if Estonian citizenship interests these people anymore. -- ] 06:57, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
::::::P.S. This is an interesting issue, but unfortunately talk pages are not for discussing politics. -- ] 07:00, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

:::::::We're not discussing politics. We're discussing your weasel tactics of introducing loaded terms into an encyclopedic article to further your pro-Russian POV. "Armed resistance" has well-known political connotations aside from it's purely descriptive meaning, and it is never used in cases of drunken rioters attacking police with rocks. You don't use loaded terms like "state secret", "armed resistance" or "demolish" unless you can back them up with multiple reliable news sources reporting the same. For the love of Stalin, stop it already. ] 02:38, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

:::::::What about police violence, i've heard there has been a lot of that too (not as much as by rioters, but i've heard that innocent people have been beaten up. ] 11:07, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

::::::::Nobody is being beaten, not even the rioters. They are just thrown to ground if they don't obey the commands of the police. ] 12:59, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

:::::::::Actually, those who broke into the stores and pillaged were beaten by the police. But not those who just shouted.--] 15:02, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

:::::::::Is that what they told you on the news? Because i have a few online buddies who live in Estonia, both estonians and russians, and they were there and whitnessed (and vidoed) the abuse of power by police. They'll probably post the stuff on Youtube when stuff calms down. ] 15:42, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

::::::::::This is clearly propaganda. Estonian police were extremely careful not to abuse their power and there's not a single fact confirming any abuse. Rumours only. ] 09:04, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

::::::::::Yeah? Well than watch this video clip, starting at approx 0:45, 5 police officers walk up to 2 14-year old girls and start beating them. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdudZQdOrhg Of course, they are clearly guilty of vandalizing public property and attacking a police officer. Yep, that's what it looks like. ] 13:02, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

:::::::::::If you watch closely, you notice the police is not holding a club in its hand once he has hit them once. Well he is holding the club at first, but he only hits them once, which couldnt be considered beating. They are not letting people gather in the central town at all to prevent the destruction of the previous night.--] 13:51, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

::::::::::::Oh, sorry about that, i didn't know that it's allowed in Estonia to hit innocent underage bystanders with a nightstick, as long as you hit them only once... ] 13:58, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

:::::::::::::Are you sure theyre underaged at all? Dont seem so for me. --] 13:59, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
:::::::::::::I dunno, they look smaller than the cops. And it doesn't really matter, what matters is that police violence is not just propaganda.] 14:05, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

::::::::::::::Women usually are smaller than men. Especially, considering the men are cops(=athletic), who also have large helmets. Things have gotten recently out of hand, and some violence is inevitable. But the police can make a difference. They either punish people a bit for gathering in the first place, in which case the violence is minimal; or they let people gather and suffer mass psychosis (like they pretty much did on the first night), in which case uncontrollable violence emerges, that is, looting and damaging the nearby shops and also the murder of that Dimitri. It is not meaningless police violence. The damage that would be caused without such small measures(like hitting someone once with a club) would be massively larger.--] 14:15, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

::::::::::::::Oh so you're saying everything could have been prevented if they hit every woman in town before moving the statue? Now i don't know much about Estonian laws, but if hitting someone with a stick just once is allowed, and 2 people talking to each other is an "illegal gathering", that makes me not want to visit that country :P. BTW what you say if we move this conversation to another place, because this thread is getting kinda thin.] 14:22, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

:::::::::::::::That's right, you don't know anything about Estonian laws, nor do you know anything about police procedure or the realities of crowd control. You are not an expert and a brief Youtube video is so out of context I doubt any expert would hasten to draw conclusions from it. This is an encyclopedia, not an opinion forum - you don't get to decide what constitutes police brutality. Also, "innocent bystanders" hardly applies in the middle of riot. The police issued orders to vacate the area, not doing so is illegal in any civilized state. ] 20:12, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

:::::::::::::::K, check my talk page for my MSN and put me in you contact list right away so i can delete my MSN address from the wiki again (im 82.131.85.6, but im too lazy to log in, usually). --] 14:45, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

=== State secrecy? ===
He also removed the reference to ]. I saw an article on this in ] (or was it ]?) yesterday. I tried to relocate the article, but could not find it among hundreds of new articles on the demonstrations. Also my skils in Googling in Estonian are not that good. Somebody please help on finding a reference. -- ] 02:14, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
:I'll find it for you if you give more details on what it was about. EDIT: A quick search on both EPL and PM for "riigisaladus" came up with nothing past August 2006, when a Russian colonel was convicted for selling state secrets (in Russia). What did the article say about these "state secrets"? I've been following the story for a while and I'm hard pressed to think what exactly they could be hiding. ] 04:09, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
::I do not think they used the word "riigisaladus", maybe "saladus". The article said that the government had desided that all details of the operations are strictly secret. (Maybe state secrecy has demanded the removal of the article from the web :-) -- ] 05:47, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
:::What operation? There was no secrecy about the archaeological excavations and ultimate relocation of the monument and any remains that were found. If you're talking about the security surrounding the excavation and the impromptu removal of the monument following the protests/rioting, well duh. Police ANYWHERE don't offer such information to the public. It's not "state secrecy", it's common sense and common practice. Do you think the LAPD broadcast their tactical information on public radio during the Rodney King riots? Frankly, I'm getting tired of your insistence on inundating this article and this discussion with countless red herrings and weasel-wording wherever you possibly can. Just stop the pretense and call Estonia a Neo-Nazi police state. ] 05:55, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
::::I must agree with Unigolyn. Please don't make any further such controversial edits and claims unless you can back them up with a reference. ] 06:30, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
Petri, the link you found states, that the timeline will not be revealed to the general public, because they are afraid of violence/vandalism. ] means something entirely different. So I am going to remove that sentence again, hopefully for good now. ] 09:08, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

:The article uses the word ''riigisaladus'', in the sentence "teemad kuuluvad riigisaladuse alla". Maybe the issue here is that ] in Misplaced Pages is something even more secret than riigisaladus. -- ] 09:40, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

::The article says that after the national security council adjourned, their press corps' reply to press inquiries were that "topics discussed at the national security council are consider state secrets", which is completely normal practice and isn't used exclusively for the Bronze Soldier issue. Almost immediately, government members detailed their intentions but did not divulge exact dates, which he said had not been decided yet. ] 02:30, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

I spent several days in Estonia just before the riots started. Every newspaper and every news broadcast told about the beginning of the excavations. All talk about secrecy is pure BS!

--] 13:14, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

== Opening paragraph wording and times ==

Petri,

1. Please back up "escalated" violence claim with numbers of more property damage, greater number of rioters, more injuries, or more arson.
2. Please back up "protest" instead of "riot". Who was protesting what and where? Obviously the root cause of the continuing violence is the removal of the monument, but general mayhem does not a protest make.
3. Please stop weaseling with semantics. Timelines are important in the opening paragraph because there has not been round-the-clock rioting, and police have restored order shortly after midnight on both days. Also, the second riot started on Friday the 27th, not Saturday the 28th. So far, only 90 minutes of the 28th had riots, as of this writing, 8 hours have been riot-free. ] 06:26, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

:Fixed date, ] was a leftover from an earlier edit. -- ] 06:38, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

::Okay, I'm content with the new wording. Please, please try to justify every adjective you use on an evidentiary basis so we can avoid "escalating" and the like in the future. ] 06:40, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

==Memorial theme ==
It says in the article that the monument was ''created in 1947 originally as an official memorial to Soviet soldiers who died fighting in World War II. The theme was later changed, stating "For those fallen in World War II"''. Was the "theme" changed after the independence in 1991 (when the eternal flame was removed)? And, if so, was it a part of a compromise to keep the monument at all. How did this affect the message signs on the memorial? ] 07:34, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
:Yes, it was altered after 1991. However, the statue itself carries soviet symbolics, so the new label didn't change much for most of its opponents. --] 07:59, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

==Disputed section==

The long section about regaining independence, demographics and possible causes of the conflict is written not from a neutral viewpoint and is inaccurate as well. we should have here only things directly connected with the events, e.g that Russians regard it as a monument of the liberators and most of the Estonians view the statue as the symbol of the long and bloody Soviet occupation. But citizenship issues should _not_ be dealt with here _in detail_. ] 07:47, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
:The background, demographics section contains many false statements. Please remove it, correct the false statements or mark it as disputed. ] 10:25, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

== Reason to Revolt: Discrimination of Russians in Estonia ==

I think these protests have very little to do with the statue itself, and a lot more to do with how the russian speaking people in Estonia (and the other Baltic countries) are today being discriminated and harassed in many ways by the Estonian State, almost apartheid like... That is the real background for their anger; The governments removal of the statue was just an other example of this tendency. ] 08:02, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

::Very interesting argumentt; though it has nothing to do in the encyclopedia. So it should be removed. ] 08:05, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

::That is not true: What is the social cause of the riots? It should too be in an encyclopeic article. The disputes around this statue today have very little to do with what crimes Stalinism did in Estonia 50 years ago, but everything to do with what the Estonia State is doing today. ] 08:08, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

:::So what is Estonia doing today? Demanding ability to communicate in Estonian for citizenship, is that really so bad? No, it is more about that some Russians have been raised in Stalinist spirit, both by their parents and the Soviet Propaganda. No matter what Estonia would do, their way of thinking doesn't change. It is very connected to what happened 60 years ago.--] 09:16, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

::::Apartheid in an EU member state? This is hard to believe. In any case, just how does violent rioting and looting help Russian minority to fight discrimination? If anything, it completely undermines their cause and creates a precedent for tough police measures. They should learn to engage in dialog and use consensus-building mechanisms, which are readily available under Estonian Constitution and EU umbrella. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) 00:14, 29 April 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->

''Replay to the two anonymous editors.'' This is not suppose to be a debate on who is right and who is wrong! The point I'm making is that there could be social issues in the background behind the protest against the removal of this statue. ] 09:41, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
:I've added a wikilink to the ] article in the intro; it mentions some of these issues. ] 10:17, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
:On second thought, ] might be a better fit. ] 10:18, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

== POV tag? ==

There is {{tl|pov}} tag on the page. I cannot find related dicussion on this page. In fact, I can not even guess what kind of POV is implied: Russian or Estonian? As the article is on the front page, I am removing the tag in one minute. If you disagree, restore the tag, but write your grievances here. Better yet, instead of taging the whole article, place {{tl|fact}} and other tags to individual paragraphs. -- ] 09:04, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
:It seems like editors from both "sides" are tagging the article... ] 09:37, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
::Then I guess it is OK to remove the tag. -- ] 09:41, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
:::let's try to keep this as neutral as possible, that is by representing both sides opinions —] 17:29, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

== Schroeder's comment ==
Flag of Germany Germany - Gerhard Schroeder, former chancellor of Germany, called the action insulting to Russians who died fighting fascism: "the way Estonia dealt with the memory of those soldiers shows bad taste and disrespect."

this is marked as German response. But Schroeder is on the paycheck of Gazprom, so i dont think this should be marked as the official response of Germany? --] 10:46, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
:Sure, a Putin ally who joined Gazprom shortly after leaving office, a major political scandal in Germany.... As we may not know in what capacity he speaks (Gazprom, Putin, on his own behalf etc), I changed the national template to a flag image instead (after all he is German). ] 11:54, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
:I might as well mention that I wasn't sure exactly where to add it when I put it in, but was encouraged that the section "political reaction" wasn't titled "official political reaction". I'm glad that it has been moved to another section, though perhaps the main one should be retitled somehow? Schroeder's statement is also a "political reaction" after all, even if it may not be the official response of Germany. ] 12:50, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
:Schröder is not the head of state of Germany or any official so I don't see why it should be noted. --] (]) 12:54, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

:Isn't including the information about Schroeder being part of Gazprom, thusly presenting a qualifier about his statement, slightly POV? His statement is his POV, but mentioning that he happens to be tied in with Gazprom seems to suggest that the writer's own POV is that he's bound to say such a thing because he's obviously in the pay of the Russians. That's not presenting evidence with impartiality, and I think mention of his ties to Gazprom should be removed from this page - let viewers find it out for themselves, they shouldn't be told what to think when reading this. Whether Shroeder's own comments on the matter still remain relevant to the page is another question.--] 13:31, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
::I think it is actually very much NPOV - just stating that he works for a major Russian company, which is publicly known as a tool used by Russian government in politics before. There are no further comments on that, just the plain facts - and each can draw their own conclusions. ] 14:20, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
:::It's notable that the former Chancellor says: "Russians who died fighting ''fascism''" (]). Maybe he made the statement in Russian... ;) ] 15:17, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
::::I disagree - I think the wording seems to be trying to make a point. I mean, I didn't know that he worked for/with Gazprom until I saw that comment. My perception of the statement is changed before I even read it. This is slightly irrelevant, as someone else has now removed the mention of Gazprom. Also, apologies if this has already been clarified, but why is it incorrect to say the Soviet Union faught against "fascism"? It wasn't just Nazi Germany that took part in Barbarossa.--] 16:06, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
:::::I would expect a former Chancellor of Germany (the country that started the war and had the option to end it anytime before the bitter end) to be more honest, and not using Russian sematics as ''fascists'' when talking about a monument in memory of the fight against the ''nazists''. Even though I begin to wonder if the Soviets actually "liberated" Estonia from the Italians... ] 17:44, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
::::::I think by the time the Soviet army came back to Estonia, the Italians had already switched sides. However, one of the last batallions to leave Tallinn was the SS wallonie division, commanded by ]. Not really Nazis, but Fascists.--] 18:34, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
::::::Also remember that the Romanians also took part on the Eastern Front and were also ruled by a Fascist state, as were several other Axis powers. Whether any Romanian or Croat or whatever divisions were dotted around Tallinn in 1944 is something else entirely, but for the Soviet Union the whole war was the fight against "the fascists", I wouldn't expect them to be getting very politically correct after all that happened on the Eastern Front. But from a technical standpoint, that point I think is more accurate than saying they just faught against Nazism. But I find myself drifting off the point though I think.--] 18:55, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
:::::Why is "former chancellor" more important than "current Gazprom *something*"? In my opinion, the present occupation is more important than the past. I'll change it back. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) 16:23, 28 April 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->
::::::No, I agree that mentioning his current job is relevant. I'm adding it back in for now, hopefully in a way that nobody will find POV. ] 05:56, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
::::::Huh, I see someone already added it in before I managed to. Anyway, I think it's relevant because it gives better context to his comments. I hope nobody finds the current phrasing POV. ] 06:03, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
:::::::I agree, Mr. Schroeder's comment has also to be judged in view of his current credentials. ] 09:24, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

==Vello Rajangu ==
Now it's claimed that the statue is modeled after the Estonian soldier ]. True or not? ] 14:13, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
:According to , identity of the model is unknown. ] is very likely not the model, most probably the model was a carpenter named Albert Adamson. The name Vello Rajangu isn't mentioned at all, so it is probably not true. I'll remove that from the article, unless someone can come up with a citation supporting that. ] 14:26, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
::Additional source (also in Estonian, unfortunately) ] 14:31, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
:::Interesting, are there enough material for an article about Albert Adamson? The name sounds Swedish, doesn't it? ] 14:33, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
::::To an Estonian ear the names Albert and Adamson sound very Estonian, and there have been plenty of Albert's and Adamson's in Estonia. Just an observation, not an allegation about the ethnic identity of the person in question. Cheers, --] 15:51, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

== Monument intact ==

Estonian prime minister made a statement in which he announced that the monument is "intact" and "undamaged" (http://www.delfi.ee/news/paevauudised/eesti/article.php?id=15706791). Therefore any references to the dismantling or destruction of the monument should be removed. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) 17:45, 28 April 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->
:And that implies that the Estonian authorities have returned the Bronze Soldier from its undisclosed location? --] 17:57, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
The prime minister states that the monument is currently under police custody and will be transferred to the cemetery of the Estonian Defence Forces as soon as the preparations are complete.

::I thought they sawed it off by it's ankles? There were photos of that. ] 21:14, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
:::The photos were fake. Here is proof: http://surnuaed.ee/sold_fake.gif The image is originally taken from this same wikipedia article and photoshopped. ] 10:48, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

==The Bronze statue ==
What is going to happen with the bronze statue? Is it going to be melted down, given away to Russia's deputy Prime Minister, or be included as a decorative element at the local military cemetary? ] 18:06, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
: As I said above, the statue, along with any remains unearthed at Tõnismäe, will be transferred as a whole to the Cemetery ASAP. This was said in the official statement by Andrus Ansip, the prime minister. ] 18:15, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
::Sigh... Why, then, did you suggest removing any references to the removal or destruction of the monument? ] 18:29, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
::: I said "dismantling or destruction" which would mean the statue would be no more. Of course the statue is removed from Tõnismäe. I never said that it wasn't going to be relocated. Just the fact that the article said the statue was going to be destroyed was inaccurate. Sorry if you misunderstood. ] 18:34, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

==Amazing page ==
I think the recent development of this discussion page is truly amazing, much more interesting than the article it is supposed to cover. --] 20:41, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

==Mass grave ==
What is actually known regarding the mass grave? Does it contain a number of unidentifeid human corpses (more or less dumped into the grave), or are these corpses arranged in some kind of a system, facilitating identification? Since this grave doesn't seem to have been supposed to be a Grave of the unknown soldier - Why were the corpses buried in an intersection in the middle of a big city? --] 21:18, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
:Identity of those buried, even the amount of those buried isn't clear. Numbers have been stated to be 13 or 16 in different sources, as several burials & reburials took place during soviet times. The intersection was widened decades ago by soviet authorities, at the same time when the controversial bus stop was built (widening it the other way would have required the demolition of one of Tallinn's main churches). It's believed that part of the burial site was paved over then. Also, there's no clear information about whether any remains were removed or relocated when the gas pipes for eternal flame by the statue were ran through the burial site.

<small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (]) 23:13, 28 April 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->

::Thanks, very interesting! You mentioned a church - does that imply that the site was used as a burial ground when the remains of the soldiers were laid to rest in the mass grave? --] 23:36, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

::: Definitely not, as far as I know this particular church did not have a cemetery attached to it, as it was constructed on an empty plot when the city had already enclosed it. The space used for burials can be described (for the want of a better definition) as a "small park". For best available information on the graves you can read the goverment study linked on the main page, presently under the "Neutral" heading. ] 23:55, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

:12 coffins have been found (2 rows of 6). 9 sets of remains will have been recovered by tonight (30/04), according to Defense Ministry press conference earlier today. ] 13:04, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::Coffins have been identified as the right ones, as their handles are a clearly identifiable unusual make, same as on burial photographs. ] 13:40, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

==Russians vs Estonians is not correct!==
I don't like two aspects: 1) This talk page says this is piece of russian history
2) Marauders in Tallinn is Russians. In my opinion, former correct version is CCCP history, not Russian. Later is more slavic people, russians are most common slavic peolpe in Estonia, but Belarus and Ukraine descendent is also common. {{User|62.65.227.172}}
:''Russian history'' is relevant as post-communist Russia (notably her political institutions) has been quite obsessed with the issue. ] 21:50, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
::As far as i know Belorussians and Ukrainians dont walk in the streets of Tallinn shouting: "Russia, Russia". So please dont mess them in this dirt. ] 22:37, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
:::I'm talking about the quite hysteric political reaction in Russia, which certainly has neiher been diplomatic, nor discrete. That, my friend, is part of the Russian contemporary history. I understand Russians who are not so proud of their politicians, when they use the kind of offensive and destructive power language we have seen in the last couple of days. Yet, it's part of the Russian history... --] 23:32, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
::::Yes, this monument is history of Soviet Union. It's strange that leaders of 100 times bigger nation (Russia) than Estonia are so "critical" to small nation which suffered much during the times of USSR. I believe also Russia suffered from Soviet Union? Or were they only rulers of Soviet Union and now miss the glory days? '''We should remember the Bronze Soldier was not set up by independent Russia. It was set up by dead communist state called Soviet Union'''. Not Ukranian people, or their decents, are celebrating communist monument there. Most probably they think crazy people both side.. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (]) 15:17, 30 April 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->

== Demolished structures category ==

The word 'demolished' is not correct, thus I recommend to remove this category. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (]) 23:33, 28 April 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->

:As the comment said: come back when it is rebuilt. Then, maybe, it can go into ]. For now it stays in ]. -- ] 23:45, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

::Try to find a new category. I do not protest against anything but I want to see correct grammar - this is not the case. The word "demolish" would be correct if the monument was destroyed (e.g. blown up or whatever). ] 23:47, 28 April 2007 (UTC)84.50.157.9
::I'll try to find a better category. Please leave this category intact for now. ] 23:49, 28 April 2007 (UTC)84.50.157.9
:::The PM was obviously only referring to the stutue when he told the press that the "monument" was "undamaged", but what happend to the ''stone structure'' - was it actually demolished today, or not. Who is right? We need evidence! ] 23:50, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
::::There is not a single stone left of the structure in the original location. This was made clear by the published photos of the inside of the tent. -- ] 23:55, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
::::Unconfirmed sources say that the stone structure is almost intact and was removed by sections, not brick by brick. Trying to get confirmation. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (]) 23:53, 28 April 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->
:::::Even if the structure was in sections, it would still count as "Demolished structures". -- ] 23:57, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
::::::No, 'demolished' means 'destroyed completely'. Like I said before, the word 'demolished' seems incorrect. Why should we put it in this category if it has not been destroyed completely (or until we do not have information if it has or has not been destroyed)? I would not put it in a "Not Destroyed Structures" category either (even if it existed) since I cannot confirm my sources right now. You should use the same mentality. I recommend removal of the category until confirmation.] 00:02, 29 April 2007 (UTC)84.50.157.9
:::::::It seems that you have misunderstood the meaning of the word "demolished". Any structure torn down is demolished. It does not need to be blown up with dynamite. -- ] 00:09, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
:::::'''P.S.''' Considering the state secrecy surrounding the structure, maybe we need to create a ]. -- ] 23:59, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
::::::You could create the category if you want to, but I do not see the point of it.] 00:02, 29 April 2007 (UTC)84.50.157.9
:::::'''P.P.S.''' We could of course consider ]. -- ] 00:05, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
::::::I would prefer it instead of the demolished structures category. Change it then?] 00:06, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

:::::::Again with the "state secrecy" nonsense. Please stop misusing the English language to further your political ends. Dismantling something in order to re-erect it elsewhere is not demolition. See dictionary definitions of and . Also, you were asked to, and you appeared to agree with, stopping with your completely unverified and baseless "state secret" accusations. ] 02:21, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

::::::Unexplained disappearances seems more like alien stories & divine interventions & other mystical stuff. IMO, unsuitable for the statue which was taken away with a common truck. --] 06:08, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

== Waffen SS monument and its removal relevant? ==

It seems that there's parallel between this conflict and the building/removal of the monument to the Estonians who fought as members of Waffen SS in 2004. I found this and also remember BBC News covered it.

:And that story is duly linked at the end, under "See also". See ]. Any longer sections in this article are hardly NPOV, and this isn't a compendium over political statue removal in Post-Soviet countries. ] 02:16, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

:Also, the source is plain wrong. Despite what the media claims, no SS insignia was displayed. This was confirmed by an expert (professor of semiotics from Tartu University) brought in by police . Link in estonian, but broadly saying that the only identifiable insignia were distinctly estonian, and the helmet worn a generic german model (understandable, as that what was worn by estonians fighting against soviets at the time). ] 03:01, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

==Khimki War Memorial==
I fail to find a Wikiarticle on exhuming of six Red Army pilots and destruction of the memorial in Khimki (http://www.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2007/04/20/014.html). They had to bring in special forces (OMON) there - and there are no plans of restoring the monument, afaik. Would be highly relevant to Bronze Soldier controversy as well, for obvious reasons. ] 06:45, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
:Few more sources: , , (bottom of the page).] 06:50, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

:Yes, you already mentioned it (16:21, 27 April 2007). It's relevant, but not directly related to this - it's more like those other links in the "see also" section (the alleged SS-uniform memorial, etc). This particular case is only partially about the removal of a statue. In large part, according to the comments I've read by Russians, it is about "15 years of repression". Much like the protests in France last year, it was ''sparked'' by something relatively simple, but if that other background had not been there there is absolutely no way it would have escalated to these huge proportions. Rather, the reaction would probably have been much as it was in Khimki - anger, but not wholesale destruction.
:But yes, if you wish, by all means create an article about it and link it somewhere (maybe in the "see also" section). ] 06:59, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
::Ok, I was going to mention that it's not really up to wikipedia editors to make comparisons. However, now that I see that the comparison is being made in the media and within Russia (from those new links you posted), perhaps it ''would'' be a good idea to start a small section about it. Mind, it still probably shouldn't be a huge part of this article. ] 07:02, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
:::Yes, that is exactly what I meant - something in see also section. If I can find some time this afternoon, I'll try to start the article about it - and perhaps a small section in here as well, like Esn suggested. ] 08:30, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
:I've started the article now - ] - just a stub atm. Someone, whose Russian is better then mine could expand it better, perhaps, as most of the sources are in Russian. Some unused sources are also in HTML comment in the article. ] 13:42, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

==Order of mentioning countries==
Currently, there seems to be no order to how countries are organized in the "political reaction" section. I suggest the following order:

1) Estonia (as the country most affected)

2) Russia (as the country claiming to represent the ethnic group involved, and having the most significant response - significant in the sense of influence to the further development of this issue)

3) UN (as the largest international organization)

4) EU (as the second-largest international organization)

5-?) all the other countries in alphabetical order

What do you guys think? ] 07:19, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

:I think the Estonia and Russia should top the list, with EU and the the neigboring countries having priority. The UN reaction, however, seems to be an automatically generated respons without any implication (that's why UN dosen't top the list any more) ] 08:17, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

:: Well, you both have valid points. I don't see the UN ever making a statement concerning some conflict where they would support only one side of the quarrel. They're a pacifist organization, so their response is pretty much predetermined (Make love, not war). Then again there's no point in making the closest countries more importaint. I suppose the list should be in alphabetical order, but beginning with Estonia and Russia (and leaving perhaps some white space in between the first two and the remainder). -- ] 09:14, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

== Mastaba-like? ==

Currently, the article describes the memorial as "]-like". Is this just a convenient physical description, or is some marginal connection to ] indeed implied?--] 07:53, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

:: Just a physical description. -- ] 08:47, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

==Rumours about the mass grave ==
There are rumours on the internet that some of the soldiers in the mass grave actually didn't perished in combat, but died of natural causes, alchoholism and in one case in a traffic accident. Is there any truth behind these rumours? ] 08:25, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
:There is nothing certain about it, hence the archaeological excavations. Rumors go from "no one is buried there at all" to "few soldiers shot for pillaging, looting and raping". Looking at the current list, I doubt it is entirely true (in some cases they had to carry the body for days and 50 kilometers, while there are mass graves in battle sites, some dates are weird (Aleksandr Grigorov died in March, rest allegedly in September). ] 08:35, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

== Thumbnail pictures ==

What's the point of having thumbnail size under ] when the thumbnails have fixed widths? -- ] 08:59, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Since noone cared to join in discussion, I deleted the fixed thumbnail sizes. See ] and ]. -- ] 12:31, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

:The question is interesting, but far to general to be answered here. I ask that the fixed sizes be restored, to make space for the image captions. -- ] 22:27, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

== Statue or the whole monument? ==
I still haven't figured out was just the bronze soldier statue removed or the whole monument made of bricks and metal plates? Is the "monument" still standing there without the soldier, or was every brick moved? Will only the soldier be moved to military cemetary, or the whole monument as it was in Tönismäe? --] (]) 10:13, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

:Everything's gone and everything will be put up to cemetery as it was before at Tõnismägi. ] 10:18, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

::Everything happens inside a big tent; but reports (along with authentic pictures???) suggest that the bricked monument is now removed and forensic experts are digging their way in the mass grave to exhume the corpses of what is believed to be fallen soldiers. ] 10:23, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

::: One of Estonian TV channels just showed full view of the inside of tent. It's empty alright. ] 16:04, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

==May 8 ==
The Estonian government now reports that the monument's relocation to the military cemetery will be completed by May 8. Does that imply that the May 9 celebrations will take place at the Cemetery of the ] this year? ] 10:36, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

:Very unlikely. I find it much more likely that the ] celebrations will consist of burning down the Estonian Parlament building on Toompea. ...but Misplaced Pages is not a ]... -- ] 11:08, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

::That's ridiculous. Toompea is completely sealed off, only some military action could break through there and be able to set fire to/blow up something. Anyway, the "celebrations" are on the 9th, so there should be no problem. Also the monument/statue/whatever you want to call it will be relocated to the new spot by tomorrow (according to the latest press release). - ] 11:40, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

:'''P.S.''' It seems that the ethnic Russians have given an ]: either the monument is restored by May 9, or the day will mark "the beginning of our war against the criminal Estonian government." (See ) -- ] 11:34, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
:: Estonian news sources have not confirmed it. If you are in need of news from Estonia and speak Russian, then read . Using Russian sources when talking about Estonia is not a good idea. Also, please stop posting this Anti-Estonian propaganda. ] 11:57, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
:::Petri Krohn has a good point! You never know what's going to happen next. And when did <kavkazcenter.com> become a pro-Russian propaganda tool? ] 13:28, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
::::That blog seems just the opinion of 1 russian to me. --] 13:36, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
::::: is one of the best informed sources on Russian affairs. This was evident also in the case of ]. They are however extremely anti-Russian; as the name implies, they are a "propaganda" tool of organizations involved in insurrection against the Russian government. By assosiation, they are also very pro-Estonian. They might not be right in this case, but what they publish is certainly not "Russian propaganda". -- ] 18:02, 29 April 2007 (UTC).

:BTW - "Kavkazcenter" reminds me of Estonia's ties with ]. --] 12:27, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

:: Yes, he was one of soviet military commanders in Estonia during Soviet Union's breakup, and is generally considered one of the level-headed officers who kept the situation here from turning to violence. It has been claimed he ignored direct orders from Moscow ordering security clampdown. ] 13:33, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

:::Wasn't Estonia one of very few countries that had diplomatic relations with Chechnya? --] 14:23, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

::::Yes, Estonia supports separatist movements of ] (primarily as an insult to Russia) <small> unsigned comment 15:07, 29 April 2007 by {{User|Borism}} </small>

:::::Perhaps because according to the international law, they have right for their own country? Which is all they have been asking. ] 15:19, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

::::::Which international law says countries can be created just like that? Can I create country of my own if I want to? I'd like to... Or how would you feel if say estonian Setu people would create their own country on Estonian soil? Anyway, sorry for offtopicness ]

:::::::Charter of the United Nations grants a right for national self-determination for every nation. Setu people are not a distinct nation, they are also Estonians. ] 09:32, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

::::::::Besides, i think everyone would let them (Setu) make their own country if most of them really insisted. But i doubt they would, considering they would have to join all the WTO and EU and NATO and all the rest, which could take lots of years... All that time without any international protection could bring severe consequences from the east. --] 15:43, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

==External links==
There are sections "Supporters" and "Opponents" in ]. Supporters of what, opponents of what? Either section names should be changed or all sections merged, as now it is rather strange and un-encyclopedic. ] 14:02, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
: I changed it to "Supporters of the relocation" and "Opponents of the relocation". How's that sound? -- ] 14:57, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
::That is good, except that now links don't match the headlines. I'll change that. ] 14:59, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

==Is or was?==
The Bronze Soldier of Tallinn still exists. Then why do you use past tense in the beginning of the article? ] 18:01, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
:If it ever gets rebuilt, you can add the information in the article on ]. This article is about the ] memorial and its symbolic value Soviet and Estonian people. -- ] 19:54, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
::There are no "Soviet" people. And you're moving goalposts again. You do NOT get to decide on whether the memorial loses all its meaning by being relocated. Physically, it still exists and will continue to exist. If your theory is correct, it will be proved to be so in the fullness of time, for instance, by the lack of mourners there on May 9th. ] 20:05, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
:::Petri Krohn is right: Past tense makes more sence, as the article is a about a war memorial on a mass grave downtown Tallinn. --] 20:30, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
:::Though it pains me to say it, Petri Krohn is right there (what Soviet people, tho?) ] 21:45, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

::If the pieces ever get reasembled, we will have a never-ending debate about the ] (]) of the two monuments. What is clear, is that the statue will will have lost its symbolic meaning. To the Estonians it will mark the final step in the re-establisbent of Estonia's pre-1940 independence. To the Russians and other resident non-citizens it will most likely symbolize the "criminal acts and oppression by the fascist Estonian government" ". -- ] 23:07, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
:::We will see about that. It's too early to make any kind of assumptions yet. ] 14:08, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::::Soviets??? Homo Sovieticus? And do you have some kind of cristall ball so that you definitely know what Bronze soldier in new location will symbolize to different people? Even better, maybe you can add source for that crystal ball?--] 14:39, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:::::What I am saying, is that I can see no (symbolic) continuity between the old memorial and the new monument with the ] statue. I doubt if others will. -- ] 20:18, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::::::Well, the fact that you can't see symbolic continuity does not mean that nobody can see it. Of course I understand that for stalinists and ultra-nationalist Russians new location of Bronze soldier does not fit as its not so good location for getting large amount of public attention. Those people who simply want to honour fallen soldiers can still continue doing it. From some point it can be even considered better location because peaceful atmospere at cemetery can have advantages compared to former location which was next to large streets with heavy traffic, and bus station very close to it. By the way, Estonia is now independent state not province of Russia, so its up to Estonia what to do with monuments here. I would say Russians should be even happy, USSR itsselfly simply demolished memorials it did not like, without any discussion.--] 21:20, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

==Economic immigration==

"At the time over a third of Estonia's population were descendants of Russian and other Soviet economic migrants, who had been drawn to Estonia by its rapid post-war industrialization."

This is unsourced, and incorrect information. No one was "drawn" to Estonia, it was not legal to simply grab your suitcase and head off to a different SSR. Intra-Soviet migration was controlled centrally from Moscow. Also, claims of "rapid post-war industrialization" are ridiculous. Estonia was industrialized well before the halfway point of the 20th century, and most of the immediate "industrialization" consisted of forced collectivization of agriculture. Estonia's main industries in the 20th century were textile manufacturing, lumber and power generation, all of which were just as prevalent before the occupation. I am going to rewrite this sentence, to remove the implicit exultation of Soviet economic prowess and the wholly voluntary immigration policies (which, again, didn't exist). ] 20:05, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps, ] were also built without help of Soviet occupations, huh? Remove those facilities into Russian soil and live in Stone Age.] 01:20, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

:Gee, in fifty years we naturally wouldn't have managed to build the power plants ourselves. Thank you for the fifty years of occupation, killing tens of thousands Estonians and forcing others to live in poverty - after all, you brought us those mighty power plants! ] 12:08, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks to the "rapid industrialisation" we were still sitting behind Juku computers and driving Zhaparozets in even early ninties, while we could have long time used IBM's and driven a volvo. Claims of soviet industrialization are relatively short sighted. As the estonian economy showed very fast rise in the first independence. We could have been compared to other first world nations for long time if the soviet occupation wouldn't have happened. ] 12:15, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, you were sitting behind Juku and driving Zhaparozets's. Do not forget, you also had gas in every house, delivered by Soviet/Russian pipelines as well as mentioned Soviet-built power plants. Without Soviet Empire, you'd still graze cows and lit bonfires.] 01:59, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
:Bonfires? Naah, not really. We'd probably have a small nuclear plant as Sweden and Finland have. Also, the only thing nowadays in common with soviet built plants is the location. Machinery etc. had to be updated to western standards, because, well, soviet technology was decades behind. There wasn't a thing that didn't need updating. ] 08:45, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

==Estonian Defence Forces? ==
The article doesn't observe the fact that, along with regular police officers and volonteers, also military personel () are patrolling the streets of Tallinn. What kind of military personel have been involved in protecting the city from looters and vandals etc? --] 20:46, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

:No, these are volunteers from Estonian Defence League who are temporarily under the command of police. For a few years now they have been partnershiping (mainly at large concerts etc.) ] 21:36, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

::If they are ], then they should be counted as military, like the ] in the U.S. -- ] 22:19, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

:::Please read my comments below. The EDL members aren't present as members of military (or even as members of EDL), but as volunteer assistant policemen from civilian population. ] 22:46, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

::::Then they would have to have double membership also in the ]. If they receive commands from their EDL superiors, then they are military. -- ] 00:23, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

::::: They are called up by police forces and assigned to police units. EDL chain of command doesn't enter the equation. ] 01:35, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

: Those are assistant policemen who don't get issued police uniforms, hence their being out with whatever they can get. Also, many of the assistant policemen are members of EDL, volunteer organisation (under the oversight of Defense Forces) for training for guerilla warfare, etc. They don't have a common uniform but often get donations from different armed forces around the world / regular army's leftovers. The faux-military outfits are commonly known as 'duckhunting suits', as that's what they're often worn for. ] 21:41, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

: Oh, and it's Jõhvi, not Tallinn. With the bulk of police forces in Tallinn, the volunteers (registered assistance policemen) were called in to support police in the outlying areas. ] 21:43, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

==Genuine message? ==

"Command of group "KOLIVAN " Army of Russian Resistance"
I guess this is what kavkaz is referring to, from: :
<removed on the basis of Misplaced Pages policies: see ]> - ] 12:01, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

But is it just another hoax? --] 21:46, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

: ...or a provocation by Estonians?
: The primary demand is citizenship to all ex-Soviet citizens. I do not think this would have been included by anyone, but real Estonian Russian non-citizens. This makes it sound authentic. It does not prove a real threat, but even a hoax or provocation has the potential to lead to concrete action. -- ] 00:13, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

:: "KOLIVAN" is allegedly a medieval Russian name for Tallinn. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (]) 02:00, 30 April 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->

=== Translation ===
Here is a translation by ]: (Feel free to improve on the translation -- ] 00:01, 30 April 2007 (UTC))

<removed from Misplaced Pages: see ]> ] 12:02, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Yesterday I found 3 Google hits for "Армии Русского Сопротивления". Today I find 118: Seems that the message is notable and can be refered to in Misplaced Pages. Are there any Estonian languge sources for this? Whow is this group refered to in Estonian? -- ] 22:01, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

== International Committee for the Baltic States without Nazism ==

As a follow up to assorted statements and press releases: this one I got from Tallinn and am publishing in St. Petersburg. The Committee is improvised but I will help to register if I'd be ever asked to. The report or rather open appeal is absolutely accurate as far as ethnic dictatorship (ethnocracy) and Bronze Soldier affair is concerned although I wish the authors were perhaps less empotional and childish. As it revolves around barbaric act of official vandalism in Estonia - the Bronze Soldier debacle and is pertinent to this article, I believe it should be posted here. (] 00:33, 30 April 2007 (UTC)).


--------------------------------------------

Friends,

You should be aware that when you do business in Estonia or buy anything made in Estonia or visit it as tourist you support an apartheid state and fund a new generation of European Nazis...
:''(Moved long declaration to ]. -- ] 01:31, 30 April 2007 (UTC))''

*The last statement is simply to long to be on wiki. If the copyright is OK and the authentecity is not a problem then it might go to wikisource ] 01:28, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:: Good heavens! Estonia IS NOT FASCISTIC, there is NO apartheid state and NO European Nazis! It may seem fascistic for mr. Putin, but it is not. That we don't want communism doesn't mean that we are fascistic. You have read Russian news agencies too much. ] 05:21, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

::Reported to ], . Misplaced Pages is not for pushing political agendas or promoting hatred and violence, I recommend reporting such incidents in the future as soon as they happen. We've managed to keep this article NPOV, all sides agree to that - and for something that hotly debated, that is an impressive feat indeed. ] 05:37, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

::Is this the same ´"anti-fascist" movement Russian State television is urging people to support? ] 09:49, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

==Splitting the article?==
Some people have decided to split the article, without consulting anyone here; see ]. If there is indeed support for this, I suggest that most of the information from this article be ''moved'' there, rather than simply duplicated. For example, all of the international reactions, and the explanations for the controversy, should be on that page rather than on this one. The only thing on ''this'' page about the incidents which began this year should be a very short paragraph and a link to that page.

That's assuming that there is indeed support for the move. Currently, all it's creating is two articles with similar information that's updated at different rates. ] 07:24, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

:'''Oppose:''' I see no reason for the split. At the moment the new article just mirrors information here. If/when there are more riots, then the article can be re-created. There was some small talk about it in edit summaries, I think - and did you check ]? ] 07:29, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

:'''Support:''' Well, why shouldn't we split the article? Let's have all the matters concerning the statue ], and all the unrest information ]. I'd say this makes both articles more diverse. There are many reverts in the that claim to revert irrelevant material, just because it does not concern the Soldier specifically, just the unrests. I vote for two articles. -- ] 07:45, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

:'''Oppose: ''' A spit is only confusing for people who are not so familiar with the subject. ] 07:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

:'''Support:''' It has been already done in . Let the unrest be in a separate article. My opinion is the same as Telempe's. ] 08:08, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

::It may be, than on Estonian wikipedia, the split is done to push a POV: the unrest is presented as acts of ] by drunken ]s, without any political content. In the end we may have to create a page on ]. Right now we are not there yet. -- ] 13:00, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

:'''Strong Oppose:''' That article is just a duplication and very confusing. We now have a situation with updates taking place on two different articles covering the same topic. Important developments are expected within the next few days. Let this article be the sole and only article for that. ] 08:28, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


==Bronze Night==
::'''Already voted:''' To all of you opposers: you do realise that having only one article decreases possibilities covering the unrest (e.g. Claims of police brutality, external links to more info on looting and so on). -- ] 08:52, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Is it just me or is there a tendency to call the happenings surrounding the relocation of the statue the Bronze Night? So why don't we move forward with splitting up the article, make one about the statue and another about the Bronze Night?--] 01:59, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
: I think time is ready for that. Although you have to make sure the scope won't leave out following events and propaganda waves, or we need three articles instead. ] <small>]</small> 10:22, 17 September 2007 (UTC)


==Serious ] issues==
:::I think Telempe has good point. But right now that article is a complete disaster, and totally misses the point. For example: It doesn't deal with the background of the riots, and it actually implies that the international reaction is focused on the riots, and not the political controversy (more violent riots take place on a regular basis without any statesman rising an eyebrow). Although, it may have been created with a good intention, the article ís a kind of vandalism or ] which has become a major problem with Misplaced Pages. I would support a '''possible solution''', where the details of the riots are moved to a seperate article, with the major development (including the most important aspects of the riots, political reaction etc) left to this main article about the statue (which indeed has a greater political than artistic/architectual value. ] 09:05, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Folks, Looking through the article and the ongoing variable pace edit war it is clear that large parts of the article are being used for presenting material unrelated to the Memorial. Much of the article seems to cover a battle between Estonian and Russian viewpoints rather than anything directly related to the article's title. It is hard to see what a section like the "Accusations of glorification of fascism" is doing in the article if not to present someones dislike of Estonia(ns). Given the intemperate edit summaries being used I won't be foolish enough to add an {npov} tag but it is clearly not presenting a neutral point of view except in a few places. - ] ] 10:25, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
:Yes, I was thinking too that this article was becoming a coatrack. Is there a tag for coatrack issues to identify the dubious sections? ] 10:36, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
:: This has been gone through several times. Basically this article should talk about.


* Statue
:'''Support''' split. I believe the story around the monument was only the trigger point for the tensions that grow for decades the emphasis on the plight of the statue limits our abilities to tell the full story ] 09:37, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
* Construction, location
::Practically, it seems complicated, though, because if we make a separate article about the political contorvercy and riots, that article would probably need to include most of the facts of the monument (the trigger). Maybe this article should be '''renamed''' the ] - after all, very little in this article is focused on the very building and design of the monument, but mostly about the controvercy... ] 10:07, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
* Its history
* Controversy (not longer section than 3 - 4 paragraphs)
* See also links to other related events.


Other crap. Like timelines, responses, accusation sof nazism should be deleted or moved somewhere else. ] <small>]</small> 10:42, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
==] Afd-req ==
:Indeed the material should be deleted. I have little doubt it is a repeat of material elsewhere here. I may have a small attempt to see if the article can gradually be chipped into shape - ] ] 11:19, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Dear friends: We cannot have two different articles competing with the same updates. I've now pulled the emergency break. How can we solve this problem? What do you think? please, voice your opinion here: ''']''', ] 08:09, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


== Protection == ==Split?==
It was suggested before to split the article into two: an article about the 2007 controversy and an article about the structure itself with the link and a minimum commonly agreed factual text about the controversy. This proposal seems to be neutral over the different POVs but will greatly streamline the text allowing the chronological order in both articles.


Obviously the article about the structure does not need section about the alleged glorification of Nazism, human right problems in modern Estonia and very little or none about the annexation of Estonia and deportations in the post-War period.
Please protect this article. And add pov tag. The article is compromised with false statements and vandalism. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (]) 10:10, 30 April 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->
:I disagree. As it is now, article is pretty NPOV, especially considering the "hotness" of the topic. ] 10:50, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:Looking back, I would have hoped the that the page had been soft protected earlier. The page has received a barrage of edits from IPs in countries involved in the dispute. Most of these IPs have no other edits on Misplaced Pages; their edits on this page have been focused on POV pushing: edits wars over wording and deletion of sourced content they dislike. -- ] 12:38, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::This is a current event article, every minute something notable may happen and we would not be able to proper account the new info if the article is protected or even semiprotected. Having said this I would obviously approve any level of protection if the level of vandalism would become unbearable. IMHO, so far it not that bad ] 13:17, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:::I agree that this article needs semiprotection - it is blown up by irrelevant info already ] 19:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


On the other hand, in the article about the 2007 riots we have to mention annexation, deportation, Soviet crimes, etc. as without it the reasons for the relocation of the monument are unclear. On the other hand we have to explain the frustration of a large section of the Russophones with the human rights situation as well as the perception that the relocation of the monument is a link in the larger chain of rehabilitation and glorification of Nazism. Without it the position of the opponents of relocation including the rioters is absolutely unclear and the article is biased.
==September 22 ==
Was that day (anniversary of the Red Army entering Tallinn) officially observed in some way during the Soviet years? --] 10:24, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


As far as I rember the proposal was already stated in the past and rejected as it might compromise the chances of the article to get the GA status or something. It is not actual now maybe it is time to reconsider?
== Morning of 26.04 ==


At any rate there should be either all or none of the following:
It says in the article: "Members of protest organizers "Night Vigil" reported that police had attacked three of their members monitoring the situation in a car parked nearby, injuring one of them."
*Annexation
*Deportations and other Soviet crimes
*Rights of the Russophone minority
*Perception of the glorification of Nazism
None of the list is directly related to the structure all of them are directly related to the background of the 2007 controversy.
Inclusion of some points from the list and not the other makes the articles biased. Obviously we not need 20 page sections on any of the points but they should be present ] 12:50, 29 September 2007 (UTC)


::Considering that only yesterday, you were into the article, I do not think you have the article's best interests in mind with this proposal. ]<sub>]</sub> 14:17, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
This is not accurate as they were not monitoring the situation nearby, but their car was actually parked in the area which the police was clearing out and where no civilians were allowed. The police gave repeated orders to the three member of the "Night Vigil" to clear the area, but they locked themselves in the car and refused to leave. The police tried to get to make them leave peacefully, but as they refused to show any cooperation, the police had to break the car window and use force to get them out and during that one person obtained some minor injuries. With the current wording it seems as the police attacked them without any reason which is not true. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (]) 10:31, 30 April 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->


== Split ==
:Actually I think this should be removed, as it is not relevant to article and has only provocative meaning. ] 11:05, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Folks, it's an article about a statue/monument. Sure there has been a lot of ill-feeling, rioting, nationalistic fervour and dredging up of past misdeeds ''associated'' with the concept of the statue, but at the end it's a statue. The article is hardly about this now, is absurdly long, packed full of trivial and repetative detail and simply a vehicle for soviet/estonia/WWI/etc... opinions to be expressed . This talk page has been a ] for so long it's hard to find talk about the article at all. From the commentary on this page and in the archives it is clear that this is unlikely to change and the article will not improve.
: The injuries were caused by broken glass, as was the case with vast majority of injuries during the riots. ] 11:42, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::Any sources to back that up? ] 11:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::: This presse release byt Estoniain Foreign Ministry , quoting Estonian Health Care Board. ] 12:52, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:It is notable, as it shows the determination of the people protecting the memorial. Also provocations are likely to cause more violence later. -- ] 12:48, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


I can see that at various times many editors have supported the split. How about a rough straw poll on the split ? - ] ] 21:58, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
== References to russian media ==


:I'm all for it, just that , how about calling the split the ] or something like that? That's the way the events have been called in general.--] 22:10, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
The Russian media is running large provocative campaign by uttering lies towards the events. I don't think the estonian media is compromised by so hevay propaganda, but I still think neutral references should be used instead. BBC, CNN and other news sources seem to be more neutral. For example the arrest of and violence to the Night Vigil members is compromised by this issue. ] 11:00, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


::Usually the articles of that sort have more boring and longish names starting with the year like ] or ], etc. On the other hand is the ] name appear to be NPOV I would support it - at least it can be consistently typed without cut-n-paste. One of the problems is that we want to talk about at least two nights + background + epilogue. Would it be hindered by this to narrow name? ] 02:50, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
:Even BBC isn't neutral. For example, their correspondent who covers events in Estonia is in Moscow and uses Russian sources. ] 11:45, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::That is controversial issue, but they are definitely more neutral than russian media. We should possibly cite both russian and estonian sources for neutrality. ] 11:50, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


:Split supported. In fact, I tried once already, but the eternal SPA troublemakers stopped that horrible "estonazi" action. -- ] 02:53, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
== ] ==
What is known about the Estonian sculptor of the monument? --] 11:25, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::not much, I'm afraid;-)
:::If somebody reads Estonian and might be of some help ] 13:50, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::::Well, there are many people here, who do. And those who read Russian - there are many such people here as well - might ], former Estonian MP, son of the famour ].] 14:12, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:::::Have not found anything about Enn Roos in this interiew, maybe you misplaced the comment? ] 03:47, 1 May 2007 (UTC)


To ], I wouldn't see any problems with including + background + epilogue, + events before and after to an article about the ]. Every story has its prologue and epilogue, + BG.--] 06:53, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
==Update, new sections==
:], although not in common use in English language press, looks like a good name to start with. It appears to be a common name for the night and common names are what we should use. - ] ] 07:57, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
:: Actually it was Bronze Nights as there was two of them. ] <small>]</small> 08:07, 1 October 2007 (UTC)


:::Using the ever popular GoogleBattle, Bronze Night seems to be used far more -- ] 08:26, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm adding news about the current protests in Moscow against Estonia's policies. Also, Russia's delegation has arrived in Estonia and made its first declarations - those have to be covered as well. Wil lgive my best, unless the page gets semiprotected :S ] 11:50, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:::: That is logical. Because "On the first '''bronze night''', there were ....", "On the second '''bronze night''' there was...", so generally "'''Bronze nights''' were...". But article should talk about both bronze nights not about only one. ] <small>]</small> 08:32, 1 October 2007 (UTC)


I haven't seen or heard anybody talking about Bronze nights. Although the second night is the ripple effect and surely should be included and everything else that has anything to do with the Bronze night, the night the statue was relocated.--] 08:38, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
British reactions:
http://comment.independent.co.uk/leading_articles/article2496635.ece <br>
] 13:11, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


:Well, let us do the article as ] and redirect ] (and some other suggested names) there? Should be acceptable for everybody? -- ] 09:05, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
:Yeah! Maybe the British can recreate the ] to liberate the Balts from the evil ]s. -- ] 13:26, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:: Yes works for me. :) ] <small>]</small> 10:16, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
::Hmm, interesting... any links describing the campaign? I gather it's about British naval support for Estonian forces during the war of indepencence? ] 13:44, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:Any objections then if I do this in the next few days ? I was thiking of splitting off basically most of the article from ] onwards and leaving a small summary. That way we get an article about the statue and a separate one about the move and resulting echoes.] ] 09:54, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
::: See ]. - How is this related to the issue at hand. The Estonian view fails to acknowledge that Estonian independence was gained through two foreign occupations and interventions, against the wishes of a large portion of Estonians. (These same Estonians were demanding joining the Soviet Union in 1940 and fighting Nazis in 1944.) -- ] 14:09, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::Not from me. That split is needed - as is general cleanup. -- ] 10:18, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
::::::Estonia's independence gained 'against the wish of a large portion' of Estonians? Which figures lead you to conclude that? ] and ] didn't make up but a very SMALL portion of society in 1918-1920. Вот так, товарищ Крохн. ] 14:15, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::::::Would like to see a quote as well. During the interwar period, Estonian Communist Party's support hovered around 5%. Their smashing victory in 1940 elections can be attributed to ongoing Soviet military occupation (stand as non-communist, get visitors in middle of night) ] 14:39, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


:::I agree with the split. The sub-article can be could Bronze Nights i think. It looks nice. -- ] 11:39, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
:Petri, you are talking total bs. Support for independence was so strong in 191x that schoolboys joined ''en masse'' the Estonian army.
::::I totally agree too. I think that the events on that(these) night(s) were important enough for a separate article. Only the first 3 chapters and maybe a short roundup of the events should stay here. ] 21:40, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
:Why would anyone but small group (perhaps 15..20, with supporters maybe 300..400) of communists join Soviet Union in 1939? Estonia, with better living standards then Finland - and Soviet Union, with GULAG, famine, hunger. If you look at the photos of "mass meetings" from that time, you can actually see, how the meeting is surrounded by circle of Soviet soldiers/navy. First elections after the war reported "99.8%" support, while in some counties they had less then ten valid election tickets, according to the eyewitnesses. ] 14:36, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::Can't find a source, but remember reading that Estonian Communist Party had 53 card-carrying members pre-occupation in print media. ] 14:43, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
: Alternative Russian view http://www.dp.ru/msk/news/politics/2007/04/29/216245/ <br>
] 18:06, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


==The soldier is up==
The soldier is now at the cemetery of Estonian Defence League. Pic: http://www.epl.ee/pic.php?suurus=s&file=164643 (Reminds Batman, doesn't it?) The text in front of it reads "To an unknown soldier" in both Estonian and Russian. The stone wall will be added later since it'll take time to build it. ] 14:16, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:Sounds like the Grave of the Unknown Soldier. --] 14:22, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:This image settles it, I am restoring the ]. -- ] 14:24, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::Well, the Tallinn monument is history now... Maybe there are categories for ''relocated parts of monuments''? And, curiously enough, the statue actually comes out much better without the ''mastaba''. ] 14:28, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:::''Mastaba'' will be re-built later , may take up to a month - which is understandable, as it needs a solid base etc. And ] is totally invalid now, as statue was the important part of the memorial (hence ], not ]). Also, the name isn't invalid, as the military cemetery is in Tallinn as well. ] 14:43, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::::That's a pitty, because the bronze statue does look much more dignified without its back against a stone wall. ] 15:05, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:Reappearance of the bronze soldier threw Duma's factfinding mission off course. They canceled all appointments for today, including a press conference. ] 15:24, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::But they still want the Estonian Government to resign... Maybe the Duma deputies would better consult a Public Relations agency next time...] 16:52, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:A friend of mine now says that the "To the Unknown Soldier"-stone is ''not'' at all new, and that the bronze statue has been put behind the stone (grave?) probably only for the time being; there is simply not room enough for the stone wall to be erected behind the statue, unless other graves are removed... Can somebody confirm this? --] 16:35, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::The stone was there before, to accompany the graves that lie before it (military cemetery, after all). There are no graves in the bushes behind the statue, though. Check the video accompanying this newsbite: ] 17:28, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


'''Done''' - I've used the opening section of ] as the summary. It seems to cover all of the pertinent points without going into too much detail. I'll leave Bronze Night article for a few days but it really does need culling and editing to make it neutral and encyclopediac. - ] ] 09:01, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
==Helmet ==
What kind of helmet is depicted on the stone in front of the statue? It almost looks German! Pic: http://www.epl.ee/pic.php?suurus=s&file=164643 --] 14:38, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:Soviet make. German helmets had a distinctly different shape/profile. ] 14:40, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:The phrase "]" in the modern Estonian ] may however be a reference to the Estonian ]. -- ] 18:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:: Where did you hear/read that out? ] 18:54, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::Give it up. The stone was obviously placed there during soviet times, as though the main text is bilingual, the date is followed by cyrillic 'g.g.' - russian notation. ] 18:56, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:::Would it have been in Estonian and ''English'' had it been during post-Soviet rule? ;) --] 19:28, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::::Still estonian & russian, with possible addition of german & english. I was pointing out the 'g.g.' part. ] 20:17, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:::I've heard that the Estonian ''unknown soldier'' may refer to the ] (restistance movement). Right? ] 19:01, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::::There's a distinction between 'sõdur' (soldier) and "võitleja" (fighter). Forest brothers are described as "vabadusvõitleja" (freedom fighter), whereas "tundmatu sõdur" (unknown soldier) implies membership of a military. ] 20:17, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


== Historical background - section ==
==Graves==
According to , by this evening they've found nine coffins out of (possible) twelve, archaeological digging continues. They hope to identify the remains by end of May or early June. ] 14:53, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:So they are not expecting to find 13? Does it say if the coffins are marked with identity tags? ] 15:01, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:: 12 coffins were found, 2 rows of 6. 9 sets of remains will be recovered by tonight (archaeologists don't like to hurry). Coffins were identified by the help of archive photographs of burial - the handles were of same unusual make. ] 15:16, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:::Does anybody know why the soldiers were not buried in a military cemetery in the first place? --] 16:38, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::::I wonder this too. How they died and when? <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (]) 16:46, 30 April 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->
:::::This yet to be determined. The official sources are quite unclear about this. ] 16:48, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


Folks,
== War Graves Protection Act ==


This section clearly does not belong here. It appears to be another coatrack section designed to continue the battle raging here. Does anyone have any good reason that this section should not be removed ? - ] ] 11:15, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
The citation of "The law was passed to legitimize removal of the Bronze Soldier as it was not legally possible before." keeps appearing and disappearing in the article. The statement is somewhat correct, the main reason for this law was to protect/move the bronze soldier and war graves from the critical place. Although statement that it was not legal before are false. There is no law forbidding moving of statues and reburial of war graves. I wish this statement to be included, but modified to be NPOV. Here is also another source to claim the views but from different perspective: http://www.postimees.ee/290606/esileht/siseuudised/207552.php (Estonian) ] 17:28, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:Ok, i changed it. --] 18:45, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


I didn't come across the post here yesterday but I noticed the problem in the article. It looked like the Historical background had been left hanging there during the split and it actually is more the background for the reasons of removal rather than the monument. So I moved the section down there. The Historical background would have context with the Preceding monument though, the one that the girls blew up back then. But in current state it was way over proportioned. Also, the historical background for the removal reasons can be tightened up in this article and spelled out more in the Bronze Night. As long as it makes sense in the end why ''Estonians considered the Bronze Soldier a symbol of Soviet occupation and repression''. --] 06:22, 12 October 2007 (UTC)<br />
There's a whole paragraph discussing that the law was implemented in order to bypass local government, and further claims that local government most likely wouldn't have allowed the move. However, there are no citations for this, and it all adds up to speculation: The law covers all military graves in the country, not just this specific one. They are also moving military graves all over the country, not just Tallinn.
PS. Also, It seems that it's not spelled out in the article anywhere, and there are factual inaccuracies: previously the monument was called "to the Liberators of Tallinn" etc. now it says so on the tablet and it is Monument to perished during WWII.--] 06:22, 12 October 2007 (UTC)


== The Meeting in Tallin in commemoration of the Bronze Soldier relocation on April 26, 2007 ==
==Name of this article? ==
It has been suggested to rename this article to the ''']''', and at the same time merge and delete the article ] (which basically is a copy of parts of this article). Currently, there seems to be a ''']''' for deleting and merging the competing article. What do you think? --] 17:45, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:'''Neutral:''' Only a small fraction of this article is about the design and building of the monument. Creating a separate article about the reaction of the monument's relocation and exhumation of the corpses is practically difficult without creating another identical article about the monument. It's probably correct to assume that the monument was only the ''trigger'' of the current unrest, which has more to do with demographic problems etc. Yet, I think that the background information gives at least a ''somewhat'' good picture of the problem. Somebody said that the reaction was mainly symbolical, but the monument is also symbolic (as its ''artistic'' value is rather questionable - we are not really dealing with a Piccasso statue, or is its aristic value mainly ignored...). Therefore, I think that the suggestion is worth some consideration. ] 17:45, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:At the moment I '''oppose''' a rename. This article has been nominated a good article. It has also achieved a level of stability, despite the widely defering opinions and points of view. If we rename the article, then we would need to bring all the POV material to the intro. An impossible task at this point. -- ] 18:46, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:'''Weak Oppose'''. First of all, this article is not ''just'' about the controversy, but about the statue as well. To rename it to "Bronze Soldier controversy" would not be accurate. Although it may make sense to have two separate articles (one about the statue's history, etc, and one about the current controversy), there is no exact agreed-upon date for when the information relevant to the controversy begins, since most of the background information is relevant as well. I really think that for the moment, it is best to keep everything in one place. For a split to make sense, there needs to be a thorough discussion on the best way to split it. The article is just changing too quickly at the moment for any such discussion to be effective. I suggest that we keep everything in one place for now, and have a new vote to split it later on - in a few weeks at the earliest, maybe months (depending on how long this story takes to conclude). ] 20:27, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:'''Support''' --] 21:37, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::Just as a friendly note, a vote of support counts more if you give a persuasive reason. ] 23:15, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:::Ok, its because the article is now mostly about the events of April 2007, not directly connected to the statue itself, but rather inspired from it. --] 07:55, 1 May 2007 (UTC)


A meting held in Tallinn in commemoration of the Bronze Soldier relocation (that happened on April 26, 2007).
== City of Tallinn ==


April 26, 2008 - the defenders of the monument initiated the meeting. They demand to create the International Commission for detailed investigation of the events on April 26, 2007.
What is the position of the City of Tallinn on the location/relocation/removal/demolition of the monument? Have they made any ] plans for the park? Is it still zoned for the WW II memorial?
During the two days, April 26 and April 27, 1,500 people are arrested. 50 are injured, 1 dead.


http://news.mail.ru/politics/1731767/et
As I understand it, the removal is done against the wishes of the City and the ]. It is purely an ] operation orchestrated by the inner "national security council" of the ]. Unlike theethnically restricted ], the City of Tallinn has a "democratic" government, with electoral ] by the ]d ethnic minorities. I do not think the City or mayor ] would like to have any part in this demolition business. -- ] 19:41, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
] (]) 09:15, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
:Uh, what? Estonia is democratic country, accusing the military of meddling into civilian affairs is, frankly, absurd. Thanks for informing us about your pet theory, though. ] 20:30, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:Just to clarify on ] - all citizens of Estonia, regardless of ethnicity, are eligible to participate in the elections. Remember, a third of local russian-speaking population ''do'' have citizenship. ] 21:43, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


: Not to mention millions of dollars of damage done to private property by looters high on heroine and booze. Also, we shouldn't forget that most of the injured were police officers who got hit by a pavement stones or garbage bins, or the looters who got cut by broken glass while trying to get tampons out of the nearby kiosk. ] <small>]</small> 15:44, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
=== Ownership ===
Has the question of legal ownership been discussed? It seems to me, that the City of Tallinn ordered and paid for the construction of the monument. If so, how is it possible that the Estonian Defence Forces have ]/taken posession of the monument and the statue. Has the City of Tallinn made demands for their return? -- ] 19:46, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:I understand that the monumement was removed due to a new state law on "forbidden structures", (i.e. a kind of expropriation) and that law was challenged for not being constitutional - which might have been a question of violation of a fundamental right, such as property e.g. (our '''Estonian pundits probably know the details better'''). But, as the challenge was dismissed, the property in question was banned, and had to be removed, no matter who happend to own it. Maybe the owner, whoever that may be, can ask for legitimate compensation for his possible damage. Time will tell. ] 20:18, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::The owner was either the city of Tallinn, or the Government of Estonia. I've sent a couple of e-mails to people who should know it, but I'm not expecting a too hasty answer - it's ]. ] 20:30, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:::But tomorrow is ], an ordinary working day in post-communist Estonia? ] 20:33, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::::No, ] has no communist origin - it's an international holiday. In fact, most employers gave monday off as well, so people are having a nice 4-day long weekend over here. ] 20:42, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:::::This "international" day of labor celebration is not observed in countries such as the United Kingdom or the United States. And Soviet was supposed to be communist, even though modern socialist refrain from tagging this failed economic system as "true" communism.... The markets on Wall Street will be open as usually on May 1, but Estonians may have a day of hang-over and head aches instead. Which they certainly deserve after all this turmoil. ] 20:52, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:::Apparently the lockdown on alcohol sales has limited people's Walpurgisnacht enjoyment as well. As I was told, the park the statue was located at belongs to city, but the state claims all military memorials in public spaces. ] 21:28, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::No, that's not the law. The monument has been removed in accordance with another law, the Law on War Graves. The proposed law on Forbidden Structures was vetoed by the President and never became law. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (]) 22:48, 30 April 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->
::Evidently the bare statue cannot be banned as it is now being set up by the Defence Forces. Also our Estonian pundits are claiming / reading from Estonian language sources that the whole mastaba would be rebuilt. What we end up is a ] process where the pieces will return to their legal owner, once the evil spell of their Soviet dedication have been removed by a re-dedication by the Estonian (some say Ethnofascist) government. -- ] 20:34, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:::Blast, I _knew_ someone would come up with a better idea once I picked my name. Anyway,it's a purely civilian operation. Reassembly of the mastaba (nice how fast we settled on a name for it) is delayed as the foundations need to be poured - and the construction-site look was deemed unsuitable for Alyosha on 9th May. ] 20:42, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::::Just my speculation: Technically the law banned the public display of monuments that glorify the Soviet Union, which this monument certainly did on its location in a busy intersection downtown the capital of Tallinn. By incorporating the monument in a context of a regular military cemetary outside the city, its glorification of the dead would be less controversial, or say: more ''justified''. ] 20:46, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:::::I'll answer with a speculation of my own: the relocation is partially designed to change the meaning of the monument, from 'Monument for Soviet Liberators' to 'Monument to Honor War Dead', as the 'soviet' connotation was what kept annoying local population, together with the display of soviet flags ever 9th May. ] 21:28, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::::::Yeah! A bit like relocating the ] to ] and renaming it ]. Now, THAT would solve a lot of problems! -- ] 22:42, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::::::Officially, the statue is now considered a grave marker, and it is relocated as a part of the relocation of war victims' graves from an unsuitable place onto a proper graveyard. The Law of War Graves was necessary for that because Estonia does not have a mutual war grave protection treaty with Russia, whose soldiers most or all of the victims in question were. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (]) 22:52, 30 April 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->


Reference is needed to the statements by ]. ] (]) 23:57, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
== Photos of relocation ==


: Talk pages don't necessarily require references. This was all reported on the news. —] (]) 02:54, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
http://news.mail.ru/politics/1317880/


== Denial-of-service attack ==
This is the new site for the Bronze Soldier ] 19:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC) ZealotKommunizma


The article is missing info on this; see --] (]) 13:10, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
::Here's another video as well (scroll down): http://www.postimees.ee/010507/esileht/siseuudised/258058.php. It's apparent that the photoshopped pictures distributed by the government about Alyosha's new location depict the very same spot (bar the mastaba for now). ] 21:34, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


:It should be mentioned in ], which is referenced in the ] article. This article is about the statue itself, for the political and criminal consequences, those other articles are more suitable. ] (]) 19:17, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
:::That picture was done by Postimees, not the govt. - ] 21:43, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::Don't you think there should at least be a sentence or two mentioning the attacks with an in-text link to the other article? --] (]) 06:09, 4 June 2008 (UTC)


== Another edit war ==
::::I stand corrected. Still, it did depict the right spot. ] 22:09, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


Folks, over a dozen pointless revert edits about a picture. Pointless as no one is discussing the dispute here on the talk page. Can you please come here to talk through the issue then edit the article once consensus is clear ? - ] ] 21:00, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
==Video from inside the tent ==
: Smiling. Amazing collusion is going on. Interesting timing of events. His mate once again deletes the picture with vague explanations ''' 21.01''' and requests the page to be protected '''21.04 '''. Then his reply about the so called "another edit war" '''21.00''' ] (]) 00:00, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Tonight, Russian television broadcasted a video taken from the inside of the tent, showing forensic experts digging in what appeared to be a 2 meter deep hole and possibly some bones in the bottom of the grave. ] 20:24, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::You have the timing wrong there - Martin left the talk page message after I pointed out the idiocy of this. As for the ''mate'' bit - look at the map....Australia is a very big place full of lots of strangers. Perhaps you will discuss your point of view on the article here now ? - ] ] 04:21, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
:Same on Estonian TV news. Apparently recovery of second row is somewhat more difficult, due to the bus stop, and the trees around it having grown their roots through those. ] 20:45, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Flowers on the former site are fine. Signs threatening "I'll be back" (as in fringe threats of invasion) does little to inform an article about the statue and serves only to push an anti-Estonian POV. —] (]) 02:17, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


:The reason I removed the pic the moment I noticed it was explained in the edit history. This is a political poster that violates ] and ] . The origin of this quote "I'll be back" comes from the withdrawing Russian troops that had the line written on their trucks when they pulled out from the Baltic states. Therefore the poster suggest for the return of occupation and it is a Russian ultra-nationalist statement and should be removed from WP because it violates the policies mentioned above--] (]) 05:06, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
==Mastaba! ==
Misplaced Pages seems to set the trend: A Google-search on Mastaba+Tallinn generates 319 hits. That is roughly 319 more than just a week ago... ] 21:03, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


::I'd request Beatle Fab Four not restore the picture the next time it is deleted. It is, indeed, a POLITICAL poster representing anti-Estonian "we'll invade them again" threats. I would consider such action similar to past edits which appear to push an anti-Estonian/Baltic POV, as an example, Beatle Fab Four's edits and . —] (]) 14:51, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
== ] ==
::: Nonsense, own research and throlling. Reasoning like that of kids. "I'll be back" is from Terminator by the same stupid analogy. ] (]) 16:28, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


I don't know.. can anybody explain this posters meaning and what value does it add to the article? The message itself is quite bizarre, in Estonian and in Russian it actually says "I'm back", in English it says "I'll be back". I personally don't agree that this sentence has some kind of hidden deep meaning, like suggested above and consider whole poster as total nonsense (however, this suggestion brought one recollection, couple of years ago on the tribunes of the Estonian-Russian football match there were some football-fans from Russia, with USSR flags and with banner "Masters are back", masters as "proprietors" - хозяйны)) - so maybe there really is some hidden meaning I don't know or remember anymore. Anyway, I would delete this picture too, but only on the basis that it's message is quite unclear and it doesn't add anything substantial to the article.
Someone made a POV pushing attempt at adding unrelated material to the page. I used the material to create ]. -- ] 21:31, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:Thank you. Though factually correct, it has no place here. ] 21:38, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


BTW, Beatle Fab Four, your statements are starting to look like personal attacks, so please, tone down your rhetorics. ] (]) 18:21, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
==Pro-riot propaganda ==
This entry was recently deleted as vandalism, but I think it should be further reviewed, as the "Russian" perspective is also valuable in order to understand the conflict:


:Compared to the thousands of flowers on the site, this single political poster indicates a tiny minority viewpoint and thus its presentation here is undue. ] (]) 20:57, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
<blockquote>
::: Ha-ha-ha. The poster simbolizes the virtual presense of the monument on the original site. Flowers on the same original site simbolize the same thing. Even kids can understand that. ] (]) 21:25, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
==Pro-riot propaganda ==
::::No, it is a picture of an Estonian deportee who was dragooned into the Red Army but escaped across the frontline to the Finnish side at the first opportunity. ] (]) 22:44, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Before and during the events strong propaganda war as launched to upset the Russian speaking population. A photo shopped picture was circulated that depicted the statue sawed of at feet. Strong effort was put into trying to depict Estonia as a fascist country resulting in videos of arrests made by police in the first night of rioting being posted on YouTube tagged as "eSStonia" and while being actual videos showing only police action not the causes for the actions, like looting of shops. Leader of the Constitutional party Andrei Zarenkov claimed on Friday morning that the bones had already been dug up and thrown away and the statue cut to pieces and scraped and was never going to be restored <ref name=polling> ] ] ]</ref>. A day later the same man claimed that more than 350 ethnic Russian police officers have already or will be resigning shortly in protest to having to discipline rioters. His claims were soon said to be an outright lie by police officials ] ] ].
::::: Weeeeell, Peripitus, you can clearly see the root of the problem. ] (]) 22:49, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
</blockquote>
::::::??? Something factually incorrect about my statement? ] (]) 22:58, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
--] 21:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:::: Whose presence, Palusalu's or Bronze Soldier's? Yes, there is one theory that Palusalu could be the prototype of the Bronze Soldier, but I don't think that anybody could argue about their virtual equality in current context, nobody connects them on that level, I could bet that 99% Estonian people (including local Russians) don't even know this fact. ] (]) 10:54, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Folks, would this be solved by removing the entire gallery and adding a {{tl|commonscat}} link at the bottom. Galleries are usually discouraged here as that is what commons is for. ] ] 21:29, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
{{commonscat|Bronze Soldier of Tallinn}}
: Really? What about here and here . Peripitus, the problem is not in the gallery, the problem is that someone can't grow up. ] (]) 21:43, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
::]. I think ] makes a good suggestion. I would support moving the entire gallery to commons. ] (]) 22:44, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
: Support. But I can already see what is going to happen... ] (]) 10:54, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


== Sourcing ==
:Oh, well, somebody put it back again... --] 21:57, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


I've just noticed that all 18 sources are either pro-Estonian or anti-Russian. Is there a reason for this? ] (]) 10:21, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
==Law enforcement for non-nationals ==
Heading: "Law enforcement response": ''An estimated of 40-60 of the rioters were not citizens of Estonia, and were residing in Estonia under residence permits. The law enforcement and the Immigration Office are reportedly working on getting them exiled through revocation of the residence permits, pending conviction in a court of law.''
:What is the status of permanent Estonian residents with Russian citizenship? I understand, there are many of those living in Estonia. Do they also risk being expelled to Russia if convicted? ] 22:10, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::That's whom that quote descibed (where from?). About a third of ethnic russians in Estonia have Russian citizenship, and they could, tehnically, have their residence permits revoked. Those with 'alien's passport' can _not_ be expelled, as there's no place to expel them to. (Coincidentially, that's claimed to be a reason why Russian attempts to have all non-citizens take on Russian citizenship havent' been very successful). Anyway, in a TV interview today, foreign minister Urmas Paet said that expulsion isn't considered a realistic option, apart from one detained russian national who broke the conditions of his tourist visa by participating in the riots. He has already been handed over to Russian authorities on border. ] 22:24, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::The central issue here is about citizenship. Two thirds of the 1/2 million ethnic Russians are without citizenship. I am astonished if only 60 of the almost 1000 arrested are without Estonian citizenship, I would assume the numbers were the other way around: 60 of one thousend had Estonian citizenship. -- ] 22:28, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:::Well, most of those detained were released the next morning, after they were identified. Judges only granted longer detainment for those whose active participation in riots was positively proven by evidence on hand. While at it, you're wrong about 2/3 having no citizenship (half of them are Russian nationals), and there are 350k, not half a million ethnic russians in Estonia. ] 22:37, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:For "technical reasons" expulsion to Russia is not possible for anyone. Russia will simply refuse to accept any expelled Estonian residents, even if they have taken Russian citizenship. Estonia manitains a kind of "concentration camp" for people it wants to expel but Russia refuses to accept. At the moment the camp only houses a few ex-Soviet military retirees. -- ] 22:34, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:: Whatever the place is, it isn't a "concentration camp". If you insist of calling it that way then you should be aware that even Finland has similar institutions/places for the same purpose. ] 05:54, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
:Ah, stupid me - the quote was from the article itself. I'm sorry to say, the referenced newspaper article has been mistranslated. It's saying it 'would be legally possible' to deport foreign nationals who took part of the riots, not that 'it's being worked on'. ] 22:37, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::I understand that the Estonian police is known to be relatively competent in solving crime. Some years ago, a foreign businessman was murdered in Tallinn and the Police ''started'' the investigation by saying: "We'll have the murderer within 48 hours", and so they did! (We shall hope they caught the right guy..) Regarding all surveilance cameras and private pictures and video clips from the crime scene, the local prosecutors may have a busy time to look forward to. --] 22:39, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:::They had 16-hour workdays after the riot nights, so you could say they already have their hands full of work (my information on this aspect comes directly from one of them, a personal friend). Police asked for extension of the nominal 48-hour maximum detainment for majority of detainees - to have enough time for processing all photographic and video evidence, but judges blocked all cases for which the evidence at hand wasn't good enough. Thus, their personals were taken down and they walked out. ] 22:46, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::::I would guess that even if they could walk out, they didn't automatically escape justice. Or is the legal enforcement so overwhelmed with cases that many of the criminal acts would just be written off? ] 22:59, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:::::Not overwhelmed, but everyone was working serious overtime (only 4 prosecutors, for example). Those who walked (or, in many cases, were picked up by parents) were identified, photographed, had their fingerprints taken, etc. The circumstances of their arrests are on file. ] 23:13, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, to sum things up - source has been misquoted. ] 23:20, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


: Could you clarify, please? What do you exactly mean with "pro-estonian" and "anti-russian"? And how do you define those categories in given context? ] (]) 12:24, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
==Historical comparison ==
The Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt pointed out that he understands why the popular reaction about the statue has been so sharp:
"If somebody had errected a statue of King Christian the Tyrant in Stockholm 500 years after , it would also have been subject for controversy."
:This unexpected twist must be music to Estonian's ears. Although, the statement sound like having been delivered at 3am at a party with too much hard liquor. ;) ] 22:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::Nice comparison, though I've read better: ''Imagine a statue honoring Japanese liberators on ]''. ] 22:56, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:::In Denmark, king Christian the Tyrant (a "liberator" who organized one of the worst massacres in Swedish history) is curiously enough called "Christian the Good". Reminds me of some Russian perception of "Great Soviet leaders" in the last couple of days... ] 23:03, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::::If it had not been for ], the "] of the North", you too would be calling him Good. Bildt really fails to see the big picture. -- ] 23:08, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:::::''Pol Pot of the North'', sounds like the Finnish tabloid reporter H. Lindqvist? --] 23:15, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:Such comparisons are totally BS, they fail to take into account the fact that the Soviet Union DID win the war against fascism, AND Estonia has a half a million ex-Soviet residents. If Hitler had won the war, there would be a statue of him in central Moscow and 5 million Germans saluting it. So what! -- ] 23:05, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::That's the thing. Who Soviets fought against and whether they won or not doesn't enter the equation. It's about the brutal occupation of Estonia. If a rapist has great CV and wonderful references, he's still a rapist. ] 23:10, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::Well, after the war, Estonia became a closed military zon for more than 40 years, with purges and a demographic churn that turned the poor country upside-down! --] 23:12, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:::To all of you: Please look at the notice at the top of the page: '''"This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject."''' If you can't say something relevant to the improvement of this article, '''don't say anything at all!''' ] 23:17, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::::"they fail to take into account the fact that the Soviet Union DID win the war against fascism". So you're saying Soviet Union fought against Mussolini? Interesting.. ] 08:39, 1 May 2007 (UTC)


There has a lot of political commentary sneaked in again over time into this article. Please note that all propaganda articles that are straight out lies are going to be removed from this article. For example claiming that ''Estonian nationalists reportedly tried to put a wreath of barbed wire decorated with a swastika on the statue.'' That's not what you'd call ]. Please stick to <u>reliable, third-party, published sources</u> while editing this article! POV can be tolerated only if it;d say that Russia Today claims this and that. But since the report about swastika is a straight out lie, I think the text should be just removed.--] (]) 05:38, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
== DDoS attacks ==


: Russia Today is the mouthpiece of the Russian Federation. Completely unreliable with regard to anything about the Baltic states in particular. ] <SMALL><SMALL><span style="background-color:#a12830;">&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="background-color:#ffffff;">&nbsp;</span><span style="background-color:#a12830;">&nbsp;&nbsp;</span></SMALL> ]</SMALL> 00:52, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
From news: The ] attacks crippling access to Estonian governmental sites from outside world aren't the usual, distributed ] type. Incoming connections have been traced to ]s used by Russian government. ] 23:19, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:If verified, it should be added to the text. ] 23:23, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::It was Minister of Justice who claimed it. I'll try to dig up an actual linkable quote (in english) tomorrow morning, best I can do right now is (in estonian). Won't edit anything here until I've worked my way through the rules and regulations governing submissions. ] 23:33, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
:This was also reported on Finnish (]?) TV news. The source of the traffic was not attributed to Russia but to armies of hijacked ] machines troughout the world. -- ] 23:48, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
::Naturally, as most major botnets are attributed to russian hackers, these being put to use was expected. Usual botnet activity shows a distributed pattern, though, apparently in this case abnormally large chunk of connections come from abovementioned IP ranges. Or (and that's a scary thought), Russian govt computers have been infiltrated by botnets. ] 23:54, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


== Motions for "destruction" ==
==Failed GA==
All the posturing over destruction of monuments is interesting, but my understanding is that there are treaties between the Baltic states and Russia regarding the ''preservation of war memorials''. Let's make clear what contentions and motions are rhetoric and which are not. Not a single war memorial anywhere has been destroyed or will be destroyed. Yet blogs are full of invective over Estonians destroying monuments to and graves of fallen Soviet soldiers. ] <SMALL><SMALL><span style="background-color:#a12830;">&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="background-color:#ffffff;">&nbsp;</span><span style="background-color:#a12830;">&nbsp;&nbsp;</span></SMALL> ]</SMALL> 00:50, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
indicates that the article is nowhere ''near'' stable. ] 02:57, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
==File:Bronze Soldier of Tallinn, 2007.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion==
*It's probably impossible for an article like this to meet all GA-criterias while being featured on ITN. Having followed the article for the last couple of days, I'm more surprized of its comparably high level of stability. --] 07:39, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
{|
|-
| ]
| An image used in this article, ], has been nominated for speedy deletion at ] for the following reason: ''Other speedy deletions''
;What should I do?
''Don't panic''; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Misplaced Pages. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is ] then you may need to upload it to Misplaced Pages (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no ] then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try ]


''This notification is provided by a Bot'' --] (]) 03:52, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
==Juhan Kivirähk ==
|}
News media have found resentment among the Estonians! Referring to Estonian newspapers who are quoting an Estonian sociologist named ] who is critizing the Goverment and asks for its resignation. According to Kivirähk, the Estonian government created the riots in order to show the world that it was impossible to negoitate with the Russians. This seems interesting (who is Juhan Kivirähk?), but we need direct sources to confirm this story! --] 09:14, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
: Everyone is free to speculate, but it does not prove anything about the case at hand. ] 09:30, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
:This is already mentioned in the article. But Juhan Kivirähk is some random sociologist who thought it was his time to shine. It's not really notable figure, or atleast he wasn't befor these events and his statement. ] 09:33, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
::He had some social study & poll company named Emor, IIRC. --] 09:42, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
::He's held in fairly high regard, so definitely not an unknown. This refers to his op-ed piece is one of Estonia's larges daily newspapers ] on 30/04. It has caused quite a ruckus, drawing many counterarguments from his colleagues, as he's been the only notable figure to have voiced such opinion apart from ] (Centrist party, Estonian ''de facto'' russian party) functionaries. ] 10:12, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
::His connections with keskerakond are also ruomored, his beliefs to be one with keskerakond are confirmed. ] 11:00, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
:::Another Sociologist named ] also expressed his concerns about the whole issue and so did 12 professors of Estonian Universities '''before the whole mess''' ] 11:08, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
::::Andrus Saar was one of those critisising Kivirähk's article, and last night 28 professors of Estonian universities (estonians, ethnic russians, western nationals) sent an open letter in support of govt. ] 11:12, 1 May 2007 (UTC)


== The Heroization of the deceased rioter == == The Red Army wasn't Russian but multinational ==


] (]) 11:03, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Should we mention this in pro-rioter propaganda. As the deceased Dmitri who got stabbed during the riots is largely heroized in russian media as one who gave his life protecting the holy statue. Statements go as far as blaming police in killing him. The information from eye-witnesses suggest that he was killed in conflict with other mareuders over a pair of jeans or something. Police hasn't confirmed anything concrete, but has denied any connetions between the death of the Dmitri and police activity. Also the police is holding someone named Oleg in captive as the suspect of murdering Dmitri. We need some sources to confirm both the russian media attitude towards the event and official and eye-witness statements. ] 09:39, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
:Accoring to Russian News show ''Vesti'', demonstrators are surrounding the Estonian Embassy in Moscow in a peaceful rememberance of Dimitri. ] 09:46, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
::Their actions are nothing but peaceful. (sarcasm) ] 10:02, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
::Yesterday a pregnant woman managed to escape the peaceful rememberance vigil with her small child, and the ambassador (with eventual assistance from militia) could get out to attend one meeting. Apart from that, the embassy is completely blockaded. ] 10:15, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
:::Sources sources! I can find estonian ones myself, but I am currently more interested in russian ones. ] 10:21, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
::::According to the Russian news show ''Vesti'', the Estonian Consulte at Moscow (where the peaceful demontration takes place) is currently not issuing viza to Estonia. An upset woman - who had her viza application delayed - was interviewed, comparing Estonia with ''fascism''. One might wonder if she ever gets her viza... Actually, I think that kind of news reports ("We present the propaganda - you decide") are more honest than they appear to be in the first place. ] 10:55, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
::::This article ] ''Russian youth organisations have blockaded Estonian embassy'' confirms the fact of blockade, quoting embassy workers. 'Pregnant woman evacuated with OMON assistance' is also mentioned. ] 11:16, 1 May 2007 (UTC)


== Common name? ==
== Arguable relevance of sections 3.2-5 and their excessive POV ==


This statue is broadly known as “The Unknown Rapist”, why is this fact no longer mentioned? —] (]) <!--Template:Undated--><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added 15:21, 7 March 2022 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
I'd argue that Claims of police brutality, Situation at the Estonian embassy in Moscow, Pro-rioter propaganda and Law enforcement response sections are irrelevant to statue itself but rather are excessive POV of both sides. ] 11:02, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
:Since we are dealing with "the worst riots seen in Estonia", the claims (and denials) of police brutality are justified. ] 11:03, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
:I don't agree, as the whole article tries to concentrate on the events surrounding the bronze soldier, not only the statue itself, otherwise it would only talk about the contstruciton of the solider and controversy section would only contain: "The statue was relocated because of the ethnic estonian and russian different representation of history". We should rather concentrate on keeping those sections NPOV. ] 11:05, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
:I think they should remain, and it would be obviously relevant if the article was renamed "Bronze soldier controversy".--] 11:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
::Right now, it is agreed that the article is dealing with the Monument + Controversy. ] 11:07, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
:::I removed some of the POV tags. And I plan to remove others after I have reviewed the content. Shall we call some sort of vote on the relevance? ] 11:15, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
::::This concerns the problem with competing articles. Let's stick to the agreement from previous votes for the time being. ] 11:21, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 05:07, 12 February 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Bronze Soldier of Tallinn article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
Former good article nomineeBronze Soldier of Tallinn was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 1, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
July 16, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
Current status: Former good article nominee
This article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconSoviet Union Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconEstonia Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconBronze Soldier of Tallinn is part of WikiProject Estonia, a project to maintain and expand Estonia-related subjects on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.EstoniaWikipedia:WikiProject EstoniaTemplate:WikiProject EstoniaEstonia
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
To-do list:

 Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
WikiProject iconRussia: Visual arts / History / Military / Politics and law Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Misplaced Pages.
To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the visual arts in Russia task force.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the history of Russia task force.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Russian, Soviet, and CIS military history task force.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the politics and law of Russia task force.
WikiProject iconArchitecture Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconVisual arts: Public art
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the public art task force.
WikiProject iconDeath C‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath
CThis article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconMilitary history: Memorials / Baltic states / European / Russian & Soviet / World War II Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.
B checklist
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
  1. Referencing and citation: criterion not met
  2. Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met
  3. Structure: criterion met
  4. Grammar and style: criterion met
  5. Supporting materials: criterion met
Associated task forces:
/ 
Taskforce icon
Military memorials and cemeteries task force
Taskforce icon
Baltic states military history task force
Taskforce icon
European military history task force
Taskforce icon
Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force
Taskforce icon
World War II task force

Archives
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3
Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6
Archive 7Archive 8

Bronze Night

Is it just me or is there a tendency to call the happenings surrounding the relocation of the statue the Bronze Night? So why don't we move forward with splitting up the article, make one about the statue and another about the Bronze Night?--Termer 01:59, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

I think time is ready for that. Although you have to make sure the scope won't leave out following events and propaganda waves, or we need three articles instead. Владимир И. Сува Чего? 10:22, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Serious coatrack issues

Folks, Looking through the article and the ongoing variable pace edit war it is clear that large parts of the article are being used for presenting material unrelated to the Memorial. Much of the article seems to cover a battle between Estonian and Russian viewpoints rather than anything directly related to the article's title. It is hard to see what a section like the "Accusations of glorification of fascism" is doing in the article if not to present someones dislike of Estonia(ns). Given the intemperate edit summaries being used I won't be foolish enough to add an {npov} tag but it is clearly not presenting a neutral point of view except in a few places. - Peripitus (Talk) 10:25, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I was thinking too that this article was becoming a coatrack. Is there a tag for coatrack issues to identify the dubious sections? Martintg 10:36, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
This has been gone through several times. Basically this article should talk about.
  • Statue
  • Construction, location
  • Its history
  • Controversy (not longer section than 3 - 4 paragraphs)
  • See also links to other related events.

Other crap. Like timelines, responses, accusation sof nazism should be deleted or moved somewhere else. Suva Чего? 10:42, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Indeed the material should be deleted. I have little doubt it is a repeat of material elsewhere here. I may have a small attempt to see if the article can gradually be chipped into shape - Peripitus (Talk) 11:19, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Split?

It was suggested before to split the article into two: an article about the 2007 controversy and an article about the structure itself with the link and a minimum commonly agreed factual text about the controversy. This proposal seems to be neutral over the different POVs but will greatly streamline the text allowing the chronological order in both articles.

Obviously the article about the structure does not need section about the alleged glorification of Nazism, human right problems in modern Estonia and very little or none about the annexation of Estonia and deportations in the post-War period.

On the other hand, in the article about the 2007 riots we have to mention annexation, deportation, Soviet crimes, etc. as without it the reasons for the relocation of the monument are unclear. On the other hand we have to explain the frustration of a large section of the Russophones with the human rights situation as well as the perception that the relocation of the monument is a link in the larger chain of rehabilitation and glorification of Nazism. Without it the position of the opponents of relocation including the rioters is absolutely unclear and the article is biased.

As far as I rember the proposal was already stated in the past and rejected as it might compromise the chances of the article to get the GA status or something. It is not actual now maybe it is time to reconsider?

At any rate there should be either all or none of the following:

  • Annexation
  • Deportations and other Soviet crimes
  • Rights of the Russophone minority
  • Perception of the glorification of Nazism

None of the list is directly related to the structure all of them are directly related to the background of the 2007 controversy. Inclusion of some points from the list and not the other makes the articles biased. Obviously we not need 20 page sections on any of the points but they should be present Alex Bakharev 12:50, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Considering that only yesterday, you were pushing this joke into the article, I do not think you have the article's best interests in mind with this proposal. ΔιγυρενΕμπροσ! 14:17, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Split

Folks, it's an article about a statue/monument. Sure there has been a lot of ill-feeling, rioting, nationalistic fervour and dredging up of past misdeeds associated with the concept of the statue, but at the end it's a statue. The article is hardly about this now, is absurdly long, packed full of trivial and repetative detail and simply a vehicle for soviet/estonia/WWI/etc... opinions to be expressed . This talk page has been a forum for so long it's hard to find talk about the article at all. From the commentary on this page and in the archives it is clear that this is unlikely to change and the article will not improve.

I can see that at various times many editors have supported the split. How about a rough straw poll on the split ? - Peripitus (Talk) 21:58, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm all for it, just that , how about calling the split the Bronze night or something like that? That's the way the events have been called in general.--Termer 22:10, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Usually the articles of that sort have more boring and longish names starting with the year like 2007 Tallinn riots or 2007 controversies over the relocation of the Bronze Soldier monument, etc. On the other hand is the Bronze night name appear to be NPOV I would support it - at least it can be consistently typed without cut-n-paste. One of the problems is that we want to talk about at least two nights + background + epilogue. Would it be hindered by this to narrow name? Alex Bakharev 02:50, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Split supported. In fact, I tried once already, but the eternal SPA troublemakers stopped that horrible "estonazi" action. -- Sander Säde 02:53, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

To Alex Bakharev, I wouldn't see any problems with including + background + epilogue, + events before and after to an article about the Bronze night. Every story has its prologue and epilogue, + BG.--Termer 06:53, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Bronze night, although not in common use in English language press, looks like a good name to start with. It appears to be a common name for the night and common names are what we should use. - Peripitus (Talk) 07:57, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Actually it was Bronze Nights as there was two of them. Suva Чего? 08:07, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Using the ever popular GoogleBattle, Bronze Night seems to be used far more -- Sander Säde 08:26, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
That is logical. Because "On the first bronze night, there were ....", "On the second bronze night there was...", so generally "Bronze nights were...". But article should talk about both bronze nights not about only one. Suva Чего? 08:32, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I haven't seen or heard anybody talking about Bronze nights. Although the second night is the ripple effect and surely should be included and everything else that has anything to do with the Bronze night, the night the statue was relocated.--Termer 08:38, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, let us do the article as Bronze Night and redirect Bronze Nights (and some other suggested names) there? Should be acceptable for everybody? -- Sander Säde 09:05, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Yes works for me. :) Suva Чего? 10:16, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Any objections then if I do this in the next few days ? I was thiking of splitting off basically most of the article from Bronze_Soldier_of_Tallinn#Controversy onwards and leaving a small summary. That way we get an article about the statue and a separate one about the move and resulting echoes.Peripitus (Talk) 09:54, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Not from me. That split is needed - as is general cleanup. -- Sander Säde 10:18, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
I agree with the split. The sub-article can be could Bronze Nights i think. It looks nice. -- Magioladitis 11:39, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
I totally agree too. I think that the events on that(these) night(s) were important enough for a separate article. Only the first 3 chapters and maybe a short roundup of the events should stay here. H2ppyme 21:40, 6 October 2007 (UTC)


Done - I've used the opening section of Bronze Night as the summary. It seems to cover all of the pertinent points without going into too much detail. I'll leave Bronze Night article for a few days but it really does need culling and editing to make it neutral and encyclopediac. - Peripitus (Talk) 09:01, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Historical background - section

Folks,

This section clearly does not belong here. It appears to be another coatrack section designed to continue the battle raging here. Does anyone have any good reason that this section should not be removed ? - Peripitus (Talk) 11:15, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I didn't come across the post here yesterday but I noticed the problem in the article. It looked like the Historical background had been left hanging there during the split and it actually is more the background for the reasons of removal rather than the monument. So I moved the section down there. The Historical background would have context with the Preceding monument though, the one that the girls blew up back then. But in current state it was way over proportioned. Also, the historical background for the removal reasons can be tightened up in this article and spelled out more in the Bronze Night. As long as it makes sense in the end why Estonians considered the Bronze Soldier a symbol of Soviet occupation and repression. --Termer 06:22, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
PS. Also, It seems that it's not spelled out in the article anywhere, and there are factual inaccuracies: previously the monument was called "to the Liberators of Tallinn" etc. now it says so on the tablet and it is Monument to perished during WWII.--Termer 06:22, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

The Meeting in Tallin in commemoration of the Bronze Soldier relocation on April 26, 2007

A meting held in Tallinn in commemoration of the Bronze Soldier relocation (that happened on April 26, 2007).

April 26, 2008 - the defenders of the monument initiated the meeting. They demand to create the International Commission for detailed investigation of the events on April 26, 2007. During the two days, April 26 and April 27, 1,500 people are arrested. 50 are injured, 1 dead.

http://news.mail.ru/politics/1731767/et Victor V V (talk) 09:15, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Not to mention millions of dollars of damage done to private property by looters high on heroine and booze. Also, we shouldn't forget that most of the injured were police officers who got hit by a pavement stones or garbage bins, or the looters who got cut by broken glass while trying to get tampons out of the nearby kiosk. Suva Чего? 15:44, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Reference is needed to the statements by Suva. Victor V V (talk) 23:57, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Talk pages don't necessarily require references. This was all reported on the news. —PētersV (talk) 02:54, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Denial-of-service attack

The article is missing info on this; see --Espoo (talk) 13:10, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

It should be mentioned in 2007 cyberattacks on Estonia, which is referenced in the Bronze Night article. This article is about the statue itself, for the political and criminal consequences, those other articles are more suitable. Martintg (talk) 19:17, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Don't you think there should at least be a sentence or two mentioning the attacks with an in-text link to the other article? --Kraftlos (talk) 06:09, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Another edit war

Folks, over a dozen pointless revert edits about a picture. Pointless as no one is discussing the dispute here on the talk page. Can you please come here to talk through the issue then edit the article once consensus is clear ? - Peripitus (Talk) 21:00, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Smiling. Amazing collusion is going on. Interesting timing of events. His mate once again deletes the picture with vague explanations 21.01 and requests the page to be protected 21.04 . Then his reply about the so called "another edit war" 21.00 Beatle Fab Four (talk) 00:00, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
You have the timing wrong there - Martin left the talk page message after I pointed out the idiocy of this. As for the mate bit - look at the map....Australia is a very big place full of lots of strangers. Perhaps you will discuss your point of view on the article here now ? - Peripitus (Talk) 04:21, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Flowers on the former site are fine. Signs threatening "I'll be back" (as in fringe threats of invasion) does little to inform an article about the statue and serves only to push an anti-Estonian POV. —PētersV (talk) 02:17, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

The reason I removed the pic the moment I noticed it was explained in the edit history. This is a political poster that violates WP:Point and WP:BATTLEGROUND . The origin of this quote "I'll be back" comes from the withdrawing Russian troops that had the line written on their trucks when they pulled out from the Baltic states. Therefore the poster suggest for the return of occupation and it is a Russian ultra-nationalist statement and should be removed from WP because it violates the policies mentioned above--Termer (talk) 05:06, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
I'd request Beatle Fab Four not restore the picture the next time it is deleted. It is, indeed, a POLITICAL poster representing anti-Estonian "we'll invade them again" threats. I would consider such action similar to past edits which appear to push an anti-Estonian/Baltic POV, as an example, Beatle Fab Four's edits incorrectly changing European Victory Day to coincide with Russia's/Soviet Victory Day and deleting the reference to the Baltic States not observing the Russian version of Victory Day because they consider it re-occupation by the Soviets. —PētersV (talk) 14:51, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Nonsense, own research and throlling. Reasoning like that of kids. "I'll be back" is from Terminator by the same stupid analogy. Beatle Fab Four (talk) 16:28, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't know.. can anybody explain this posters meaning and what value does it add to the article? The message itself is quite bizarre, in Estonian and in Russian it actually says "I'm back", in English it says "I'll be back". I personally don't agree that this sentence has some kind of hidden deep meaning, like suggested above and consider whole poster as total nonsense (however, this suggestion brought one recollection, couple of years ago on the tribunes of the Estonian-Russian football match there were some football-fans from Russia, with USSR flags and with banner "Masters are back", masters as "proprietors" - хозяйны)) - so maybe there really is some hidden meaning I don't know or remember anymore. Anyway, I would delete this picture too, but only on the basis that it's message is quite unclear and it doesn't add anything substantial to the article.

BTW, Beatle Fab Four, your statements are starting to look like personal attacks, so please, tone down your rhetorics. Ptrt (talk) 18:21, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Compared to the thousands of flowers on the site, this single political poster indicates a tiny minority viewpoint and thus its presentation here is undue. Martintg (talk) 20:57, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Ha-ha-ha. The poster simbolizes the virtual presense of the monument on the original site. Flowers on the same original site simbolize the same thing. Even kids can understand that. Beatle Fab Four (talk) 21:25, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
No, it is a picture of an Estonian deportee who was dragooned into the Red Army but escaped across the frontline to the Finnish side at the first opportunity. Martintg (talk) 22:44, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Weeeeell, Peripitus, you can clearly see the root of the problem. Beatle Fab Four (talk) 22:49, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
??? Something factually incorrect about my statement? Martintg (talk) 22:58, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Whose presence, Palusalu's or Bronze Soldier's? Yes, there is one theory that Palusalu could be the prototype of the Bronze Soldier, but I don't think that anybody could argue about their virtual equality in current context, nobody connects them on that level, I could bet that 99% Estonian people (including local Russians) don't even know this fact. Ptrt (talk) 10:54, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Folks, would this be solved by removing the entire gallery and adding a {{commonscat}} link at the bottom. Galleries are usually discouraged here as that is what commons is for. Peripitus (Talk) 21:29, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Really? What about here and here . Peripitus, the problem is not in the gallery, the problem is that someone can't grow up. Beatle Fab Four (talk) 21:43, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
WP:OTHERSTUFF. I think Peripitus makes a good suggestion. I would support moving the entire gallery to commons. Martintg (talk) 22:44, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Support. But I can already see what is going to happen... Ptrt (talk) 10:54, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Sourcing

I've just noticed that all 18 sources are either pro-Estonian or anti-Russian. Is there a reason for this? HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 10:21, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Could you clarify, please? What do you exactly mean with "pro-estonian" and "anti-russian"? And how do you define those categories in given context? Ptrt (talk) 12:24, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

There has a lot of political commentary sneaked in again over time into this article. Please note that all propaganda articles that are straight out lies are going to be removed from this article. For example Russia Today claiming that Estonian nationalists reportedly tried to put a wreath of barbed wire decorated with a swastika on the statue. That's not what you'd call WP:RS. Please stick to reliable, third-party, published sources while editing this article! POV can be tolerated only if it;d say that Russia Today claims this and that. But since the report about swastika is a straight out lie, I think the text should be just removed.--Termer (talk) 05:38, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Russia Today is the mouthpiece of the Russian Federation. Completely unreliable with regard to anything about the Baltic states in particular. PetersV       TALK 00:52, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Motions for "destruction"

All the posturing over destruction of monuments is interesting, but my understanding is that there are treaties between the Baltic states and Russia regarding the preservation of war memorials. Let's make clear what contentions and motions are rhetoric and which are not. Not a single war memorial anywhere has been destroyed or will be destroyed. Yet blogs are full of invective over Estonians destroying monuments to and graves of fallen Soviet soldiers. PetersV       TALK 00:50, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

File:Bronze Soldier of Tallinn, 2007.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Bronze Soldier of Tallinn, 2007.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Other speedy deletions
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Misplaced Pages. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Misplaced Pages (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 03:52, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

The Red Army wasn't Russian but multinational

Xx236 (talk) 11:03, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Common name?

This statue is broadly known as “The Unknown Rapist”, why is this fact no longer mentioned? —NoApostropheInIts (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 15:21, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Categories: