| Revision as of 21:18, 2 May 2007 editAlexia Death (talk | contribs)1,658 edits →[]← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:24, 2 May 2007 edit undoDigwuren (talk | contribs)11,308 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
| : It is documented plenty in ] and the legistration changes belong in ]. If a country or territory is considered to be a new one every time a law changes most countries would be reborn quite often.] 21:08, 2 May 2007 (UTC) | : It is documented plenty in ] and the legistration changes belong in ]. If a country or territory is considered to be a new one every time a law changes most countries would be reborn quite often.] 21:08, 2 May 2007 (UTC) | ||
| ]]] | ]]] | ||
| : Nobody is proposing not documenting such history. Indeed, such documentation has already been done to a significant degree, as pointed out by ]. | |||
| : However, this article is not about documenting the freedom process of Estonia, but about declaring a fictitious legal entity. This is blatant historical revisionism, already used for ] pushing purposes on other article's discussion pages. | |||
| : And did I mention the article cites no sources? It is because sources that would support this article as distinct from the real history article do not exist. '''Delete''' (after all, I made the formal request for deletion.) ] 21:24, 2 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 21:24, 2 May 2007
Republic of Estonia (1990-1991)
- Republic of Estonia (1990-1991) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
This page is an attempt to legitimise the POV that no continuity exists between the current Republic of Estonia and the Republic of Estonia established in early XX century, and cites no sources. Digwuren 09:29, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Looks like a POV fork to me. --RaiderAspect 12:54, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- Delete No such country legally existed during that period. Alexia Death 14:35, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- Really? Estonian SSR says that the US and the UK "considered the annexation of Estonia by USSR illegal" and "never recognized the existence of the Estonian SSR de jure." So Estonia did legally exist, at least according to the opinion of some. Anyway, I'm still deciding how to vote on this one. But the nominators statement that the article denies continuity between the two republics seems to be false. StAnselm 14:49, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- Estonian SSR existed, but it was never an independent country. It has its own article. This article contradicts History of Estonia. The country symbols were not used officially until independence was redeclared. There was no country like this during that period as this territory was Estonia SSR. Alexia Death 20:58, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- I realised only just now what you were trying to say. the first Republic never ceased to exist legally all through the existence of Estonian SSR, but de facto no territory by the name of Republic of Estonia existed during that time. It wasnt a territory but a legal ghost of a country. Alexia Death 21:16, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- Merge/Delete: I don't know the background to this (my knowledge of Estonian history is more-or-less non-existent) so I can't judge the accuracy of the content, but surely any legitimate content can be merged into the Estonia article. --RFBailey 16:16, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- Comment I think this, like the other Estonian article up for AFD, should be referred to dispute resolution instead, as regardless of the content of this article, Estonia, and every other former Soviet republic, should have some documentation of its history during the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Thus the question is not whether to cover it, but how and in what fashion. Once that issue has been discussed, then what to do about this page can hopefully be reached by consensus. Mister.Manticore 16:41, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- It is documented plenty in History of Estonia and the legistration changes belong in Estonian SSR. If a country or territory is considered to be a new one every time a law changes most countries would be reborn quite often.Alexia Death 21:08, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
]
- Nobody is proposing not documenting such history. Indeed, such documentation has already been done to a significant degree, as pointed out by Alexia Death.
- However, this article is not about documenting the freedom process of Estonia, but about declaring a fictitious legal entity. This is blatant historical revisionism, already used for WP:POV pushing purposes on other article's discussion pages.
- And did I mention the article cites no sources? It is because sources that would support this article as distinct from the real history article do not exist. Delete (after all, I made the formal request for deletion.) Digwuren 21:24, 2 May 2007 (UTC)