Talk:Cold War Europe

From Wikivoyage
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Weird lines on the map[edit]

It looks as if someone inserted the mainlines of Russian railroads onto the map by accident. How come? Hobbitschuster (talk) 11:15, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Finland in WW2[edit]

"All that despite the fact that Finland had fought three separate wars against the Soviet Union between 1939 and 1945 and had been a de facto ally of Nazi-Germany in two of them." That's two errors in one sentence. Rather than fixing them myself, the author can have a look at w:Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, w:Winter war, w:Continuation war and w:Lapland war, learn something new and come back and correct it. ϒpsilon (talk) 13:56, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So they were de facto allied with the Nazis in one of the three wars and fought one against the Nazis on tacit pressure of the Soviets and on account of the Nazis not leaving fast enough. Ok. Hobbitschuster (talk) 14:07, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. ϒpsilon (talk) 14:11, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As this article is not about World War II, the topic does not need to be brought up at all. /Yvwv (talk) 14:50, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It does bear mention imho, at least in one sentence as it is rather remarkable how Finland managed to stay in existence without becoming a puppet of either block, despite the fact that they already had to deal with a similarly impossible situation during World War II. Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:32, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"de facto" ally or ally of the Nazis?[edit]

Now I have been wrong on this before (see above) but I thought that Finland very carefully tried to be "not an ally" of the Nazis despite the fact that they fought the same enemy at the same time. IIRC, this also led to Mannerheim meeting with Hitler somewhere near the border instead of a full scale state visit in Helsinki. But maybe this "we were not an ally of the Nazis" narrative is a myth even the modern Finland has ceased believing in, thus not violating our WV:be fair policy if we say so. As I am not sure of all this, I would like to hear a Finnish or - absent that - at least Scandinavian/Nordic/Fennoscandian voice on the issue. Hobbitschuster (talk) 00:42, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I may have been too hasty in my edit. See w:Ryti–Ribbentrop Agreement. But also note the "multiple issues" with the article. I'll reinstate the "de facto" language, at least for the time being. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:50, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I think "de facto ally" is quite close to what most Finns believe. There were probably quite many people sympathetic to the Nazis among the ultra-nationalist movements, but Mannerheim did not like Hitler and his folks. The leadership played a very difficult game in getting support from Germany without getting too involved with their plans, but also in the government there were different attitudes. At least any formal pact with Germany was never signed and Finland did avoid e.g. attacking Leningrad. --LPfi (talk) 18:29, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The page quote[edit]

That was added today by an anonymous user appears to be rather strange... Is it a well known quote I am unaware of? Or should it be deleted? Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:47, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted, in my opinion. Any objections to deleting it? Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:21, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The IP who added it has nothing else but vandalism in their history, including two edits to the user page of User:Ibaman (who reverted the IP's vandalism for the first time). ϒpsilon (talk) 04:44, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"Quote" removed. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:03, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Good riddance. /Yvwv (talk) 10:23, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So my hunch proved correct. Should've looked at the contributions of said IP before I wrote the above comment, I would probably already have reverted given the vandalism by said IP Hobbitschuster (talk) 13:49, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Gentryfying Plattenbau neighborhoods[edit]

So these edits by an IP user changed the tone from "Overall this type of building has a bad rep, but there is some reason for hope" to "all is fine and dandy and Plattenbau is making a huge comeback". As someone who lives in a city with a lot of this architectural style, let me assure you, people who have free choice (and are not e.g. impeded by lack of money) still prefer the Gründerzeit buildings over the Plattenbau buildings. Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:32, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

To Guide and FTT[edit]

What would be needed to make this a guide and ready for the main page limelight? Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:45, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hobbitschuster, I'd say the topic is already quite comprehensive. I will try to check if any obvious destinations are missing, but I think they might be, because just at a brief glance I though of (and added) two I've known about. Danapit (talk) 19:36, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Cold War and Cold War Europe[edit]

Swept in from the pub

Given that both articles are quite short, I was wondering if we should merge Cold War Europe in the Cold War article. After all, the Cold War was in many ways a global conflict, and you could in a sense see the Korean War and Vietnam War as an offshoot of the Cold War. This merger would also adequately allow us to cover things like the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Sino-Soviet Split and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, which were very much a part of the Cold War. The dog2 (talk) 18:09, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cold War Europe is a usable article, and I see no problems with its size. If the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the conflicts in Africa, Latin America, Middle East and the war in Afghanistan are included and covered adequately, its size will become unwieldy. Why cannot these other conflicts be covered in Cold War, making it grow to more than a stub? –LPfi (talk) 18:50, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Only the first two paragraphs in Cold War Europe are relevant for the other continents. The Understand section would have to be much developed, probably making the article structure convoluted. Groups trained and armed by CIA and Cuba fighting in Africa, Iraq getting weapons in turns from the USA and the Soviet Union, these are things that did not happen in Europe, although we were aware of them, some more than others. –LPfi (talk) 19:12, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:23, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No FoP in Bulgaria :(. Isn't it surprising that the nominator (廣九直通車) is a well established user here? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 05:35, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not a good photo or visible in the article. I'd let it go. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:07, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not necessary. Drop it. /Yvwv (talk) 10:37, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikivoyage.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cold_War_Europe&oldid=4599020"