Talk:Swedish-speaking population of Finland

Spelling mistakes

There are some errors below the article, in the box of ´´Diaspora´´. Faroe Islands and the Netherlands must be corrected. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Haettman1986 (talk • contribs) 09:13, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Finland-Swedes in the US

We are Swedish-speaking Finns, that is to say, descendents of Finnish immigrants who spoke Swedish to the USA, specifically the West Coast. Our spare time goes to volunteer for the Swedish Finn Historical Society, which is preserving the traces of Swedish Finnish emigrant culture around the world. SFHS began in Seattle WA and now has members from Australia to Alaska, Japan to Finland. The main reason for that is the informative Quarterly. You can read some of the articles on their web page. Just search Swedish Finn Historical Society. And their Finlander list is also an interesting Talk Page, in which many folks find or offer help locating info on family trees in Swedish Finland. Gott nytt År och Lycka till! D and S

I am one, but in english, I would prefer talking about us as the "finnish-swedish" and not the 'finlandssvensks'. Is there anyone who knows the english language better to tells us which one is the better one? --Tbackstr

---

I am one too. I think Swedish speaking Finns would be the best wording to use. --P0ppe

---

I don't quite agree. I'm a 'Finlandssvensk' too and I don't think the term 'Swedish speaking Finn' is quite the same thing. I have some good friends who speak excellent Swedish. Clearly they are 'Swedish speaking Finns' but they are not 'Finland-Swedes'/'Finlandssvenskar'.

---

In my vocabulary a Finlander (finländare) is basically an inhabitant in Finland, mostly either a Swedish speaking (finlandssvensk) or a Finnish speaker. Since I'm a "finlandssvensk" and not a "finlandsfinsk/finne" it is awkward to be called "finne" or Finn. I use the term Swedish-Finn to describe the Swedish speaking finlandssvensk in the same linguistic way as the constructions anglo american, afro american etc. I agree that all the name variants used all have their weaknesses, but Finlander and Swedish-Finn feels imho as being the "most suitable and descriptive".

I don't like to have to form complete sentances in order to get the message through. /H.

---

You need to think this in english... I think its best that finnish are called finnish, swedish are called swedish and finlands swedish are called finlands swedish. If you want to go making up new words go with Finnswedes and leave Swedefinns to finnish minority of sweden. (Notice the order of parental country and language minority in there.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.156.119.203 (talk) 20:24, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Are the Finland-Swedes an ethnic minority?

Shouldn't we then rename this page to, uh, something? "Swedish speaking Finns"? "Finnish-Swedish"? I think we should have headers in english in an encyclopedia in english. Anyway, for those not familiar with the topic, we are speaking about both the Swedish speaking people in Finland and the local variant of Swedish spoken in Finland. The swedish term "finlandssvensk" is in a word by word translation "a finnish Swede" and "finlandssvenska" is the corresponding language. Perhapse we should have a page for both. --Tbackstr

---

I think "Finnish-Swedish" is not as close a translation as "Finland-Swede(s)" (for the people; finlanddsvensk(ar)) and "Finland-Swedish" (for the language; finlandssvenska), but I definately agree that using "Finlandssvensk" in an English article [other than in the introductory definiton] is wholly inaccurate and inconsistent with Wikipedia policies. --217.215.99.203 14:24 Dec 30, 2002 (UTC)

If this is about an ethnic group, shouldn't it be at Finland-Swede according to naming conventions? Tokerboy

---

I don't think Finland-Swedish are an ethnic minority, but a lingual one. They are finns, not swedes after all.

There are differences between nationality and ethnicity. While the Finland-Swedes are ethnically Swedish their national belonging is to Finland. The term Finn refers to the Finnish ethnical group, which often inproperly is used also as the national designation for all Finnish citizens. The term Finlander is more proper since it includes both Finns and Swedes as Finnish nationals. -- Mic

On what basis do you consider Finland-Swedes ethnically Swedish?

From: http://www.lib.hel.fi/mcl/julkaisut/tutkielma/3.htm quote (in finnish): "Etninen ryhmä on siten vähemmistö, joka poikkeaa enemmistökulttuurista ulkonäöltään, kieleltään ja uskonnoltaan."

translation: "An ethnic group is thus a minority, which differs from the majority of the population by their appearance, language and religion"

Finland-Swedes not only appear Finns, they also have the same religion and almost all of them speak the same language. I have yet to meet a Finland-Swede who thinks of himself as a swede in a foreing country. -- Smicke

This is wrong, most Finland-Swedes do not speak Finnish. Some do, but most of them do not. Most Finland-Swedes feel a greater affiliation to Sweden than to Finland. They watch television, listen to radio from Sweden, read books from Sweden - all this in Swedish. Of course they not feel like they are living in a foreign country, after all, they have lived there for thousands of years - longer than the Finns! But they feel that they are Swedes, and that it is their country at least as much as the Finns. Den fjättrade ankan 01:19 May 5, 2003 (UTC)

I think you ought to support this with some data. It doesn't fit with the limited experience of mine. -- Ruhrjung 01:29 May 5, 2003 (UTC)

Well, that's what all my Finland-Swedes friends says, at least. And what they have written themselves at the Swedish Wikipedia sv:Finlandssvensk, as well as http://susning.nu/Finlandssvenska and http://susning.nu/Finlandssvensk(in Swedish). Den fjättrade ankan 02:16 May 5, 2003 (UTC)

With all respect, but...

1. Where are there any credible or serious claims of the Swedes having lived in Finland for longer than the Finns?
2. Regarding books: would you conclude that the German-speakers in Switzerland feel "a greater affiliation" to Germany than to Switzerland from the fact that more German books are written and printed in Germany and Austria than in Switzerland? No, I suppose you wouldn't.
3. If it were so, that Finland-Swedes really felt closer affiliated to Sweden than to Finland, then I'm sure there would exist sociological surveys and treaties and gallup polls ad infinitum. Do you know of any?
4. The figures for how the Finland-Swedes distribute their TV consumtion is:

25% Finnish language public service,

25% MTV,

20% Commercial TV in Scandinavian languages,

15% Public Service from Sweden,

10% Public service in Swedish from Finland (and 5% "Other").

-- Ruhrjung 04:20 May 5, 2003 (UTC)

Please note that "MTV" above refers to MTV3, a commercial Finnish terrestial broadcaster that existed long before the "Music" MTV's history began.

Correction: Finnish MTV3 had its own channel many years after Music television MTV had begun. --Lalli 18:13, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

---

1. Depends on what you mean by credible sources. You won't be able to find any definite sources saying that either group came first - it cannot be proven. Sure, you'll find people claiming that one group (usually their own) was their first but it is impossible to tell. Most probably there were Finns in the area around, say, Viipuri/Viborg before there were any Swedes there. Equally probable, there were Swedes in parts of the western coast of Finland before there were Finns there.

2. Almost no Finland-Swede feels "a greater affiliation" with Sweden. Our country is Finland, we support Finland, we feel for Finland.

3. There aren't any, see answer 2

4. This is an example of lying with statistics. Most Finland-Swedes I know watch only Swedish television and read only Swedish newspapers. According to the statistics you gave, this percentage is 45% - I have no idea why you've split it up into different categories. It all depends on the region, though. About 50% of the Finland-Swedes don't have access to Swedish television. In other words, almost all Finland-Swedes who do have that access watch Swedish television

---

I have yet to see a Swedish Finn who supports Sweden in ice hockey. - Cymydog Naakka 17:37, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Surely Swedes and Finns are both mostly Lutherans, no? So that doesn't prove anything. john 02:11 May 5, 2003 (UTC)

• I am Finlandssvensk, but I now live in Sweden. I feel more like a Finländare, because of the fact that I feel that Swedes and Finlandssvenskar are two different groups. I feel that we finlandssvenskar have more common things with the finns. //Martin

---

Finland is bi-lingual country, therefore both Swedish and Finnish speaking residents of Finland can be ethnically Finnish - Officially there is no language barrier. Besides suomenruotsalaiset fought along their Finnish speaking brothers in Winter War and Continuation War. For all intents and purposes they are Finns. - G3, 15:32, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Finnic-speaking and Swedish-speaking Finns

The fact that English terminology doesn't seem to distinguish between members of the ethnical majority and citizens of Finland more generally is at the root of the problem discussed here. Can one intuitively distinguish between a Finnish language on one hand, and a Finnish national who is not Finnish, but Swedish? It doesn't really seem possible, at least not intuitively! Let's, for the sake of argument, refer to the language as Finnic instead of Finnish, and repeat the sentence. "Can one intuitively distinguish between a Finnic language on one hand, and a Finnish national who is not Finnic, but Swedish?" This change does seem clarifiy issues to a large extent.

The differences between the Finnic and the Swedish groups should not be over estimated, but neither should differences be neglected. In the discussion so far there has been some nationalistic overtones that I wish that we could do with out. It should be stated that the Finland-Swedes are neither Swedish nationals nor ethnically Finnic. However, as English doesn not make the distinction between Finnic and Finnish, the matter has to be expressed and terminology applied all the more delicately. -- Mic 16:42 May 5, 2003 (UTC)

---

I wish to second Mic above in the sense that the "ethnic" differences should not be just simply glossed over, as is often done in the official Finnish public discourse. I debate the language issue a lot with Fenno-Swedes -- personally, I believe that the Swedish language is given a lot of undue attention in Finland -- and my general observations on the ethnicity issue is that when it comes to it, the Fenno-Swedes are very skilled at shifting their ground as suits their purposes. If it is beneficial to their case, they are "just like the rest of us" and simply just speak a different language... but if you start to question the position granted to their mother tongue, all of a sudden they turn into this distinctly separate ethnic minority with special qualities that deserve to be protected -- even if it meant forcibly educating the entire rest of the population in their language, which is indeed a measure unheard of in the rest of the world. I wish they were, for once, at least consistent in defending their position.

The Fenno-Swedes were very eager to be recognized as an ethnicity of their own all the way until the last decades... in the old days, they even had leading individuals such as Axel Olof Freudenthal, a notorious racist, who were very eager to prove that the "Finnic Finns" where a lower race and thus deserved to be ruled by the higher-race Fenno-Swedes... their tone changed around 1980 when they realized that by isolation they were just going to go extinct. So, the better course of action was to try to seem as "Finnic" as they possibly could, so that the Swedish language would all of a sudden become the problem of everyone in the country... even of those who never had any contact with it before.

This is not just some random evil nazi attack on a minority... it is a wish that the Finnish language situation would be for once seen in a fair and balanced light, without the prejudice that is too often directed at individuals who wish to defend the rights of the people who speak Finnish as their mother tongue.

I have a serious gripe with "pakkoruotsi" ("mandatory Swedish") being characterized as a derogatory term. It simply just describes the school subject by its real name... that is what most Finnish-speaking Finns experience it as. Calling it "derogatory" is a politically loaded description that could come straight from the Svenska Folkpartiet... the Fenno-Swedish extremist party.

HuckFinn

---

The poster above is a classic example of an extreme nationalist that harbors an irrational hatred for the swedish-finnish population. They are eerily similar to nazis(note how he himself recognizes it and tries to address the issue before it is even raised) in how they vilify and demonize one minority group. They also have about the same credibility with the populace at large, both finnish and swedish-finnish, that is to say, next to none.

Lots of people might not like to learn swedish and there are tensions but extremist groups like these tries to capitalize on it.

---

Finland-Swedes appear very much like Finns in visage. The religion is the same, Lutheran, for those who have religion. (a buch of both of course have quitted membership of the church. A vast majority of Finland-Swedes think themselves as Finns (finländare).

It is totally wrong to claim that most Finland-Swedes do not speak Finnish. In reality, most of them do. Actually, a MAJORITY of them speak Finnish approximately as well as Swedish, thus being bilingual. (This is particularly true in areas of Nyland and Åboland, except some small villages. It is as true in towns in other provinces too, except Mariehamn.) Most of the rest have good grasp of Finnish language. A small minority of Finland-Swedes are not sufficiently familiar with Finnish, to use it. Most of them reside in Åland, and some rural municipalities of Ostrobothnia.

At hishest, only a small minority of Finland-Swedes feel a greater affiliation to Sweden than to Finland.

Duck: "Of course they not feel like they are living in a foreign country, after all, they have lived there for thousands of years" I must firstly quib stating that no living Finland-Swede has lived in Finland longer than 104 years, and most of them only for a remarkably shorter period. (Partially a joke, but of course very true. Of course, same goes for any living Finnish-speaking Finn.)

Thousands of years seems to be an exaggeration, even if speaking also about dead individuals aggregated as a race or whatever. We know that some archipelagoes got Swedish-speaking population about one thousand years ago, during the Viking raids, but no evidence shows Swedish inhabitation before that time.

However, it is absolutely incorrect to claim that Swddes lived in Finland long before the Finns. There is overwhelmingly vast amount of evidence of Finnic population in Finland already two or three thousands of years ago, and many signs already thousands of years before that.

213.243.157.114 18:17, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)

---

Perhaps but the argument I believe was that the now finnish-swedish peoples ancestors colonized the emerging archipelago and west coast before the finnic populations did, not that they got to finland first, only they got to a certain part of what is now modern Finland first.

---

Finland-Swedish fennomans

Reverted changes in which an anonymous user attempted to remove a number of the listed individuals of Finland-Swedish origin, presumably due to their fennoman affiliation. Practically all of the first generation fennomans where Finland-Swedes, but self-professed affilliation did not alter their ethnic background. -- Mic 13:28, Dec 19, 2003 (UTC)

Dear Mic, the article itself agrees that Finland-Swedes are NOT ethnic Swedes. There is no significant differences in visage, coloration etc between Finns and Finland-swdes. Actually, bigger differences are found between two Finland-swedes, and between two Finns. You should learn that the language is the only thing that separates here.

Furthermore, the header of that list says "Swedish speakers". That is a very god choice, since the language is the difference. I understand the header to mean that those persons used swedish as their only (or at least main) language on their own volition.

jeffery and nihayah alexis and america and brittany and tony and dominique are all invete to my birthday and tre too

reflecting a Finnish nationalist point of view

As now this articel is NOT NPOV. It reflects a Finnish nationalist viewpoint. Finland-Swedes (or East Swedes, which many call themselves) themselves should tell what their feelings are, what they call themselves, etc, not outside people like Finnish nationalists. Den fjättrade ankan 22:26, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Maybe you could elaborate on what it is that you think could be better expressed?
--Ruhrjung 01:11, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Yes, they should tell what their feelings and not outside people like Swedish nationalists. Remember also that some Swedish-speaking Finns spoke first Finnish and then adobted Swedish-language. I don't have years now but "have heard about it once". Kahkonen 10:46, 2004 Jun 12 (UTC)

Ankan's view of how to make this article npov can be studied at http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/wiki.phtml?title=Finland-Swedish&diff=4032241&oldid=4025795 which I reverted all-in-all. To put it brief, there might have been parts of his edits which are of any value, but... if so, maybe a step-by-step approach would be to prefer. /Tuomas 10:53, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia:NPOV dispute:

If you add the above code to an article which seems to you to be biased, but there is no prior discussion of the bias, you need to at least leave a note on the article's talk page describing what you consider unacceptable about the article.

I remove that banner now.
--Ruhrjung 12:57, 2004 Jun 16 (UTC)

List of Swedish-speaking Finns

I think there is a factual error in the list of Finland-Swedes: the name of Pehr Evind Svinhufvud. Undeniably, his name is totally Swedish, but I have read that he was chiefly a Finnish-speaking person. One of the signs of his Finnish preference has been the first names of his children. He christened them with Finnic names. He lived in places where practically only Finnish is spoken, such as his home in Luumäki.

Strange, since what I remember from political autobiographies and similar works is that hes mothertongue was Swedish and that it's noted that he (at least at his age) as president spoke Swedish with Swedish speaking politicians. /Tuomas 19:14, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Regarding his refusal to finnicize the surname, there are excellent motivations for such refusal despite of his otherwise Finnish preference: 1) the ancient history of the surname and its position as a protected name, enrolled among the nobility in the Finnish riddarhuset. He actually was the primogenitural head of the said noble house, thus having an inherited place among vote-entitled chairs of the Riddarhuset - which was first of the four estates of the days of Diet, up to 1906. 2) direct translation would be Sianpää, Swinehead, not very nice. He could live with an ancient name (with historical value to counter the not very beautiful content) that he has not personally chosen and that was in language (Swedish) so alien to most of people surrounding him, but he could have been wary to choose himself a Finnish name that says Swinehead to everyone.

---

Regarding Svinhufvud if he could be called a Swedish-Finn by todays standard or not could be viewed by looking at his genealogy. On his father's side the namelist consists almost totally of nobility names that can be traced to Sweden, the area around Viborg and down towards the continent - many of them with old family brances in Finland. On his mother's side the lines are quite similar. I wouldn't be that sure that the language spoken at home at Svinhufvud's wasn't Swedish, after all also the Timgren family was quite Swedish speaking.

The fact that he was a fennoman doesn't necessary mean that he turned completely Finnish speaking over night and abolished his Swedish language heritage. He simply saw that the Finnish language was surpressed within the administration and should be given the status it should have and worked for this goal. Perhaps it even was politically wise for him to do? He was a prominent man in any case. Nice to be related to him!

Because of this line of thought the Svinhufvud name is a good candidate for a list of "Swedish-Finns" - if such a list is interesting to have. Hasse N.

---

He chose political parties, firstly "Nuorsuomalainen Puolue", then "Kansallinen Kokoomus" (both of full Fennoman origin) for his political activities, instead of Svenska Folkpartiet. Had he been of Finland-Swedish preference, and in agreement with SFP's goals, why did he not enroll that party? Why did he always chose heirs of original Fennomans, those parties which had advancement of Finnish language as their cultural program in all of his time there?

Therefore, I propose that Svinhufvud's name be removed from the list within two weeks, if no one brings convincing evidence of him being preferentially Finland-Swede on his own volition.

213.243.157.114 07:50, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Interesting that there apparently are so few truly Finland-Swedish notables that a bunch of Finnish-speakers are needed to fill that meager list.

Were I not overly enjoying the situation where our Fnnish citizens are welcomed to yet more lists of notable people around the world (apparently they are seen as national heroes in Sweden), I might suggest that such inclusion is the mark of what sort of success these Sveco-nationalists represent here. 213.243.157.114 21:45, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

That's weird. There is many Finnish-speaking Finns in the list. If some Finnish-Swedish speaks Finnish, is he Finnish-Swedish aka. Swedish speaking Finn? Kahkonen 21:51, 2004 Jul 6 (UTC)

If their mother tongue was Swedish, or if they married Finland-Swedish (Lönnrot), and if the Finland-Swedes or the Sweden-Swedes are heppy with including ardent Fennomans, then why not?

I consider the following inclusions as more of pranks than serious additions suitable for an international public, why I remove them:

• Markus Drake, a famed Green politician in Finnish politics. Mannequin of freedom of narcotics.
• Hans Duncker, a politician of Svenska Folkpartiet, and a famed jailbird because of drug trafficking
• Nils Gustafsson, survivor of Bodom massacre, and a suspect
• Lennart Hohenthal, political assassin who shot Finnish attorney general Eliel Soisalon-Soininen
• Nils Holgersson, world-traveller
• Johnny Liebkind, famous Jew civil rights fighter. Spent a couple of years in Isreali prison.
• Elias Lönnrot, (1802-1884), author. He did not speak particularly good Swedish, and was from Finnish-speaking rural parts. Finnish has been known to be his native language
  • This is of course a typical conception in Scandinavia. I wonder what's said among the Finland-Swedes.
• Robert Rossander, former Finnish business magnate.

/Tuomas 19:14, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

---

Would Snellman be a good addition to the list? As far as I know he hardly new any Finnish but was very active in Finland.

the introductory paragraph

The following sentence is simplified, as it according to my judgement is too convoluted for the introductory paragraph:

From the administrative centralization of the 17th century forwards until the mid-19th century it was the sole language of jurisdiction, administration and higher education in Finland, however in some respects only together with Latin. In 1892 Finnish as an official language (already granted 1863) gained a status fully equal to that of Swedish, and at Finland's independence in 1917 Finnish clearly dominated in government and society.

It's of limited relevance to remind an international audience that the then-international language of science, Latin, was used beside the local language in education. The domestic debate in Finland, and particularly its history, makes it motivated to remind about this - in Finland! ...and it's of course not wrong, But we must think on the poor reader who is not to be confused. After reformation, the importance of Latin in Finland were not at all comparable to the situation in the remaining Catholic lands.

The reference to the language edict by Charles XI is here first of all misdated, as the great administrative centralization was during the 30-Years War; and maybe more important, the reference is also misrepresenting King Charles's recasting of judicial procedure, church government, and central administration (including the riddarhuset) which for sure aimed at a unitary nation with one language being used in all parts of government, but it was aimed at the territorial gains in the south Swedish Pomerania, Scania etc, and elitist officials from the Continent who wrote and spoke Danish, Dutch and Low German also in official contexts. References to that language edict, and the interpretations of it, ...and the less benevolent effects of it for Finns in what remained of Sweden after 1808/09... are surely more relevant in the articles on Fennomans, Finland's language strife and the Sweden Finns.

I restore the introductory paragraph to the following wording:

Finland-Swedish is a variety of Swedish. Until 1863 it was the sole language of jurisdiction, administration and higher education in Finland. In 1892 Finnish became an official language and gained a status comparable to that of Swedish, and at Finland's independence in 1917 Finnish clearly dominated in government and society.

/Tuomas 18:16, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The "simplified" introductory above oversimplified the facts into untruthfulness.

Firstly, during the Middle Ages and up to administrative centralization which was completed by Gustav II Adolph's government, administrative language situation in Finland was semi-anarchic. Finnish was much used. German and Latin were approximately as important as Swedish. Finland did actually not have any centralized administration besides the bishopric of Turku, which actually mostly used Latin and Finnish.

Which was not at all unique for Finland, as I am sure you know. /Tuomas 23:53, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

So what. We have here an article that purports to describe the position of SWEDISH as language in Finland. Not an article that DIRECTLY deals with position of Finnish as language in Finland. I require that the position of Swedish is presented as truthfully and properly as possible. The fact remains, In Middle Ages, Swedish has a position that was nowhere as high as later after 1600´s. Therefore, those two eras shall NOT be dubbed into one. I believe Finnish as language of administration etc was more important than Swedish up to 1600´s. Do you agree? Or, do you have counterarguments and facts in its support?213.243.157.114 08:23, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Actual contacts with Rikssverige were scarce. Österlandia was very separate from Sweden in almost all practical terms. Gustav Vasa made first attempts towards regular secular administration, but his "fogde"s were compelled to use much Finnish, since taxes were anyway rather difficult to collect from unwilling payers, and use of incomprehensible language (Swedish) in inner areas of Finland would have frustrated tax-collection efforts into failure. Gustav, after all, was a practical guy who wanted the money and was not so eager on principles, language ideologies etc. (Gustav was a Swede.)

This is stupid anti-Swedish arguments which reflects poorly on us if allowed to take up space in an article on a 5%-minority in Finland. Finland and the Finns have the moral high ground on our side until we start to demonize the Finland-Swedes. /Tuomas 23:53, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I have not suggested adding Gustav's fogdes into the article. Those facts are to feature the context in this TALK, in order to let discussants understand what happened - regarding to use of administrative language. I do not bother with moral grounds etc. I require factual correctness.

Of course, you are welcome to present a case of pity - however, some elsewhere, thank you. Factual encyclopedia is not a place to twist facts to say that even before 1600´s, evil Swedes succeeded to use their language as sole one in Finland. Since that simply was not true.213.243.157.114 08:23, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I oppose saying that before 1600's Swedish was anything like SOLE administrative language. The key word here is "sole".

This is (almost) perfectly allright. But as you point out yourself, there wasn't much of administration beside the (Catholic) Church and the governor in Viipuri before Reformation. The point is, you have to keep the introductory paragraph brief and inviting for the reader. And as the

Then, a chapter of history is needed in the article.213.243.157.114 08:23, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

language of laws was Swedish, not Finnish, and the language used in communication from the state administration out to the provinces was mainly Scandinavian and in any case not Finnish, there is

Actually, I have believed that even throughout 1600-1860´s, judges needed to explain the court proceedings to their Finnish-speaking listeners, such as the accused (convicted), plaintiffs, and Finnish-speaking juries, in Finnish. Therefore, I somewhat doubt how correct is to say that the language of jurisdiction has been Swedish. Perhaps, "language of protocols of jurisdiction", would be a correct expression...213.243.157.114 08:23, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Comm outside (adm): You need firstly to understand that before Gustav Vasa, there actually was very little communication between Finland and Sweden. Whereas there was much administration inside Finland, or more properly, inside a castle province, inside a parish, etc. E.g, tax-collection on behalf of castle lord and by fogdes. And I am rather sure that most of that communication took place in Finnish.213.243.157.114 08:23, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

no reason to go into specific details in the introduction. You do surely know as well as I about the first occurences of translations to Finnish. /Tuomas 23:53, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Daily administration has all the time been made orally to large extent. You speak much about written language.213.243.157.114 08:23, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

in 1860´s Finnish already became an official language, thus is is not correct to cite that as to 1893. 1893 was the point when Finnish as official language became fully equal with Swedish.

While I do understand what you mean, I beg to disagree strongly on the point of wording. Finnish became fully equal with Swedish in the administration after it had got a legally equal position in 1892.

Actually, I did not check that 1892/93 earlier (I was too trusting). Yesterday I went to pages of Suomalaisuuden Liitto. In their dateline listing, actually next to nothing happened in 1892 or 1893. The equalization happened in 1902. Please check the facts, and furnish the claims with evidence.213.243.157.114 08:23, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

It's questionable exactly when the languages de facto were equal in standing, but it's undisputable that it was at least some years into the 20th century, like after the parliamentary reform of 1906

Crap. Prlm reform had nothing to do with legal equalness. In dateline of SL, there was a legislative act of equalness in 1902. I think that date shoulde be used.213.243.157.114 08:23, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

for instance. But I must admit that the wording I restored was[1] unlucky: It's of course not the year 1892 but 1863 that's relevant for the status as official language, although the Language Ordinance required a gradual introduction of Finnish – over a period of twenty years, was it? /Tuomas 23:53, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

It was 20 yrs, intended to completed 1883. But unsurprisingly some delay took place, thus 1886 (three yrs late) a new act was in force. However, against the original intent, it did not guarantee full equalness. Equality was waited upon up until 1902.

(And, 1892 was nothing in this history, sorry.)213.243.157.114 08:23, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Swedish was nothing like SOLE language of higher education even after the reformation, since in Academy of Turku, master's theses and bachelor's writings, as well as debate events etc, were conducted in Latin. I recommend the previous writer to check something as easy as the list of titles of master's theses during that period. My great-great-etc-greatgranduncle Simon Fretin's Master's thesis was titled in Latin. And so was H.G.Porthan's and of others, too. Please check.

This is undisputable. The question remains: what is appropriate to put into the introduction of this article. What would you say about the wording "Swedish, not Finnish, was the language of..."? On the other hand, I think the wording with "sole" has a merit as it highlights the reason, need and mandate for the fennomans (and the language strife). /Tuomas 23:53, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

If Swedish was not the only, then an attribute "chief" or "main" should be used instead. Sole means actually the only, if you understand.213.243.157.114 08:23, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

There are clear indications that Swedish actually had a rather minor role in the Academy of Turku.

Yes, but still we would lead the reader astray if we gave the impression that Latin had an importance comparable with in for instance Poland. You remember that it was first in 1828 that a Finnish lectorate was introduced? /Tuomas 23:53, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

No one has mentioned Polish universities in the article. Please do not direct the discussion into irrelevancy. In my opinion, it is not truthful to present Swedish even as "main language of higher education 1600-1860", since it was not. Rather, it should put forward that Finnish language was not present at all in higher education up to 1800´s...213.243.157.114 08:23, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Somehow I could agree to a narrow formulation: from 1600's up until 1863 it was the sole language of jurisdiction and administration in Finland.

213.243.157.114 18:44, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

List of Swe... criteria

What sort of criteria we want for the list? For reasons I can't fathom, IP-addressed editors have added numerous Finnish-speaking Finns to the list, such as Minna Canth, the first Finnish-speaking female journalist. It seems that it's enough that there is some, however tenuous, connection to the Swedish language, to classify the entire person as Finland-Swedish, as in real-world politics. For example, these criteria might be used:

1. Swedish surname; many purely Finnish-speaking people have Swedish surnames. For one, the Swedish royal government refused to record Finnish names. Later, having a Swedish surname was a status symbol. Also, some Finnish noble families had to have a Swedish name to be recorded to the Swedish knight house, such as Svinhufvud.
2. entirely Swedish name, again, the same story
3. one Swedish-speaking parent
4. went to Swedish-speaking school — the catch being that the only possible "not Swedish" school used to be a Latin-speaking school "in the olden days"
5. bilingual, even if the achievements are literary works in Finnish, not Swedish

This is a bit similar to the "one drop of coloured blood" case in the USA, except for the motivation.

Names have nothing to do with it... language and identity, I'd say. I can imagine cases where it would make sense to call someone whose major work is in Finnish a Swedish-speaking Finn (if that is the best term), but generally no. OK I am a Swede (rikssvensk) and I shouldn't pretend to know all about these matters but is there really much confusion here? Outside of the Wikipedia list, that is. If you see people on the list you know as Finnish-speaking Finns, I suggest you take them out. /Habj 00:58, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

One problem is that in the olden days, Swedish used to be the official language. This meant that purely Finnish-speaking people had to learn it in order to end up in a list of "notables". Also, I wouldn't call anyone who publishes exclusively in Finnish and not in Swedish a probable Swedish-speaker. (There were also obvious cases of vandalism, like Larin Paraske, a Karelian poem singer.) Even if I have tried to prune the list, it's still not reliable. --Vuo 01:50, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I didn't have other intentions than alphabetising the list - it was an abvious mess. I can't understand that I didn't react on Mika Waltari, though. The longer a list on Wikipedia is, the less reliable it tends to be... /Habj 19:10, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Swedish-speaking Finns?

I lack an English word to translate finlandssvensk/suomenruotsalaisuus, i.e. what you call a person of Finland whose mother tongue is Swedish. It deserves an article, but what is the terminology in English? Is Swedish-speaking Finn a widely accepted term? How do the Finns - here meaning of both languages - feel about the term? /Habj 00:53, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Finlandsvensk would translate into Finland-Swede, that is the most used word. I guess "Swedish speaking Finn" works too and is used when you want to use a simpler and more describing word. I created a redirect from Swedish-speaking Finn to Finland-Swedish. bbx 23:47, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Finland-Swede is not used in English. You cannot concatenate two nouns like that in English.

Tensions?

Can anybody back up the claim of tensions between the Swedish minority and Finnish majority? I've spent one year as an exchange student at the Swedish School of Economics and Business Administration in Helsinki and according to what I heard and read (in Swedish-language newspapers in Finland) the only reason for disagreement with some of the Finnish-speaking majority is the language issue. In brief: Some Finnish-speakers consider studying Swedish a waste of time that could be spent studying other (in their opinion more useful) languages whilst the Swedish-speakers are concerned about the future of their language (which as far as I could tell is a quite legitimate concern). Whilst speaking in English with exchange students the Finnish-Swedes referred to themselves as "Swedish-speaking Finns" - often complemented with explanations that they do have their own traditions and culture (i.e. different from what the Finnish-speaking majority has). Some of the traditions are the same as in Sweden whilst others are entirely their own. One year of studies has obviously not been enough to expose me to all Finnish-Swedish opinions but everyone I encountered felt as affiliated to Sweden as Americans to Great Britain (and before I learnt to immediately imply that I knew it they were easily offended and very quick to point that out to me immediately since I'm from Sweden). Since my contacts with Finnish-speakers were fairly limited I cannot compare their patriotism with that of the Swedish speakers so I don't know what the "average level of patriotism" in Finland is but the Swedish-speakers were very pro-Finland patriotic. Their pro-Finland patriotism was much stronger than e.g. the Swedish patriotism in Sweden and I believe that it's due to the history of the country since virtually everyone has an ancestor that has shed blood for the country and e.g. the school building (like all school buildings that existed during the war, I was told) have memorial plaques with names of students that died for the country.

The Swedish-speaking Finns are Finns. It's rather confusing to associate them with the Swedish. Only Åland Swedish-speakers have had any interest in joining Sweden. Tensions, though, are real. The language problem is rather simple, namely that the Finland-Swedes attempt to keep a 5% minority language, a local majority language only in some rural areas, as a national language. Attempts of conservation are highly expensive, e.g. keeping 10-student schools in rural areas (which costs 10 times more per student than bigger schools) or teaching everyone Swedish (which, again, takes time and money away from learning German, French, Russian etc.). They also want Swedish-speaker quotas for education, permitting inferior Swedish students in (seen that, it's not pretty → ended up taking an extra year for a 3-year programme). In effect, a small, but loud minority. In all other respects, the Finland-Swedish are just as the Finnish-speakers; you already mentioned patriotism. --Vuo 13:10, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

No. The Swedish-speaking minority in Finland are ethnic Swedes. The only difference between them and the ethnic Swedes living in Sweden is their citizenship. There are for example larger differences between Swedes in Västerbotten and Småland than between Swedes in Västerbotten and Finland-Swedes in Österbotten. Den fjättrade ankan 11:39, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I have to say that this might give a wrong impression that is almost "dangerous" since many of the Finland-Swedes I met quickly stated that they weren't the same as I was and some were, frankly, offended by the thought that they'd e.g. support Sweden in sports and that wasn't what I'd learnt to expect from reading this page prior to leaving for Finland last autumn. My experience is of course limited but a clarification on such issues might be in place since recognizing that they have their own identity is important (especially if you're from Sweden - othwerise you easily get accused of "storsvenskhet"). (unsigned)

I disagree with Ankan, who apparently is rikssvensk, with the POV which that implies - no offense intended ;-)
I definitely don't consider myself an "ethnic Swede"! I am a Finn, with Swedish as my mother tongue, thus I consider myself a finlandssvensk (Finland-Swede), or finländare (Finlander), but these are not well-known terms in English, and I never use them. To me, "Finland-Swede" implies Swedish ethnicity, which is totally foreign to me.
No, in the English language, I am definitely a "Swedish-speaking Finn". This is the term I always use myself, even though it is somewhat clumsy.
The differences in Swedish-language dialects within both Sweden and Finland are huge - I understand a Swede from Stockholm or Gotland much better than a Swedish-speaking Finn from, say, Nedervetil in Österbotten, Finland. But I'm pretty sure the latter would not consider himself an ethnic Swede! (I bet the Ålanders don't either, they're Ålänningar, and proud of it! ;-)
--Janke | Talk 30 June 2005 22:20 (UTC)

---

There are som small tensions, but these are not to be exaggerated. I as a Swedishspeaking Finn, or Finland-Swede, do not feel that my finnishspeaking brothers would be against me, in any way. Offcourse there are some nationalistic movements in Finland, who don't like the idea of having Swedish as a national language, as we are only 6% of the population. But from my personal point of view, these arguments aganist Finland-Swedes are baised on:

• Some Finnishspeaking people feel that we don't like to be in Finland
• Some Finnishspeakers have a steroptyp view on Finland-Swedes, that we are "bättre folk", or "Better People"
• Some Finnishspeakers think that we nag to much when we want service in Swedish
• There is a negative feeling aganist Sweden (and some Swedish speakers), from a)historic things b) pakkoruotsi, our plainly, the fact that Finnsh speakers have to read Swedish in every school in Finland
• Some Finnish speaking feel that we feel more like Swedes, when we say that we are Finlandssvenskar

In my own opinion, and I come from a very Finnish town, are that many people are only positive towards Swedish speaking people. As many Finnish speaking know that the Finland-Swedes have lived in Finland for hundreds of years and that many have Finland-Swedes fought for Finland in the wars and acctualy built Finland togehter with their Finnish speaking brothers.

Talking about the diffrences between Finnish and Swedish speakers, there are some. Finland-Swedes have some other traditions and just speak Swedish, but mostly the cultural thing is not more then that we select Swedish as subtitile on a DVD or go to look at a Swedish language theather. Like, if I would go and have a beer with a Finnish speaker, we would not be arguing with eachother about culture or something, we would propablly get drunk and look at hockey or do something stupid. But, okeay, there are also some Finland-Swedes that feel negative against Finnish speakers, as many feel that they are threath or something. But, the absolut majority within both group are positive to eachother, or just don't think about it. I don't feel that we make so much diffrence between Finland-Swedes and Finnishspeakers.

• Finland-Swedes and Finnishspeakers have lived side-by-side in many years
• Both groups fought for Finland
• Both groups have built Finland, and both groups have made large countributions to Finland

I live now in Sweden, but I can say that I do not feel that I am a Swede. I am maybe proud of myself, that I live in Sweden and share something with them and just live here. But I have been thought to be proud of my country, Finland. For me it feels very natural to celebrate the Independence Day of Finland and do support Finland in hockey and sports. I remember how my grandparents told me stories about how they or there parents fhought in the wars and how the survived. So I think that the arguments that Finland-Swedes feel more as Swedes, it totally wrong and I don't feel like I would have to defent myself, or explain why I feel as a Finlander. For me it is very natural to be a Finlander. Dr.Poison 11:11, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

---

The problem with the term "Swedish-speaking Finn"

It seems that some believe that the usage of that term (in English) by Finnish-speakers is political whilst it IMHO is entirely linguistical. I'm a Finland-Swede but speak Finnish virtually flawlessly too and think that I can explain why the term is problematic and why Finnish-speakers fail to see the problem (and thus I don't think their use of it is political). The Finnish language only has one word for a member of the population in Finland and that is "suomalainen" and consequently think that "Finn" is a correct translation. Finland-Swedes, however, make a distinction between "finne" and "finländare". The word "finne" is used to refer to a member of the population in Finland that has Finnish as his/her mother tongue (and a Finnish surname and so on). "Finländare" is instead used to refer to every member of the population in Finland - i.e. regardless of mother tongue and surname. Thus even though "finn" = "suomalainen" is an acceptable translation for Finnish-speakers the translation "finn" = "finne" about a Finland-Swede is not preferable and "Swedish-speaking Finn" = "svenskpråkig finne" is quite misleading. Finland-Swedes would use the latter to refer to a Finn that can speak Swedish but isn't a Finland-Swede. I might also add that for this very reason it is quite inappropriate by Swedes in Sweden to refer to the population in Finland as "finnar", which unfortunately is quite common - "finländare" is much more preferable. The word Finlander would be better in English as well but unfortunately it hasn't caught on (13 900 hits on Google vs. 6 940 000 "Finn") since few foreigners even know that Finland-Swedes exist and I'm reasonably sure that the general use of the word on the Internet is to refer to members of the population in Finland and not only Finnish-speakers. As far as affiliation is concerned I don't think there's any factual basis for a claim that some would feel more affiliated to Sweden than Finland. We do feel some affiliation to Sweden since that's our origin but that's all. I have relatives in Sweden that despite living there, speaking Swedish like they do and having Swedish names consider themselves Finlanders living in Sweden and not Swedes moving back. /Mathias_Johansson (Added afterwards because I registered myself now.)

Finländare (Finlander) is a relatively recent term even in Swedish. It was artificially created in the 19th century to make a difference between Finnish-speakers (finnar)and Swedish-speakers. Before that ALL inhabitants of Finland were called Finns (finnar in Swedish, suomalaiset in Finnish). Therefore I think it is only natural, that this term has not gained popularity in other languages. It would be better, furthermore, if Swedish-speakers reverted back to the earlier tradition and called themselves Finns (finnar) in the cases when it is not important to pay special attention to the mother-tongue of the speakers.128.214.205.4 11:48, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Incorrect English

The problem is that you are inventing a word here - Finland Swede is simply not correct English even though you think it may describe you more accurately.

A secondary problem is that Finland Swede in English (were the term actually to exist) would mean a person of Swedish nationality living in Finland.

The conjuction of two nouns in English simply doesn't work in the way you are trying to use it - you perhaps should be talking about "Finnish Swede", and "Finnish Swedish" (compare the correct English description of the language spoken in Scotland: "Scottish Gaelic, or in Ireland: Irish Gaelic). But again Finnish Swede would actually suggest someone of Swedish nationality

From Forskningscentralen för de inhemska språken:
"Laurén använder i sin artikel Finland Swede om person, Finland-Swedish som adjektiv och Finland Swedish om språkvarianten. Efter att för säkerhets skull ha konsulterat engelsk expertis kan jag rekommendera de termerna för allmänt bruk i texter på engelska om finlandssvenska förhållanden."
Enough said. Den fjättrade ankan 22:33, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Translated to English (from Swedish): In his article, Laurén uses Finland Swede about a person, Finland-Swedish as an adjective and Finland Swedish about the variant of Swedish language. Having checked with English expertise just to be sure, I can recommend these terms for general use in texts in English regarding Finland-Swedish things. The web site belongs to an official research institute in Finland that deals with the languages of Finland. /Habj 08:31, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yes, that translation should be used throughout the article. "Reuters ruta" is _the_ source for questions regarding the Swedish language in Finland and he made the same note as I did regarding the problem with "Swedish speaking Finn". Thus such corrections should be made everywhere in this article for starters but there are several other issues as well that I consider very strange. /Mathias_Johansson

Interesting discussion... Well, being a Swedish-speaking Finlander myself, I did add the term finländare to the ethnicity sector, and I also changed it to more NPOV. Looking at older edits, I see many versions, some very POV.
PS: See my comments in the previous section, too.
--Janke | Talk 30 June 2005 21:37 (UTC)

Why on earth does this article have this name? It is wrong and clearly goes agains the recommendation of The Research Institute for the Languages of Finland [2] (30/1 1987: Finsk formgivning). They have even consulted English experts on the naming issue. --MoRsE 00:31, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

"Affiliation"

I've been thinking about the presentation of "affiliation" here and consider it quite awkward. The Swedish wikipedia page is much better and although it seems to be written mostly for Swedes from Sweden, parts of it could be translated as such but the problem is the word "finländare" (which has been noted previously).

My point is that whilst it due to the aforementioned translation issue is difficult to translate the Swedish text as such it is also very strange to write "affiliated to" since in Finland the issue is obvious and should thus be presented as such here as well. That is, the following translation of the Swedish text makes perfect sense to anyone familiar with the terms but it probably seems strange to the vast majority of wikipedia readers that aren't: "In general, Finland-Swedes consider themselves to be just as much Finlanders as the Finnish-speaking majority..."

On the one hand wikipedia could do a small contribution to make the word "Finlander" more common by using it but on the other the problem is that because the word is unusual it could thus be perceived as poor quality.

I think that the following - more elaborate translation - could be used but preferably after a native-speaker (of English) has commented on it (I'm unsure whether the noun "national" has the right meaning):

In general, Finland-Swedes consider themselves to be just as much Finnish nationals as the Finnish-speaking majority, i.e. they support Finland in sports, consider Finland their home country and themselves a part of Finnish society but they have their own identity, which is distinct of that of the majority (and wish to be recognized as such).

Possibly, the word "Finlander" could be made more common by including the following (opinions, please!):

Preferably, Finnish nationals should be referred to as "Finlanders" since it encompasses all - regardless of native language. In English, however, the word "Finn" is more commonly used but Finland-Swedes, might dislike it because the accurate Swedish translation of it ("finne") usually implies a speaker of Finnish. In Swedish the word "finländare" is thus more commonly used (especially in Finland) and the accurate English translation of that is "Finlander", but that is - unfortunately - rarely used. Finnish-speakers usually fail to make this distinction in English (and have thus made the word "Finn" more common) because the Finnish language only has one word for Finlanders or Finns ("suomalainen").

The current version of the article is the first time ever that I encounter someone claiming that a Finn could perceive "Finlander" as offensive. What is that statement based on? As I've stated above there's a linguistical explanation why Finnish-speakers usually say "Finn".

I'd also add following part from the Swedish wikipedia, since it clarifies things (it's not an exact translation but a more elaborate continuation to the translation I made above and it's stated in conjunction with the same part on the Swedish wikipedia page): Even though their culture bears a stronger resemblance to that in Sweden than to that of the Finnish-speaking majority, they do not feel affiliated with present-day Sweden.

Furthermore I think that the sentence "Today, it's often stated that Finland-Swedes are not Swedes in any other sense than that of language, and that the history (from 1714 and on) gives them no reason to feel any obligation or allegiance to Sweden." is quite pointless for a couple of reasons: (1) What does obligation or allegiance really mean in this context (what are you trying to express)? (2) Stated by whom? In previous versions it was "the Finnish speakers" but I don't see why their opinion is relevant in an article about Finland-Swedes.

I also wonder whether the sentence "...the exception may be the monolingual Åland islands." only adds confusion? A friend of mine from Åland said that a poll that was recently conducted there showed that 7 % wish for independence, 2 % that Åland was part of Sweden and the rest are satisfied with its current status. The poll was, however, conducted by "Fria Åland", which strives for independence and might thus be a little bit biased - I have, however, been unable to find it online but only searched briefly since I really don't think the matter is very important. If others think it is, you should most definitely not just include those figures as such but instead first find the poll to use as a reference.

/Mathias_Johansson

• Mathias - I totally support your suggestions. I've marked a few passages with bold type in your text above that I think should be incorporated in the article. Would you want to do it yourself? If I don't see the changes in a week or so, I'll do it myself. PS: Do create a user page, so we can send messages to you! --Janke | Talk 07:58, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

I started my discussion page now (I wanted to do that yesterday but I had forgotten my login and the new password e-mail was somehow infinitely delayed). /Mathias_Johansson

"widely established tacit agreement"

In my opinion that part should be removed for several reasons: (1) It's quite likely based purely on the personal experience of the individual that wrote it and I can immediately say that my experience has been the complete opposite: Finnish-speakers frequently want to speak Swedish with us so that they can use the language and also improve it through practice (2) If it isn't obvious enough already due to the different experiences; it's ridiculous to state that there is any "tacit agreement" for choice of language in a group since it's simply case-by-case: varying language skills + context (eg. business meeting / party) + promille level (all Finns speak Swedish when they're drunk ;) (3) I don't see how an encyclopedia should include such an explanation of something so vague and irrelevant for people to whom this article should teach something new (i.e. foreigners that presumably speak neither Finnish nor Swedish).

/Mathias_Johansson

• Well, this is a matter of opinion. It is a fact, at least in my own experience, that a group tends to speak Finnish if there's even one Finn present. (My girlfriend "listens fluently", and speaks Swedish pretty well, even though a bit shyly, but still all my Finlander friends always speak Finnish in her presence!) So, this part could be re-written somewhat. Can we reach consensus here? I will wait a few days before doing anything... --Janke | Talk 08:05, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean with concensus but I think it should simply be omitted - it's not relevant for foreigners reading this unless they speak both languages and visit Finland - and in that case they'll have their own experiences (which, as I noted, vary).

Finns or Finlanders

A few points regarding my changes:

I made the changes that I previously proposed and removed most parts regarding ethnicity - Janke suggested it and I agree; I think that the link to the article "ethnic Swedes" is enough. Even though I'm not familiar enough with that subject to assess that article I think that everybody agrees that the content here was a mess (ethnicity + status + politics all-in-one). I don't object if someone wants to re-enter some of that under "History", though.

I'm still unsure whether "Finnish nationals" has the right meaning - perhaps it should be replaced with "Finnish people". As I stated previously, if a native speaker of English can comment, it would be greatly appreciated. The question I'd like to get answered is whether the explanation "support Finland in sports, consider Finland their home country and themselves a part of Finnish society" is redundant or not - if it is, then the sentence would reflect the right meaning better without the explanation since the issue is obvious in Finland and thus explaining it is awkward (i.e. it shouldn't be "surprising" to anyone).

Personally, I'm unsure whether any Finland-Swede really would dislike being referred to as a Finn abroad but since some users here make claims that that is the case I included it. The difference is important in Swedish (when spoken in Finland) but I doubt that many even know of the word "Finlander" - perhaps it should be added to both Wikipedia and Wiktionary since it does exist in dictionaries (I just checked Norstedts). Swedes from Sweden: Please adopt our use of the words "finne" and "finländare", we'd really appreciate it! (Apologies to those who know the difference, but I read too many Swedish newspapers that don't.)

I kept the content regarding tensions almost intact but the statement "occupy unproportionally many administrative positions" is somewhat POV because: Good language skills (due to many being bilingual and Germanic languages being easier to learn for Swedish-speakers) + good education (due to well-educated parents, which of course is a consequence of past developments and an advantage but hard to see as unjust treatment of Finnish-speakers at present) = good job (and thus there's nothing unproportional about it unless there's discrimination against Finnish-speakers with identical skills). Such content could be included if reformulated to include explanations.

/Mathias_Johansson

• Looks good now. Thanks for cleaning it up - that whole "ethnicity" stuff bothered me. --Janke | Talk 13:27, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
• PS: I added a copyright-fee map - the old one was a copyvio! --Janke | Talk 14:24, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Speaking as your everyday run-of-the-mill finne, I'd like to point out that I have an issue with the word 'Finlander'. First of all, it is not an English word, and is in my opinion a very crude loan. I haven't found it in any dictionary, and it doesn't get very many Google hits on English pages. - ulayiti (talk) 00:45, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Really? Check http://lexikon.nada.kth.se/cgi-bin/sve-eng or http://mot.kielikone.fi/mot/ (the latter requires subscription). /Mathias_Johansson

Secondly, the existence of the distinction in Swedish between finne and finländare does not, in my opinion, justify artificially creating such a distinction in any other language. I find the whole distinction very artificial anyhow - why segregate between two groups of Finns who are nearly identical apart from the language they were raised in? I don't see any beneficial cause as to why this distinction should be artificially enforced on Wikipedia - either the English or the Swedish one. It's not one based on any actual difference, and thus applying a label to a group of Finns that seems to question their 'Finnishness' can only feed prejudice. - ulayiti (talk) 00:45, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

You should also read my previous comments about the issue ("The problem with the term 'Swedish-speaking Finn'" and "Affiliation"). As far as the Swedish wikipedia is concerned the difference between "finländare" and "finne" is a valuable contribution since many in Sweden are unaware of it and the words contribute to the language. They're used consistently in Finland-Swedish to distinguish between different groups of Finnish people, whenever necessary - you would say "finsk kultur" rather than "finskspråkig kultur", wouldn't you? That doesn't constitute any "segregation" or "artificial distinction". /Mathias_Johansson

It does, because it gives the impression that finländarna aren't 'real' Finns, they just happen to live in a country called Finland. By the way, I just found out that according to the Swedish Academy the use of finländare to refer to Finland-Swedes has developed 'through misunderstanding of the views that the word's creation was based on' and that it really should mean 'citizens of Finland regardless of their race' (see [3] for the entry). And Finland-Swedes aren't exactly a 'race', are they? - ulayiti (talk) 09:12, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

What comes to your phrasing of 'Finnish nationals', I think it's not a suitable expression to use when talking about Finland-Swedes. It seems to suggest someone who's only recently attained the nationality, and so using 'Finnish people' instead would be infinitely better to me. - ulayiti (talk) 00:45, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Tensions between Finnish and Swedish speakers

I removed two paragraphs here - they really don't belong in this article at all. See Mathias' comments above. --Janke | Talk 20:02, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

"Tacit agreement"

This paragraph actually said the same thing twice. So, I removed the "tacit agreement" part. --Janke | Talk 20:06, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

• That change took into account my previous objections as well (I definitely agree about "more convenient") so that's good too. /Mathias_Johansson

Removal of persons-lists

I took the liberty of removing the list of prominent people. These lists really don't serve much purpose, are hardly encyclopedic and notoriously difficult to effectively delimit. If you really want to dabble in name-dropping, try to do it in the actual article text and not merely to list names. That these people are prominent isn't reason enough to mention them here.

Peter ^Isotalo 21:46, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

'Ethnic minority' is POV

The very first sentence of this article says that Finland-Swedes are an 'ethnic minority'. This is a very controversial claim, and is actually denied by most Finland-Swedes themselves, at least according to my personal experience as well as this document from the city of Tampere (the only thing I could find with a quick Google search). The ethnic group article, which is linked to from here, says as follows,

Ethnic groups share a common origin, and exhibit a continuity in time, that is, a history and a future as a people. This is achieved through the intergenerational transmission of common language, institutions, values and traditions. It is important to consider this characteristic of ethnic groups if we are to distinguish them from a group of individuals who share a common characteristic, such as ancestry, in a specific point in time.

Most of this certainly suggests that the Finland-Swedes are not an ethnic group (I mean, they don't even have a common origin, and don't try to claim there's such a thing as Finland-Swedish values).

Now, this has been discussed before (even on this page), but I'm creating a new topic to awaken people to the fact that the last discussion didn't actually result in anything being done. The article is still highly POV, and should be changed to reflect the fact that Finland-Swedes are nothing but a linguistic group (and one that's easy to become part of and disassociate oneself with as well). The ethnic Finn article is problematic as well, since aren't Finland-Swedes ethnic Finns as well? - ulayiti (talk) 15:57, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

• I totally and absolutley agree with you, being a finlandssvensk myself. I definitely don't consider myself belonging to any ethnic minority, only to a linguistic one. (Wikipedia doesn't even have a Babel code for Finland-Swedish! ;-) I usually call myself a Swedish-speaking Finn (or even Finlander) when I correspond in English. Last time around editing, we tried to work around this problem by using weasel words, but I think a total rewrite would be in order. Shall we start a subpage where we can try it out? --Janke | Talk 09:34, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

That would be a good idea. I'd start it myself right now if I had the time, and access to Wikipedia from my home, which I unfortunately haven't got at the moment. But you go ahead and start it and I hope to be able to contribute as well at some point. - ulayiti (talk) 11:07, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

The temporary page is at Finland-Swedes/sub. I'll copy the entire article there, and make some changes. Others who follow this talk can contribute. After some time we can copy the stuff over to the article. OK? --Janke | Talk 13:18, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Recent addition to previous section on this page: I am Finlandssvensk, but I now live in Sweden. I feel more like a Finländare, because of the fact that I feel that Swedes and Finlandssvenskar are two different groups. I feel that we finlandssvenskar have more common things with the finns. //Martin (copied here by--Janke | Talk 20:05, 21 October 2005 (UTC))

Well, more than two weeks with no opposition on this talk page, so I moved the section from the sub-page here. I also removed the active-discuss tag. --Janke | Talk 13:21, 6 November 2005 (UTC) (Svenska dagen... ;-)

I don't quite see the problem with defining Finland-Swedes as an ethnic group. "Ethnicity" is a very broad concept, and as far as I can tell "intergenerational transmission of common language, institutions, values and traditions" is exactly what Finland-Swedes have, even if it doesn't differ vastly from Finnish traditions. Just the fact that Finland-Swedes have their own language separate and unique from Finnish is more than enough to define them as a separate ethnicity. Calling Finland-Swedes just a "linguistic minority" is overlooking the fact that language is one of the primary common denominators of many ethnicities.

Peter ^Isotalo 20:16, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Swedish is an official language of Finland, alongside Finnish. Therefore officially there is no language division. - G3, 15:43, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Finno-Swedes, not "Finland-Swedes"

This and the related articles are basically a joke, as long as proper grammar isn't used for the naming convention. There's no such real word as "Finland-Swedes" or "Finland-Swedish", because there's a more correct and proper naming convention for cases involving two nationalities or nationalility adjectives spelled together as one word with a hyphen. Just look up in a professional encyclopedia like Britannica how Finno-Swedish is written. The main point is that both words get the right form, just like in Finno-Ugric (eg. Finno-Ugric peoples, Finno-Ugric languages) or Sino-Japanese (eg. the Sino-Japanese War). This note applies to also to eg. the "Finland-Swedish" page.

Just a note, the fenno-prefix is, to me at least, mainly used as an adjective, and I would interpret Fenno-Swedish as "Finnish-Swedish", which clearly has a quite different semantic meaning than "Finland-Swedish". 81.232.72.53 20:26, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

The equivalent of "Fenno-Swedish" or "Finno-Swedish" in Swedish would be finsk-svensk as in finsk-svensk diplomati ("Finno-Swedish diplomacy"). The term in Swedish is finlandssvensk, so I can see nothing wrong with current translation. The use of finlandssvensk has clearly been the most relevant because it makes a point about Finland-Swedes being ethnic Swedes (defined by culture, not genetics) who live in Finland and that Finland-Swedish is primarily Swedish spoken in Finland, not an equal merger of Finnish and Swedish.

Peter ^Isotalo 14:49, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Slight disagreement, if I may, as a finlandssvensk myself: Finland-Swedes are not ethnic Swedes, however the word "ethnic" is defined. The only thing separating us from the Finnish majority is our mother tongue, and indeed, our culture, but that is not the culture of Sweden-Swedes. There are significant differences, in some cases more marked than between us and the Finnish majority. --Janke | Talk 15:03, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

You're right. I didn't mean to equate them with Sweden-Swedes. Just to separate them from Finns. However, I don't think that speaking a different language is as superficial as is claimed. See above for further discussion.

Peter ^Isotalo 20:20, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Terminology

I'm not sure if it means anything but the Swedish Assembly of Finland (svenska Finlands folkting), "a semi-official body representing the Swedish-speaking population" (direct quote from their publication, see later), uses the English term Swedish-speaking Finns and the French term les suèdophones de Finlande in their own communications. Please see [4]. The principle of the right for self-designation should of course be followed, whatever is decided on this issue... Clarifer

• This is indeed the term I prefer, being a Swedish-speaking Finn, myself. It is totally inambiguous, while "Finland-Swede" is not - it could be applied to Swede who has moved to Finland... --Janke | Talk 22:03, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree. The people should be called 'Swedish-speaking Finns' and the language 'Finnish Swedish' (by analogy to 'American English', for example). We should try and establish consensus for a consistent set of terms to be used within the project. I propose a straw poll on the subject. - ulayiti (talk) 22:16, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

• I think that the term Swedish-speaking Finn is actually ambiguous. To me this could mean any Finlander who speaks Swedish, regardless of their mother-tongue, e.g. one could say that Tarja Halonen is a Swedish-speaking Finn, as she is a Finn who is able to speak Swedish. However, this does not make her finlandssvensk of course. I agree that the terms Finland-Swede and Finland-Swedish are slightly confusing in English, especially as most English people will hear them with little context or understanding the first time, however, I think they are the best that there is. --94pjg 13:32, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

  I agree with 94. Finland-Swedes are quite clearly defined as a group in Swedish-language encyclopedias and to a Swede it would seem very strange to call a person from, say, Malmö or Västerås who has moved to Finland a "Finland-Swede". Even people who confuse Finland-Swedish and Finnich-accented Swedish would probably make the distinction. Personally, I can only perceive "Finland-Swede" as being a confusing term for people who've never heard it before. The solution to this is obviously to encourage people to read the article for clarification, not to invent new hyper-correct terminology.

  As for the right for self-designation, I am skeptical that the Swedish Assembly of Finland is representative of all Finland-Swedes, and it really seems more like politically correct POV than a relevant or intuitive self-designation. / Peter ^Isotalo 15:12, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Germanic language influence in Finnish

There is no doubt that Finnish has Germanic influence and many loan words. However, a few points may perhaps be allowed. 1. Not only Finnish but also all other Baltic-Finnic languages have Germanic loans. Therefore, the real source of such words in Finnish may not be directly a Germanic language itself but one of the close relatives of Finnish. 2. There are many layers of loans that can be considered Germanic and they do include also 'basic' words. 'Ja', however, cannot be found in any lists (at least I couldn't). Chronologically, loans from the postulated influence from the Corded Ware Culture would probably fall more on a pre-Germanic, pre-Baltic phase of the Indo-European languages in northern Europe. It has been estimated that from this period, words like 'kesä' (Summer) 'kasvaa' (grow), 'soutaa' (row) could have entered the (at the time) proto-Finno-Samic languages. 3. Words that look Germanic are in fact older Indo-European loans (i.e. from a pre-Germanic period). These would include 'nimi' (name, ancient Indian 'näma' Gothic 'namo'), 'kuka' (who, ancient Indian ku-tah, Gothic 'hvas') etc. There's no doubt that the Germanic languages (Swedish, which separated from 'eastern Norse' by the 13th century, inclusive) have influenced also Finnish over an extensive period of time. However, as with everything, this influence should not be exaggerated. The Baltic languages of the Indo-European group (with their own Germanic loans) may have had a far deeper and an older impact on Finnish, which might have earlier been interpreted as "Germanic" due to historical reasons. Clarifer

1, OK, but then the words are at least originally Germanic. 2. "Jah" is found in Gothic with the meaning "and". 85.226.122.205 16:55, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

the Finland-Swedish standard language

There's more to Finland-Swedish than just unofficial regional dialects... FST newscasters (who supposedly speak non-colloquial language) sound totally different from the Swedish ones. I think this deserves to be mentioned.

In what way do they sound totally different? They obviously have a Finland-Swede accent, which lacks the sing-song nature of a lot of Rikssvenska speakers that you will find on SVT or TV4 or other channels from Sweden. But, essentially, the language itself is virtually the same. Of course, many governmental system terms are different between Finland and Sweden, but that's largely because in Finland, the Swedish terms for the Finnish authorties will largely follow their Finnish-language versions (e.g. using ministry instead of department in describing the government's sub-units etc). --94pjg 00:20, 14 January 2006 (CET)

In Finland Swedish-language terms do actually not follow Finnish terms as such, but both the Finnish and the Swedish terms follow tzarist Russian terms. This is because the foundations of the Finnish administative system was built during Finland's time as an autonomous part of Russia during the 19th century. As for more modern terms Swedish language terms do follow the Finnish example in Finland, but after some akward translations in the 1960s-1980s, there is a very strong effort to follow the development of the language in Sweden.

(Primary) ethnic identity

Claiming that nearly all Finland-Swedes are simply ethnic Finns with an "alternative linguistic preference" is like saying that Russian-speaking residents of Latvia are merely Letts who happen to speak Russian. This may be the self-designation of some and the label given to these groups by some in the surrounding societies, but it is definitely not a universally accepted fact. See Talk:Finnish people and Talk:Swedish people. //Big Adamsky 07:12, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, after starting contributing to this subject on Wiki, I've asked dozens of Finland-Swedes what they themselves think. They come from all over Finland: Åland, Osthrobotnia, Uusimaa and so on. Not a single one could identify with being an ethnic Swede, not even the Ålanders! They all considered themselves Finns who speak Swedish. I know this is not a large sample, but since it is geographically diverse, I think it's valid. However, saying Finns with an "alternative linguistic preference" isn't right, either - they were "born into the language", even though born as Finns. --Janke | Talk 07:36, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I completely agree with Janke. I have never met a Finland-Swede who considered themselves to be an ethnic Swede either. Every single Finland-Swede I have ever met has considered themselves to be a Finn and indeed invariably are very proud of their 'Finnishness'. 94pjg 21:15, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

I have never met or even heard of Finland-Swedes who refer to themselves as ethnically Finnish. (Being "proud" of where one lives or belongs doesn't affect ethnic identities radically.) But surely there are bound to be some who will self-identify as ethnic Finns with an exotic twist. =] //Big Adamsky 02:48, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Note here that there are many citizens in Sweden which do not consider themselves as ethnic swedes. I am not only referring to immigrants and non-scandinavian speaking minorities (like samis and Tornedalen finns) but also to e.g. scanians (from Skåneland/Scania), guts (from Gotland), jamts (from Jämtland) etc. I am a jamt myself, and do not label myself as ethnic swede, but rather ethnic jamt. This is probably analogous to how the Ålanders label themselves as being Ålanders rather than finns or swedes, ethnically. To me, the ethnic swedes are those who live in Svealand and southeastern Norrland. The rest are geats, guts, jamts, scanians, vestrobothnians/norrlanders etc.

Jens Persson, jepe2503 at hotmail dot com (30 Jan 06)

It's deeply rooted into the mindset of the Finland-Swedes that they are not (i.e. no longer) "Swedes". The current wording "Finland-Swedes and the Finnish-speaking Finns are usually considered one ethnicity" is however not the best, since Finns do not go around and feel ethnic - one may have nationalist feelings and patriotic feelings and political identity and religious identity and often a weak feeling of belonging to one or some of a set of different cultural regions (West, East, Far North, Woods, Lakes, Coasts, Archipelago, Capital, Province), but ethnic identification is of no relevance except with regard to the Saami people.

If now ethnicity is what necessarily has to be mentioned, then for sure it would be the best to word it more along the lines of "Finland-Swedes and Ethnic Finns in Finland have during some periods felt reason to exaggerate their differences, and at other times to emphasize unity and similarities. Today in Mainland Finland Finland-Swedes overwhelmingly consider themselves to be closer affiliated with the Ethnic Finns than with Ethnic Swedes, although with somewhat closer cultural similarities and ties to Sweden than what's the case for the Ethnic Finns in Finland." 81.236.184.210 10:45, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Well said! I absolutely agree with the above, and won't object if you put that into the article. - If I'd have to choose an "ethnicity" other than "Finland-Swede", it wold naturally be Finnish. However, I do also feel that "ethnic" is a bit too strong a distiction between our two language groups - in many bilingual families, it is simply a matter of choice, i.e. what one reports to the authorities. Sami, Roma, immigrants - they are of different ethnicity, naturally, as is a Swede born in Sweden, but who happens to live in Finland. --Janke | Talk 12:31, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

So, what [some of] you are essentially saying is that Finnish society on the whole is actually a lot more coherent and "naturally" bilingual in the "private sphere" (many mixed marriages and kindergartens, etc) than what is the case in, say, Ireland or eastern Canada or southern and western Switzerland? Interesting... //Big Adamsky 15:28, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

It's a bit difficult to compare, because in actual fact the only difference between Finland-Swedes and other Finns is what language they've reported as their mother tongue to the authorities. Anyone living in Finland can become a Finland-Swede simply by going to the registry office and giving Swedish as your native language. You don't even have to be a citizen (though I think actually being able to speak Swedish helps). And yes, people who change from Finnish to Swedish (or vice versa) are actually considered 'real' Finland-Swedes just as much as the next person. - ulayiti (talk) 02:01, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I'll make yet another attempt to state what I perceive is the totally dominant view:

Finns, regardless of mothertongue, do not consider the difference between Finland-Swedes and "Finland-Finns" to be one of ethnicity, but chiefly one of language and of geographical region within Finland. This difference is to some degree also considered to be a difference of "culture" but not sufficiently much so to motivate a feeling of difference with regard to ethnicity. The concept of ethnicity is spared for other uses.

Åland is a particular case, some people, particularly them from Åland, might object against calling native Åland inhabitants for "Finns" - and let's now for the sake of simplicity forget about them.

There are a set of stereotypes connected to the minority, and the minority has as every minority reasons to protect its security and survival, but this does not affect the issue.

Minority status per se does not create separate ethnicities. At least not in Finland.

This is not to say that ethnicities are totally beyond the thinking of the Finns.

Saami people and Gypsie people are domestic ethnic minorities (although much smaller than the Finland-Swedes).

Then there are non-Finnic immigrants. They are considered "ethnic" too. :-)

But often not their children.

Where it gets really tricky is when discussing the Sweden-Finns. I do not know what proportion of Finns feel them to be ethnically different from the (Sweden-) Swedes, but I would guess that quite a few do so.

Who said people must follow logics?

81.236.184.210 15:27, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, there are many mixed marriages.

No, there are not many mixed schools or pre-schools. Or at least not mixed classes. Education is the most prominent locus for segregation between the language groups. This segregation is considered a good thing that ensures the minority rights that go beyond them in any comparable country.

The society as such puts pride into its bilingualism, and not being fluent in both languages is a considerable disadvantage for politicians, corporative executives and that lot. Approximately 50% of the electorate voted for a Finland-Swedish woman for president a few years ago. Her Finnish is quite good, of course, but correspondingly were all serious presidential candidates in this year's election eager to show off their competence in "the other domestic language".

In the officially bi-lingual parts of Finland, the legal rights of the minority are not always equally accessible, for instance when visiting a police station in the evening you may discover that your knowledge in the majority-language is superior to their knowledge in the minority-language, why you conveniently give up your legal rights of communicating with governmental authorities in your mother tongue. This affects also Finnish speakers. Very few make a fuss about it.

From knowing very little about Canada or Belgium, it seems as the minority rights are far superior and also far better implemented in Finland. Similarly, the tensions are much more lenient.

There exists a strand of resent among the native Finnish speakers, that to its character is easiest to compare to populist xenophobic movements in other European countries. It's often mixed with a general anti-authoritorian antipathy against "the elite" in posh Helsinki officies. The strength of this current is hard to assess.

81.236.184.210 15:27, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Anon user's additions

An anonymous editor (apparently pushing an agenda against Finland-Swedes and the Swedish language in Finland; see contribs at Special:Contributions/84.231.217.70), repeatedly re-inserts POV material here. In the article Apartheid_outside_South_Africa the same anon. repeatedly inserts a section about Finland, claiming our country's constitutional bilingualism constitutes "Åpartheid". This is utter nonsense, and has been repeatedly removed by logged-in editors. The anon. also posts mock vandalism warnings on reverting logged-in users' talk pages. Please keep an eye on this, thank you. --Janke | Talk 22:07, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Hate mongering

I have no strong feelings about whether "Apartheid" as a political slur is used in very creative ways (I've given up on that). But when referencing phrases like "pampered minority" that needs to be followed by a general discussion of minority-majority relations. Otherwise it is just hate speech with an external source. Cf. Model minority and Consociational state. //Big Adamsky 21:12, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

The reference the anon. points to, as having appeared in several papers, is one opinion piece by one journalist, reprinted in other media. --Janke | Talk 07:38, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Back again

The same anon. is back again, inserting his/her POV, and doing a minor edit after that, to cover up. Just so you know. --Janke | Talk 06:54, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Today, the coverup was the edit summary itself: (I'm glad to finally see an accurate map, instead of propaganda). I agree about the map, though. The new one is better, the previous was just a quick fix I did to avoid a copyvio - not "propaganda", however! --Janke | Talk 14:10, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Terminology again

I can neither speak Finnish or Swedish, English is my mother tongue.

The term "Finland Swede" is simply not correct English. Whatever the political connotations, "Swedish-speaking Finn" is the correct term. You just cannot say Finland Swede - it's like saying "England Frenchman". It sounds like a typical error from a foreigner.

It is the best there is in English, it's not perfect. However, "Swedish-speaking Finn" could refer to any person from Finland who can speak Swedish, as many Finns with Finnish as their mother tongue can indeed do. Finland Swede makes the distinction that the individual is a Finn with Swedish as their mother-tongue. 94pjg 19:15, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Finland Swede is gramatically incorrect in English. Moreover it is simply not the correct term. The term used in the English language for many years for the Swedish minority in Finland is "Swedish-speaking Finn". "Finland Swede" says nothing about language the person speaks in any case. (IP: 85.210.29.96)

I removed the "disputed" tag you put up - you only dispute the terminology, not the actual article, right? Swedish-speaking Finn already redirects to this article, so anybody looking for that term will get to the right place. (In fact, I myself prefer "Swedish-speaking Finn", but I'm not so bold as to change it everywhere... PS; Please sign your posts, even just with your IP, or preferably, sign in with a username - thanks! --Janke | Talk 20:50, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

How About:

• Finnish Swede
• Fenno-Swede
• Finno-Swede

The "Swedish-Speaking Finn" sounds so stiff, and they never refer themselves as Finns (finnar) in Swedish. Finlanders (Finländare) is a usable word, if they mean all the Finnish people. If they talk about only the Swedish-speaking residents of Finland, they say "Finland Swedes" or "Finland's Swedes" (finlandsvenskar/finlandssvenskar) or only "Swedes" if it can't be confused with the Swedes living in Sweden. So let's choose one of the above terms. I'd like to point out that the term "finn" in Swedish language means also "acne". --84.231.134.30 09:50, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

• Finnish Swede, Fenno-Swede, Finno-Swede - They are no better than Finland-Swede. I'm not a Swede! I am a Finnish citizen, who happens to have Swedish as my first language. The best alternative is Swedish speaking Finn, but there seems to be opposition to that, and it is somewhat clumsy. BTW, it's not finn that is acne, it's finne. --Janke | Talk 11:21, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

What I meant was that "En finne" is "acne", as well it is "a finn". Finnish-speaking people are sometimes offended about this. --84.231.134.30 18:06, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

• "Swedish speaking Finn" is correct, although clumsy. Look prior in discussion to see why your three proposed alternatives all are incorrect: [[5]] 惑乱 分からん 22:38, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

"This is wrong, most Finland-Swedes do not speak Finnish. Some do, but most of them do not. Most Finland-Swedes feel a greater affiliation to Sweden than to Finland. They watch television, listen to radio from Sweden, read books from Sweden - all this in Swedish. Of course they not feel like they are living in a foreign country, after all, they have lived there for thousands of years - longer than the Finns! But they feel that they are Swedes, and that it is their country at least as much as the Finns. Den fjättrade ankan 01:19 May 5, 2003 (UTC)"

None of that is correct... Finland-Swedes would laugh at that if they would read this!

Wouldn't "Swedish Finns" be the best English description for these people. If you wanted to specify the majority, you could call them Finnish Finns. This terminology is more in line with normal English, I think. Since most Swedish Finns feel they are Finns (and now I mean Finn in the normal English use, not ethinicity), the description Swedish Finn would tell us that, indeed, this is a Swedish Finn. Think of French Canadians (5 060 000 hits in Google) - same thing. We don't call them Canada Frenchmen.

The dialect (but not the people speaking it) could be called "Finland Swedish".

By the way, Finlander and Finland-Swedes are words that won't survive in the English usage.

Cheerio from Sweden --Wahlin 01:40, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't think 'Swedish Finns' would be a good description, since they're not 'Swedish'. In my opinion, 'Swedish-speaking Finns' would be the best option, but 'Finland-Swedes' is all right too, as it's based on the actual Swedish usage. - ulayiti (talk) 10:08, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

And Finnish usage: Suomenruotsalaiset.

As another mother-tongue English-speaker, I have to mildly disagree with 94pjg. The term 'Finland Swede' is at least totally transparent: it means a Swede of Finland (i.e. neither a Swede of Sweden nor a Finnish-speaking Finn). True, it's not the term I would have been most likely to volunteer myself, which is 'Swedish-speaking Finn', but it's not really wrong, if we want to stress the territorial aspect of Finnishness. 'Finnish Swede' doesn't pack the same territorial punch, and 'Swedish Finn' – well, that makes sense to me by analogy with 'English Canadian', but it may confuse others. Anyway, 'English Canadian' is just conversational shorthand for 'English-speaking Canadian', which brings me back to 'Swedish-speaking Finn'... QuartierLatin1968 01:24, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually, you've convinced me: I'd even prefer 'Swedish Finn' over 'Finland-Swede'. But 'Swedish-speaking Finn' still sounds best. Should we have a straw poll to get a clearer view on what the majority opinion is on this? - ulayiti (talk) 15:04, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Best to call these people Swedish Finns in English

We are discussing the best English term for a minority of Finnish citiziens.

Saying that someone is a Swedish Finn does not mean that they are "Swedish". If a boxer is light heavyweight, he is not "light", but light heavyweight. Someone who lives in British Columbia is not "British", but a British Columbian. A Russian Jew (who lives in Israel) does not consider himself to be a Russian, I think, but a Russian Jew.

In the construction Swedish Finn, the Finn is the noun, and the adjective Swedish adds a property to this noun.

French Canadians are not "French", but they are, in fact, French Canadians. The French Canadian is actually a good example of a large majority in an otherwise English-speaking country. The French Canadians by the way, support Canada in ice hockey, not France (no surprise, of course). These French Canadians can be quite well corresponded to the Swedish Finns. And French-speaking Canadians and Swedish-speaking Finns are too clumsy constructions. Words must be efficient if they want to be used. Let's call them French Candadians and Swedish Finns. Nice constructions of adjective + noun, easily understood by everyone.

I think the Swedish term "Finlandssvensk" is an unhappy one, and svenskfinne would be better. But since finlandssvensk has been throroughly rubbed in by now, I guess we have to stick with it in Swedish. Especially since conversely a Finnish Swede is called "Sverigefinne". Just don't try to spread these terms into English. They are not typical for Swedish either. A man of Swedish descent in the US is called "svenskamerikan" (Swedish American) and not "amerikasvensk". The good old French Canadians are called "franskkanadensare", not "kanadafransmän".

--Wahlin 17:58, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

These things seem difficult to standardize. Your idea is good and logically sound in an American English (sic! ;) language context of course. Could it be that in Swedish the term 'finlandssvenskar' (the people) has originally been derived from 'finlandssvenska' (the name of the Swedish language variant) rather than from 'Finland's svenskar'? (svenskar as an ethnic group is fairly modern?) If so, it follows the pattern of language variants like e.g. "Swiss German" (Schwyzerdütsch), "Swiss French" etc. etc. I'm not sure, but I've never heard of German Swiss people or French Swiss people. The people are just Swiss who speak a certain language as mother tongue ;) (Similarly: French Belgians for Walloons? Dutch Belgians for Flemings? Would seem a bit strange?) In Finnish, the relevant term is 'suomenruotsalainen' which is in line with the pattern of e.g. 'kanadanranskalainen' (French Canadian) or 'ruotsinsuomalainen' (Finnish Swede? Sweden-Finn?). These are nouns with a meaning of their own. E.g. 'suomenruotsalainen' is very seldom understood as 'Suomen ruotsalainen' which means 'Finland's Swede'. Should we now introduce the use of lower-case letters into the English language in this context? ;) Clarifer 08:42, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Swedish Finns can be confused to Sweden Finns. --Lalli 10:57, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Discussing what is best is irrelevant. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and should thus reflect common usage and not invent new terms. Common usage in English, whether you think it is logically correct or not, is "Swedish-speaking Finn". Noone knows what a Finland Swede is whereas plenty of people know the term Swedish-speaking Finn. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.178.105.9 (talk • contribs) 14:55, 12 September 2006 (UTC).

Yes, you are right, and most of the comments by all the apparently mostly non-native speakers above are unfortunately not correct or relevant. Please see discussion below. --Espoo 17:32, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Tampere not bilingual

The map shows Tampere as a "bilingual city with Finnish speaking majority". This is not true: Tampere is really unilingually Finnish.--80.186.100.180 12:26, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

To my understanding the Language Act defines a bilingual municipality as one with at least 3000 registered speakers of the second domestic language. I'm pretty sure that in a city of ca. 200000 inhabitants this holds true. [6] Clarifer 07:42, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

In this link: http://www.kotus.fi/kielitoimisto/nimisto/paikannimet/kaksikiel.shtml#2suomi Tampere is not on the list of bilingual cities and it IS mentioned on the list of Swedish names for FINNISH speaking cities. Anyone visiting Tampere can also see that it is not bilingual, since the street names are only in Finnish. 80.186.100.180 01:06, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I stand corrected. The map should be edited then. Clarifer 06:36, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Tammerfors is definately unilingual Finnish. There are some Finland-Swedes living there, for instance there are church services and a (possibly private) Swedish school. However, the number is just a handfull; too low to make Tampere bilingual. 94pjg 10:09, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Didn't anybody read the info on the map's image page? It clearly states Tampere is unilingual, but has 1,000 Swedish speakers. I've copied that text into the map's caption. --Janke | Talk 15:13, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Why then is Tampere marked on the map at all?81.175.134.236 21:46, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I laughed a bit when I read this. And now I want to know how to mark this whole article as politically biased lies.

Swedish missionaries

"Christianity was introduced to Finland from the east a couple of hundred years before)"

This is very a simplistic and partial view. Of course, there were some early influences of Eastern Christianity, but sure as hell there were Swedish and other western missionaries too. This is elementary knowledge of Finnish medieval history, so there is no reason to ask for citations.--217.112.242.181 10:45, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Crosses and Christian tombs have been found 100, 200 years before the alleged crusade in 1150s. So, if the land was under Christian influence, why would there be need for missionaries? I think it seems quite likely that the Swedes only (later?) described the conquest as a crusade to justify their aggression towards Finns. --Jaakko Sivonen 13:59, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Archaeologically documednted Christian influence during the 11th century or possibly before was exactly that: "influence", not a complete conversion. Of course, it did not eliminate the need for missionaries later. The crusade myth probably is a later construct, but it has nothing to do with missionary thing. Finland had some Christianity already before the Swedish takeover, but the process certainly was not finished, and missionaries certainly were involded even later stages. Please read some books of this and avoid making your own conclusions.--217.112.242.181 16:42, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Jaakko is right in mentioning a most probable occurence of Christianity in Finland before the 'crusades' but that does not mean that the Swedes did not bring missionaries. Once again, it's pointless thinking of Finland as a modern state almost a thousand years ago. The presence of Christianity in some parts of the country does not mean that the whole area that constitute Finland today was Christian, nor was it after the Swedish 'crusades' were over. JdeJ 18:12, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

BTW, could give some sources for the claim that large numbers of immigrants from Sweden arrived with the missionaries? --Jaakko Sivonen 20:58, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I tried to give a more neutral formulation for it.--217.112.242.181 11:08, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was Move. Duja^► 15:31, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

---

Finland-Swedes → Swedish-speaking Finns — Despite widespread use in Finland, "Finland-Swedes" is not correct English; it is an incorrect translation of the Swedish and Finnish terms that have "Swedes" as the noun for historic reasons. (Arose prior to birth of concept of nation-state, so "Swede" meant "speaker of Swedish", not "citizen of Sweden". In addition, historical and genetic studies have shown that Swedish-speaking Finns and Finnish-speaking Finns are not different ethnic groups and have intermarried and switched language use back and forth extensively.) The correct English term for the Swedish language minority in Finland would be "Swedish Finns" (similarly to "French Canadians", who are also not called "Canada French(men)"), but this is not possible because "Swedish Finns" is also incorrectly used, especially in Sweden, to refer to Finns that have moved to Sweden and to the Finnish minority that has lived there for a long time (which should be called "Finnish immigrants" and "Finnish Swedes" respectively.) Therefore the only correct English term that is unambiguous is "Swedish-speaking Finns". Espoo 18:45, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Survey

Add  * '''Support'''  or  * '''Oppose'''  on a new line followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.

• Support - I am a PhD student in linguistics and a native speaker of English who has lived in Finland using Swedish as my main language, and with social networks consisting mainly of Swedish-speaking Finns. I do not feel strongly about making the change, but I do agree that "Finland-Swedes" is a simple translation of the terms "finlandssvenskar" and "suomenruotsalaisia" and sounds a little funny in English - the same way the "France Canadians" (as opposed to the better-sounding French Canadians) would sound strange. I suppose the reason "Finland-Swedes" is parsable is because most people who use it are familiar with the terms in the other languages. So more grammatically correct English might be "Finnish Swedes," but then this doesn't seem to be the right term, since these people don't self-identify as being from Sweden. I think "Swedish-speaking Finns" is the most appropriate, since it neither sounds like non-native English nor creates ambiguity about which group of people is meant. I have heard the term "Swedo-Finns" which I also think is fine, but it is less transparent and might be harder to find in a search. Yuni123 21:06, 24 October 2006 (UTC)Yuni
• Support. Being a Swedish-speaking Finn myself, that's the term I've used in English correspondence. Note however, that the person(s) doing the change will have to edit about 80 pages that refer to "Finland-Swedes" in order to be consistent (see "What links here"). A simple page move won't fix this. --Janke | Talk 06:56, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I'll gladly volunteer to do that. It's high time this remnant of the cultural isolation of Finland during the Kekkonen era disappears, and it's a disgrace to the Swedish Finns (especially since they have always had more international contacts than the Finnish Finns) that they're still described by erroneous terms in the most international language. I'd advise any Swedish Finns that want to help get rid of this disgrace to send their feedback to Forskningscentralen för de inhemska språken. (They're primarily responsible for this mess.) --Espoo 08:43, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

• Support "I agree that the use of "Finland Swedes" should be discontinued. In spite of the fact that it is widely used in Finland and Sweden, it is not proper English and would likely be confusing to English speakers hearing the term for the first time. "Swedish Finns" would not be confusing (except for the fact that most people seem to be surprised to learn that there are Swedish speakers in Finland!), and "Swedish-speaking Finns" would be equally clear." -- statement made by David Jansson, professor of geography at Vassar College in Poughkeepsie, NY, for this discussion and sent to me by private correspondence. He adds "Feel free to use that in my name. (And in case you need to know, I was born and raised in the US, am a professor of geography at Vassar College in Poughkeepsie, NY, and I have roots in Åland, Finland, and I have recently learned how to speak Swedish.)" And as explained on http://geologyandgeography.vassar.edu/jansson.html, "he is currently working on a research project in Scandinavia examining geographic identity among Swedish Finns." (My emphasis) --Espoo 06:53, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

• Support the term "Swedish speaking finns" is more correct than "Finland-Swedes", which would mean the swedes (svensson :) ) living in Finland. While it is exactly what is used in Swedish (Finlandsvenskar) or Finnish (Suomenruotsalaiset), but a literal translation to English loses its meaning and is not correct.--A Jalil 22:23, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

Add any additional comments:

• As noted in the discussion above, the most representative organisation of Swedish Finns uses the term "Swedish-speaking Finns". (http://www.folktinget.fi/pdf/publikationer/SwedishInF.pdf

http://www.folktinget.fi/en/index.html)

• The Society of Swedish Authors in Finland also uses "Swedish-speaking Finns"
• Despite apparently incorrect English use in Sweden, "Swedish Finns" in academic English use means what it should, namely the Swedish speaking minority in Finland (compare Swedish Americans, Finnish Americans, Italian Americans, etc!), as all the search results for http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=&q=site%3Aedu+%22Swedish+Finns&btnG=Search seem to indicate:

http://www.emich.edu/symposium/abstracts2002/students/long.html

http://cognition.clas.uconn.edu/~jboster/research/working_papers/maltseva.pdf

http://davidwit.bol.ucla.edu/biography1.htm

http://ohioline.osu.edu/~ockint/countries/Finland.doc

http://www.naha.stolaf.edu/oldsite/publications/volume27/vol27_15.htm http://209.85.129.104/search?q=cache:D-fw4twXi8MJ:www.naha.stolaf.edu/oldsite/publications/volume27/vol27_15.htm+site:edu+%22Swedish+Finns&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=24

(This one may be an exception due to the writer apparently being a visiting professor from Finland or Sweden: http://geologyandgeography.vassar.edu/jansson.html ) Edit: I've corresponded with the author and he also uses "Swedish Finns" in the normal English way that means "Finnish citizens that are native Swedish speakers" (which corresponds exactly to hundreds of other designations in English such as Finnish Americans and Italian Americans).

http://www.cambridge.org/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=052183225X&ss=ind (uses "Swedish-speaking Finns" throughout book)

--Espoo 18:59, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

This has been discussed earlier - but frankly, does it matter? There's already a redirect with that name, so anyone searching can find it, and get a redirect here. If you do change it, you'll have to change the link names on a lot of pages (check the "What links here" on this article). I won't oppose, but I won't do it either... --Janke | Talk 18:56, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, i know it's been discussed before, but the result was that the incorrect name is still there. "Finland Swedes" and especially "Finland-Swedes" is incorrect English and therefore does not fulfill Wikipedia:Naming conventions --Espoo 19:02, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Swede-Finns?

Sorry if this has already been discussed... this is a long talk page! I just wanted to say that I'm half "Swede-Finn" through my mother, and have never heard any term for this other than "Swede-Finn". My grandfather was born in Finland and came to the United States. Even in old age when I knew him he spoke Swedish and little to no Finnish. But I never heard him or anyone else say he was a "Swedish-speaking Finn". He was a "Swede-Finn". And I've met other Americans with this ancestry who also call such people "Swede-Finns". So I wonder, is there something wrong with this term? Is my experience unusual? Is "Swede-Finn" not the common English term for the people this article describes? Just wondering.. I don't know that much about it, despite my heritage. (and btw, although my mom's family were Swedish speaking, they always identified with the country of Finland and not Sweden. My mom's side of the family is from Finland -- they are Finnish... but happen to be Swedish-speaking Finns, as I understood it. What I personally got from this heritage was a feeling of connection to Finland, not Sweden. Pfly 08:52, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

That's a good point, but it seems to reflect an older language situation, and a situation in which a small group of immigrants spoke about itself without majority input to correct the language error. In English, we say "Spanish American" and "Turkish American", and it's plain bad English to say "Spaniard American" or "Turk American". (And adding a hyphen doesn't help; on the contrary, it's probably a second error. UK English likes to add hyphens more often than US English to compound nouns, but it's usually avoided whenever possible in UK English too.)

More importantly, the expression is very confusing to most English speakers who don't already know a lot about the situation. "Swede-Finn" would make most people think "huh, what are they now, Swedes or Finns?". I would go so far as to say that the inherent ambiguousness of noun+noun instead of adjective+noun is not only bad or at least very unconventional English for describing a people; it may even have been a prime factor in causing the confusion about Finland and its relationship to Sweden and Swedish among the few English speakers who even know where Finland is... The following Googles on edu sites and Google Scholar searches give an indication of usage frequency among careful and educated English speakers although they of course need to be analysed in detail before making any real deductions:

46 hits for site:edu "Swedish-speaking Finns"

41 hits for site:edu "Swedish Finns"

13 hits for site:edu "Swede-Finns"

207 hits for "Swedish-speaking Finns"

60 hits for "Swedish Finns"

13 hits for "Swede-Finns"

--Espoo 09:18, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

In defense of the English language skills of these usually not well-educated immigrants (as were most US immigrants), i should add that due to "Finn" being in the noun position, "Swede-Finns" is still much better English (despite the idiosyncratic use of the wrong demonym for the modifier) than "Finland Swedes", which is not only linguistically incorrect but also sociologically and logically erroneous and nevertheless used by many even highly educated Finns in English... --Espoo 08:17, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Request for expansion

This article mostly focused on current-day Finland-Swedes. There is very little about the Finland-Swedes history. They were a significant group because of their political and cultural importance between 1600–1900.

Fred-Chess 09:12, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

You know the term "Finland-Swede" was coined in the late 19th century... And since the adminstration language in Finland for most of that period was Swedish (racism) those working for the state had to speak Swedish whether it was their native language or not. --Jaakko Sivonen 20:23, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Could any other person please comment? / Fred-Chess 07:32, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

What I stated is not an opinion but a fact. --Jaakko Sivonen 15:52, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Of course it's pure nonsense to talk about racism as Jaakko does. The administrative language of the Swedish empire was Swedish, the administrative language of the English empire was English, French in the French empire, German in the German empire and so on. There was nothin racial nor anything unusual about it. JdeJ 17:32, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I would like to have this article linked to Zacharius Topelius, Johan Ludvig Runeberg, and others. Currently there is very little relevant information. Compare to sv:Finlandssvensk and fi:Suomenruotsalaiset, and I hope you realize how this article could be expanded. / Fred-Chess 18:50, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Topelius was no Finland-Swede: his family's original name was Toppila, a Finnish name, they later latinized it. Topelius also wished that his generation would be the last to use Swedish. And as mentioned, there were no Finland-Swedes before the second half of the 19th century when for example the Swedish Party was founded. One of the guys who helped to inspire this Svecoman movement was this bastard (JdeJ, look at the sub-paragraph 'Rasismi' to understand how the Swedish "bättre folk" thought of Finns then. He is also the spiritual father of the modern Swedish People's Party). Jan-Erik Enestam recognizes this as well: "Allt hade sin begynnelse i slutet av 1800-talet. Då var begreppet finlandssvensk obekant. I Finland talade man svenska eller finska. Det var ingenting märkvärdigt med det. Men i och med att den finska medvetenheten växte till sig uppstod det också ett behov av att samla landets svenskspråkiga kring en egen identitet. Den kanske främsta banerföraren för de svenska strävandena var Axel Olof Freudenthal. Han och hans gelikar lyckades samla de svenskspråkiga kring tanken att svenskan hade ett egenvärde. Finlandssvenskarna både i Österbotten och i södra Finland hittade sig själva." From this speech. Therefore you can't say that Finland-Swedes were an important group in 1600-1900: they did not exist then, they were merely Finns with Swedish as their mother language --Jaakko Sivonen 00:10, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

<sigh> Topelius was born in a monolingual Swedish speaking town of Swedish speaking parents and grew up speaking Swedish. It's true that the term Finlandssvensk was introduced quite late. Just like the term Italian, Croat, Swiss, Belgian etc. If we can call Dante an Italian author we can do the same thing with Finland-Swedes. These days we often use terms such as Italian or German when refering to people who today would be included in that nationality, so the same principle goes here. And up to 1809, these people were of course Swedes, living in the Kingdom of Sweden. It also seems like Jaakko wishes to forget that the term Finnish is quite young as well. Finns identified as Carelians, Hämelaiset, Savolaiset and other groups, just as people did all across Europe. People generally started to identify in terms of nationalities in the 19th century, and that does not apply just to Finland-Swedes. Oh, and using swear words for people you don't like doesn't exactly increase your credibility.JdeJ 09:30, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Neither does Svecomania increase your credibility... Uusikaarlepyy is bilingual by the way and Topelius' family originated from Liminka, a definately unilingual Finnish municipality. Topelius for example fought for the status of Finnish as an official language. "Topelius osasi erittäin hyvin suomea ja hän ajoi lehdellään itsenäisen, mutta kaksikielisen Suomen aatetta." From here. Finns always shared for example the common language and culture, which means that Finns were always a people. --Jaakko Sivonen 19:46, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm not a Svecoman. In sharp contrast to you, I'm not driven by a nationalistic agenda. It's not like I go around changing the names of cities to versions not used in English or take every opportunity to attack Finnish speakers. You use Wikipedia as a tool for your personal hatred towards Swedes. Nykarleby is well over 90% Swedish and was even closer to 100% at the time Topelius was born. His grandfather's grandfather was born in a Finnish place, sure enough. He himself didn't speak Finnish.JdeJ 20:34, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Only Swedish was official for hundreds of years in a land where the overwhelming majority always spoke Finnish. That is racism and apartheid. How would you like it if Arabic would be made the only official language in Sweden and it would be the only language used in adminstration, court and education? --Jaakko Sivonen 00:10, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

No, that's not true. Swedish was the official language of the Swedish empire and Swedish speakers were always the largest group of people in that empire. JdeJ 09:30, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

In Finland Finnish speakers were always in the majority and still the only official language was Swedish (=racism). --Jaakko Sivonen 19:36, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

There was no country called Finland in that time. JdeJ 20:34, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Of course there was, it just wasn't independent. --Jaakko Sivonen 22:42, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Not only that it wasn't independent, it didn't even have any fixed borders. Finland as understood today came into being in 1809.JdeJ 23:36, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

So? There weren't defined borders but Finland was that part of the land which had Finnish speakers. --Jaakko Sivonen 16:39, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Since noone else has said anything opposing, I take it you have a point. To inform you about me -- I don't care about promoting Swedish or Swedish-Finnish; I live in Skåne and couldn't care less. If you are right I think you should just add it to the article, now that you have references and all... add them too... / Fred-Chess 00:28, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

But stop this rubbish about Arabic and apartheid . Keep factual and accurate and it will be much easier for you to be taken serious. / Fred-Chess 00:28, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

POV article

Finland Swedes are not Finns, they are Swedes living in Finland that are citizens of Finland. Thus, this article is completely POV. For example, check this webpage by a Finland Swede, you could hardly argue that he consider himself being a Finn. Den fjättrade ankan 19:25, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

This is the opinion of only you and him so far; not a large enough minority to deserve any mention in an encyclopedia. Obviously there are more of your kind, but you're part of an extremely small group of people and it seems most of you do not live in Finland and know nothing about Finland or its Swedish-speaking citizens. If you cannot find better sources to back up your completely wild and erroneous claims, i will remove the unfounded NPOV tag from the article.

As shown by the many reputable sources and personal comments in the discussions above, almost all Swedish-speaking Finns do not consider themselves Swedes. You are insulting them badly by trying to present them as something that they do not consider themselves to be and that they are not in any genetic, sociological, ethnic, cultural, or any other sense. To repeat just one important point that shows you're completely wrong with your claims: most Swedish-speaking Finns descend from Finnish-speaking people who switched their names and language to Swedish because this opened up better job opportunities and enabled them to rise in society.

The only kind of people that could be called "Finland Swedes" in English are immigrants from Sweden living in Finland, and then it's better English to call them Swedish immigrants or Swedish Finns depending on whether or not they've acquired Finnish citizenship. --Espoo 21:42, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I probably know more Finland Swedes and have spoken to more Finland Swedes than you ever will. The fact is that Finnish nationalists like you try to make the Finland Swedes be Finns against their own wish. They consider themselves Finland Swedes, not Finns. I have never met a Finland Swede calling himself or herself a Finn. On the contrary, they call themselves Finland Swedes or just Swedes. And no, most Finland Swedes do not descend from Finnish-speaking families, they have arrived to Finland from Sweden, often long before the Finns did. And more Finland Swedes have changed to Finnish than the other way around. Please take your Finnish nationalist propaganda out of Wikipedia, it does not belong here. Den fjättrade ankan 22:39, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

If your views are not those of an extremely eccentric and extremely small minority, you'll be able to present us with reputable sources that say the same. Until then, it'd be best if you don't call me something i'm not and that most Swedish-speaking Finns would find insulting. You're lucky i'm a US American and do not feel insulted and only amused by your unfounded and ridiculous claims about Finland's Swedish-speaking population and about myself. If you don't present anything except private opinions by you and other unqualified individuals, i will remove the unfounded NPOV tag that is in fact a Swedish nationalist POV that is not based on facts and does not belong in an encyclopedia. Numerous reputable sources support the article's content and you have not presented any to support your wild claims. --Espoo 22:51, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I hardly think a US American would misspell the word "I". BTW, you haven't presented any credible sources yourself, only your opinions (and no, Finnish nationalist web pages does not count). And IF you were a US American, I hardly think you have ever met a Finland Swede, so you don't know what you are talking about. Just read the prior discussions on this page and you'll see that many Finland Swedes object to being called Finns. This alone deserve the name of this article to be changed since it is not NPOV now, whatever you Finnish nationalists think. Den fjättrade ankan 23:05, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

First of all, you haven't read at all or carefully and haven't understood anything explained in the article in great detail about naming conventions in English. Even if Swedish-speaking Finns were a Swedish ethnic minority like the Swedish immigrants in the USA, it would still be incorrect or at least very old-fashioned and completely misleading to call them "Swedes" or "Finland Swedes" or "anything Swedes" in English. Swedish immigrants are called "Swedish Americans", not "US Swedes", and any attempt to defend such terminology would show that you're presenting a ridiculous private opinion.

And if you're seriously claiming that the Swedish Assembly of Finland and the Society of Swedish Authors in Finland are "Finnish nationalist web pages", then you're even more eccentric and ridiculous than i thought. Unless you present at least one reputable source for your claims by tomorrow, i will remove your trolling NPOV tag. BTW, i've been living in Finland for a very long time, and i've never met anyone with your eccentric views.

I'm a professional copyeditor, and i reserve the right to spell English any way i see fit in my private correspondence. I have never used the more modern and more polite spelling "i" instead of "I" in any professional work or in WP articles because it is not yet recorded in dictionaries, but you can be sure that these will both change very soon. --Espoo 23:48, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Take it from me Espoo (or Esbo in Swedish) I am a Finland-Swede, and I am not a Finn. Why would I be? "Finn" is someone whose first language and ethnicity is Finnish, mine is not - it is Swedish, and I am a Finnish citizen...I am therefore a Finland-Swede, and I have all the right in the world to call myself that. You say you are a US American, following your logic I could call you an native Indian. --MoRsE 00:01, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi MoRsE, welcome to the discussion, especially since you are one of the people this article is about! (Den fjättrade ankan has apparently lived in Sweden all his/her life.) All modern scientists, including linguists and lexicologists, and lexicographers consider self-designation the most important criterion in naming groups of people. We do have to take into consideration, however, that people are not necessarily able to represent their wishes well in a foreign language. I have no idea what you're trying to say with "following your logic I could call you an native Indian". Do you agree that it is correct to call ethnic Swedes living in the USA "Swedish Americans"? Do you agree that it would be incorrect to call them "US Swedes"?

What would you estimate is the percentage of Swedish-speaking Finns that share your opinion that they would like to be called "Swedes"? Are you implying that the Swedish Assembly of Finland and the Society of Swedish Authors in Finland are not representing the wishes of the majority of Swedish-speaking Finns and of all Swedish authors in Finland respectively?

BTW your unilateral page move is in violation of WP policies and will be reverted by an admin shortly. --Espoo 01:01, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

From my experience, it is a clear majority of the Swedish speaking population in Finland that describe themselves as Finland Swedes when it comes to language issues and ethnic issues .

This is obviously nonsense because otherwise the Swedish Assembly of Finland would not be using exclusively "Swedish-speaking Finns". You are clearly representing the opinion of a very small minority. In addition, many of these have incorrect ideas about what "Swedish-speaking" or "Italian-speaking" etc. mean in English and many don't know what normal English usage is for all other similar situations.

Comment: Hey, I am a Finland Swede, and I have been actively working with these issues since 2001, (e.g. cooperation with the said organization Swedish Assembly of Finland), so I should know these issues. Your view is not the real view, as the situation is as I tried to explain.

This comment is completely illogical. If that organisation has decided to use "Swedish-speaking Finns" and stop using the old-fashioned and misleading term, then their opinion is obviously the consensus among the people represented by them. So you are obviously representing a minority opinion. In addition, you still haven't answered my questions, which i'll repeat here:

Do you agree that it is correct to call ethnic Swedes living in the USA "Swedish Americans"? Do you agree that it would be incorrect to call them "US Swedes"?

What would you estimate is the percentage of Swedish-speaking Finns that share your opinion that they would like to be called "Swedes"? Are you implying that the Swedish Assembly of Finland and the Society of Swedish Authors in Finland are not representing the wishes of the majority of Swedish-speaking Finns and of all Swedish authors in Finland respectively?

The problem is that usually the terminology does not consider "language" when naming a group of people like the Finland Swedes. They are of Finnish nationality and are Finns when we're leaving out the linguistic issue. When we deal with linguistic issues, it is important to know that we are not Swedes, as that would imply that we have a Swedish nationality, which we don't have ("Swedish speaker" is although sometimes used). Swedish Finns is not correct either as this is used to for the large group of ethnic Finns that reside in Sweden (to complicate it further, there are also Sweden Finland Swedes (Finland Swedes who have moved to Sweden).

These designations are dealt with in the article. They are not correct in modern English in the sense you want to use them. It is irrelevant that they are often used incorrectly in English texts produced outside of English-speaking countries, i.e. in Finland and Sweden.

Comment: The term Finland-Swede is not incorrect, see e.g. the European Commission document [7] , the official European Union bureau for lesser used languages (EBLUL) news agency document: [8]. (The latter use both versions)

Yes, they show the shift to the new terminology, and this shift is described in the WP article now. "Finland Swedes" is misleading and old-fashioned and the linguist and the geography professor as well as the Swedish-speaking Finns who participated in the requested move discussion above agreed that it should no longer be used. As explained in the WP article right now, the modern naming method is exclusively used in the USA and also used in the UK. That means that we can mention both, but we should base the usage in the article and its title on the one acceptable in all English-speaking countries, especially when this is the more modern one and the one used by the most representative organisation of this minority.

"Swedish-speaking Finn" is a problematic term, which leaves the question of ethnicity unsolved, e.g. by "Finnish author" most would believe he writes in Finnish, by "Finland-Swedish author" we know that the person is from Finland and that he/she writes in Swedish.

The question of ethnicity is clear for most "Swedish-speaking Finns" except you and a very small minority; most consider themselves Finns, not Swedes. The language is called "Finland Swedish" and that is why an author writing in that language can be called a "Finland Swedish author"; it has nothing to do with the name of the people. In correct English, the order of the words is different when talking about the people or the language in such situations. The correct English designations are that Swiss German is spoken by German Swiss and correspondingly that "Finland Swedish" is spoken by "Swedish Finns" or "Swedish-speaking Finns". (Edit: which can also be said "Finnish Swedish is spoken by Swedish Finns", as explained in the article.)

Clarifying You are mixing up nationality and ethnicity here. Yes, most consider them being of Finnish nationality - that I agree on, but I can guarantee you that only a fraction would call themselvelves "Finns" when it comes to defining something that has to do with the language. And, yes, Finland Swedes are a different etnicity, the same goes for Ingrians, Somali, Finns, Swedes etc, that live in Finland too. MoRsE 11:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

only a fraction would call themselvelves "Finns" when it comes to defining something that has to do with the language - I never said anything of the sort. The following sentence was talking about ethnicity: The question of ethnicity is clear for most "Swedish-speaking Finns" except you and a very small minority; most consider themselves Finns, not Swedes. If you can find reputable sources supporting your claim, we can add it to the article. So far we have no proof that this is not the eccentric view of only a very small group.

And the following sentence was talking about the language; i never mixed them up, on the contrary i was unravelling your confusion of the two: The language is called "Finland Swedish" and that is why an author writing in that language can be called a "Finland Swedish author"; it has nothing to do with the name of the people.

The Research Institute for the Languages of Finland is not only old-fashioned and provincial in still advocating "Finland Swedes" when the majority of these people have rejected it and when it isn't correct English; the institute is also using incorrect/sloppy English in recommending "Finland-Swedish as an adjective" without saying for what. It's simply incorrect English to say "Swiss German people are called 'Swiss Germans' and speak Swiss German". Correct English is that "German Swiss people are called 'German Swiss' and speak Swiss German".

Commenting: It is your view that they are "old fashioned". They are de facto a State insititution and the ruling body on how to use the languages of Finland. Their opinions weighs very heavy here. MoRsE 11:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

They are not authorities on English terminology! The native English linguist and geography professor quoted above already carry more weight. In addition, the institute confusingly and amateurishly uses different terms on different pages and even on the same page. (will quote later, server down just now) --Espoo 14:49, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

When we need to separate the groups for some reason, the terms Finn ("Finne" = Finnish speaker), Finland Swede ("Svensk" = Swedish speaker) and Finlander ("Finländare"=linguistically neutral neutral) are used here (The oldest use of this that I know of is from 1820 from S:t Petersburg, where the Russians used this system to separate Finnish speaking individuals in Finland and other ethic groups like Swedes, Russians, Germans etc. "Finlander" implies that there is a linguistic/ethnic issue when used. Likewise there are Estonian Swedes, American Swedes are not being used, as the term Swedish descendants are used. MoRsE 01:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

This is all incorrect or non-existent English. You cannot apply habits and expressions from foreign languages to English. And some of these were never used in some foreign languages either (Finländare in Sweden, as i seem to remember from old discussions above), and some of them have been abandoned now. And "Swedish descendants" is just as non-existent as "American Swedes" for what have been called "Swedish Americans" for many generations. --Espoo 06:46, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

You didn't answer my questions.

Your edits and page moves constitute vandalism because they delete important and valid information and violate WP policies on approved RMs and achieved consensus. The fact that you're an admin at the Swedish WP means that these are very serious offenses. You knew exactly what you were doing. --Espoo 01:54, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

It was in the middle of the night and I have a work to take care of too, I don't have the possibility to sit here all night. MoRsE 11:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't think there's any need to start talking about vandalism. MoRsE, it seems you have some good reasons to suggest that Finland-Swedes is a better name for the article. If that's the case, then we'll want to move the article correctly, with all of its history, and doing that will require administrative assistance. Since this is clearly a controversial move proposal - we've got people defending both names - we'll need to use the Requested Moves procedure to determine consensus. MoRsE, are you familiar with Wikipedia:Requested moves? If you follow the procedures there, we can have a focused discussion on whether or not to move the page, and we can consider everybody's arguments and make sure everyone has a chance to be heard, and then we'll make a decision. I've undone the "cut-and-paste" move you did, MoRsE, and let's have the discussion before we move any pages. -GTBacchus^(talk) 03:58, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

The most recent 13 entries in my admin log are a good testament to why cut-and-paste moves are a bad idea. -GTBacchus^(talk) 04:41, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Somehow someone had managed to vote through a page move of this article, a move that was and is wrong. This target page consisted only of redirect links and could thus not be moved in a normal manner, I tried to contact some admin in the English wikipedia IRC channel, but noone was around. I was concerned about the history, but decided to move it anyway in order to raise the question. The page should be temporarliy be moved back to preserve the history and then in a correct manner be moved here. MoRsE 11:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok, to move it "in a correct manner" involves using the procedures at Wikipedia:Requested moves. I hope you refrain from doing cut-and-paste moves to "raise the question" in the future. Raising a question by bringing it up on the talk page creates much less unnecessary work for someone like myself. -GTBacchus^(talk) 17:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for reverting MoRsE's unilateral changes. MoRsE's "reasons" and the source he provided and its opinion were already dealt with and cited in the article before he simply removed a large part and ignored the exceptionally well-supported RM on the same discussion page. Being an admin, he certainly knows what an RM is and knows about the need for an RM since he could see one had just been carried out and could see that his unilateral move had recently been reverted by an admin.

In the case of a normal user, such actions might be just being bold, but in the hands of an admin they seem to be in clear violation of the content and spirit of basic WP policies. And since an admin knows that cut-and-paste moves hide the history and prevent normal users from restoring older versions, it would seem MoRsE not only violated WP policies but in effect destroyed community efforts, which definitely is vandalism. --Espoo 05:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I couldn't care less what makes you conclude that MoRsE's move was "vandalism". I will not entertain that conversation. Even if you're right, it's not a productive line of argument. It is very clear to me that MoRsE believes that this page should be located at Finland-Swedes, and I don't see any evidence that his goal is to degrade the quality of the encyclopedia. The correct next step is hear and consider MoRsE's reponses to your arguments, and not move any more pages unless we have a consensus to do so. -GTBacchus^(talk) 05:25, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

A couple of things which I think we all could agree on:

1. everyone should be able to agree that this is obviously a controversial topic where no clear-cut answer exists
2. biologically, Swedish and Finnish speaking groups in Finland have become mixed
3. culturally, there clearly are differences, as language is an important aspect of culture
4. during the late middle ages, there was considerable settlement of groups from Sweden proper on the coast of Finland
5. some Finland-Swedes consider themselves to be a separate ethnic group from Finnish speaking Finlanders while others don't
6. Finland-Swedes, as a linguistic group, have some constitutionally enshrined rights
7. in Swedish (also in 'Finland-Swedish') there is a difference between being a Finn (sv. "finne") and being a 'Finlander' ("Finländare), with the former only including Finnish speaking Finns and the latter also including Finland-Swedes. A bit like Bosnians includes all ethnic groups in Bosnia-Herzegovina while Bosniak only includes Bosnian-muslims.

Based on the above, I'm definately leaning towards Finland-Swedes being a different ethnic group (with ethnicity defined as different culture, in this case, language).KarlXII 10:13, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello everyone,

This is obviously a controversy. In the interests of trying to forge some type of agreement I've dug up some material, first an official Finnish view, second comments from the Swedish People's Party and finally, Google results for various name forms. The first of from the very offical Virtual Finland website. It recognizes that there are two views, but clearly prefers the view that Finland-Swedes are only a linguistic minority, not an ethnic minority.

As language is actually the basic or even the only criterion that distinguishes these two groups from each other, it is more correct to speak of Finnish- speakers and Swedish-speakers in Finland instead of Finns and Finland Swedes. Nowadays the most common English term denoting the latter group is ‘the Swedish-speaking Finns’.

The Swedish People's Party (Sfp), the leading party among Finland-Swedes/Swedish speaking Finns, appart from the very name implying that there is a separate "Swedish people" in Finland talks about Swedish culture and a separate Finland-Swedish identity in its party program (here in Swedish):

Vår nation genomsyras sedan flera sekler av såväl den svenska som den finska kulturen. Finlandssvenskheten är en hörnpelare i det nationella kultur- och samhällsbygget.

While Finland Swedes will feel themselves to be full citizens of Finland and that Finland is their 'motherland' they do have a separate identity to that of Finnish speaking Finns. Some would argue that this constitutes the basis for being an ethnic minority, wile other say it is simply a cultural and linguistic minority. So, there are different views on the topic. However, as Wikipedia is supposed to convey the most common view rather than the 'right' one I opt for letting Google decide. Searching in English but excluding all hits including the word "Wikipedia" gives the following results:

• "Swedish speaking Finns" -Wikipedia: 13,400 hits [9]
• "Swedish Finns" -Wikipedia: 571 hits [10]
• "Finland Swedes" -Wikipedia 580 hits [11]
  • Correction 10,400 hits [12] (MoRsE)
    • Your correction is incorrect and ignores KarlXII's whole point of excluding reference to Wikipedia. --Espoo 15:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
      • Okay, doing it again, excluding wikipedia, result 188.000 hits! [13]--MoRsE 15:54, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
        • Wrong again; your search is for the language, not the people ("187 000 vid sökning efter Finland-Swedish -wikipedia."). KarlXII's results are correct: [Finland Swedes" -Wikipedia 580 hits --Espoo 16:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Searching for "Finland-Swedes" and excluding "Wikipedia" does indeed give577 hits. You have to put the "Finland-Swedes" in citation marks. The hyphen makes no difference.KarlXII 08:30, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

So, while I agree that the article should be called "Swedish speaking Finns" it should (a) aknowledge that there are other views and (b) be clear that while it may not be an ethnic minority, it clearly a speparate linguistic and cultural minority.KarlXII 10:13, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good, but we need reputable sources to back up these claims. I suggest you call professors at at least one university in Finland and Sweden and ask for sources. --Espoo 15:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Espoo and others, I don't see this as a right or wrong issues, I see it as "what is the current common practice?" What matters is not if Swedish speaking Finns (who presumably call themselves "Finländare" in Swedish, for which there is not good English equivalent) are genetically different from ethnic Finns or not or if they have a different historical geographic origin from Finnish speaking Finns. What is important is how the majority of Swedish speaking Finns view themselves today. While historically Swedish speaking Finns may have viewed themselves as a separate ethnic group from the Finnish speakers, this is, generally, not the case today. Are German speaking Swiss "ethnically" different from French speaking Swiss? However, in both cases there is a very clear linguistic difference and a certain cultural difference (which is strongly linked with the linguistic difference).

So, I see no need to contact any professors for sources. Better to agree on the following:

1. calling the group "Swedish speaking Finns", but also give the other variant used: "Finland Swedes", "Finlanders", etc.
2. stating that the Finnish state and the majority of Swedish speaking Finns do not see themselves as a distinct ethnic group but rather as a separate linguistic and cultural group. Maybe it might even be appropriate to mention the Swiss example above, I don't know.
3. stating that Swedish speaking communities (or, rather, their ancestor, the Suiones/Svear) had arrived in western Finland already in pre-historic times and continued to settle after that, but that, following long periods of mixing and intermarriage etc with Finno-Ugrik peoples, there are now few genetic differences (are there any, I don't know).

How about it?KarlXII 08:44, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I can live with no 1 if the alternative is clearly mentioned in the opening paragraph. Nos 2 and 3 I agree on.--MoRsE 09:35, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

In order to state things like "the majority of Swedish speaking Finns do not see themselves as a distinct ethnic group but rather as a separate linguistic and cultural group" we do need a reputable source, especially because we will need to be able to present contradicting views with the appropriate weight. If the contradicting views are only those of an extremely small and eccentric group, they cannot be presented as an equally widespread opinion, but we can't just claim this is a very rare opinion without sources that report research on these opinions. More importantly for the present discussion, two participants have claimed that this view is the more common one. You and i and most other participants of prior discussions on this page know this is nonsense, but we can't claim it's a rare opinion without at least one reputable source.

In addition, we also need at least one reputable source to be able to claim that the opinion you and most others here feel to be much more common is also more valid in a scientific sense. In other words we do need a reputable source to be able to claim what you wrote ("clear that while it may not be an ethnic minority, it clearly a speparate linguistic and cultural minority")

We have enough reputable sources to claim that "Swedish-speaking Finns" is preferred by native English experts on the topic and preferred by the organisation that apparently best i.e. most comprehensively represents these people, the Swedish Assembly of Finland. The opinions of non-native English speakers on what is correct English or what term should be used to designate them in English are not really relevant, but we can add the comment that "Finlander" does not exist in English and is Swenglish/Finglish, and the erroneous belief that "Swedish-speaking" also means non-native speakers is already mentioned and can be explained in more detail in the article. --Espoo 10:09, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Espoo and others, I'm in agreement with you. Except I do feel that enough arguments and sources have been presented above to convince me that the term "Swedish speaking Finns" is correct. No need to call any professors (I'm not sure that would necessarily be seen as more convincing than any of the above arguments/sources). So, let's settle on the following:

1. the "Swedish speaking Finns" wording, using the surces above
2. that there are other wordings as well, such as eg "Finland Swedes", "Finlanders" etc. No need to say that these are "extrememely rare" or "incorrect". Just say that the "Swedish speaking Finns" is the most common one.
3. state that the Swedish speaking Finns today are defined, and define themselves, as a distinct linguistic and cultural group, though not necessarily a distinct ethnic group. Again there are those who disagree. No need to characterize how many or if they are "eccentric", this will only lead to unnecessary provocations and discussions.

Are we all OK with this? Let's wait a couple of days (say, towards the weekend) and then implement the above on the related articles (Finnish people, Swedish speaking Finns, to name a few).KarlXII 10:38, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

KarlXII, you're confusing issues that i tried hard to keep separate. I already said that we have enough sources for the naming issue but we don't have any for the ethnic, cultural, or other claims. Those latter claims are the ones we need the reputable sources for. Not the least important reason being that we can let this article's editing start to again reflect the calm surrounding this issue normally in Finland. People are upset about pakkoruotsi but nobody does anything but laugh about the kind of claims of NPOV we will encounter regularly from Swedish nationalists (and the time wasted on repeated RMs etc.) if we don't have reputable sources on ethnic, cultural, genetic, language-switching percentages, and related issues.

More specifically, i have read on at least 3 occasions in Helsingin Sanomat about research showing that there are "surprising" and statistically very significant differences in suicide rates and disease rates between Swedish and Finnish speakers in Finland despite the lack of statistically significant differences in terms of income, education, or genetic makeup between these population groups. This kind of research shows that there are clear cultural differences including more and closer family ties, greater willingness/ability to communicate (talk), and a stronger sense of responsibility for others which all result in better care, less loneliness, and basically "better vibes". I don't remember if these studies were able to or even tried to show if the stronger sense of community and better vibes and better health were due to cultural traditions or caused by the feeling of being a minority and being forced to stick up for their rights and each other.

And, once again, we cannot present "Finlander" as just another possible or even traditional name without explaining that this does not exist except in texts badly translated by non-native English speakers. --Espoo 11:18, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Espoo:

1. I misunderstood you earlier. My apologies. I agree that we have enough information to settle the language issue but not enough to settle the cultural and ethnic differences (the language differences are obvious)
2. I'm not sure what the pakkoruotsi you are referring to is/means or its relevance here.
3. I don't think the view that the Swedish speaking Finns are a different ethnic group to be a "Swedish nationlist" view. Difficult to tell which is the 'natinalist view' - to say that Swedish speakers in Finland are actually Swedish or if it is a Finnish nationalist view to say that Swedish speakers are just Finns who switched to Swedish for reasons of historical convenience or to say that Swedish speakers are a separate ethnic group from the Finnish speakers (a bit like the controversy about whether Bosniaks are a separate ethnic group or just Serbs/Croats who have converted to islam to gain benefits from the Ottomans). Let's keep the nationalism discussions/accusations out of this forum.
4. "Finlander" may be a bad (and that's an opinion) translation of a Swedish word, but that doesn't stop it from being common. Again, a Google search for "Finlander" in English yields some 38,700 hits [14] (though a lot of these may not refer to the meaning we're discussing here).
5. I agree, let's see if we can find any good sources referring to any possible genetic and/or cultural differences (apart from the language). In that case, the Swedish speaking Finns would definately classify as a separate ethnic group in the common understanding of that word, even though that is not the common view in Finland (either among Finnish or Swedish speakers).

RegardsKarlXII 13:43, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

• Google, especially combined with WP, is your friend. By putting site:wikipedia.org pakkoruotsi into Google (or adding the relevant search engine to your browser) you'd have found http://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakkoruotsi and the link to Mandatory Swedish. Honestly not trying to give you a hard time, but if there's one Finnish word a Swede should know, it's this. It's killing Swedish in Finland, as has mandatory study of any language in any country throughout history, and the Finns have shown special talent in being stubborn with Russian. Instead of getting people to want to learn Swedish (for example by reserving one job in every public office for a truly fluent speaker), Swedish is being made into something repulsive. It's horrible to see what cultural damage both stupid politics and nationalism still cause today even in so-called civilised countries.
• I don't think so either, as you can see by my detailed example of research that proves the contrary. But you seem to have forgotten what started this debate. The following kind of wild claim will resurface regularly and we and other future editors will have to desperately search around for a reputable source to prevent a possible requested move: "Finland Swedes are not Finns, they are Swedes living in Finland that are citizens of Finland."
• It's not just any old opinion; it's an informed opinion of a professional copyeditor based on actual usage in well-edited English texts. "Finlander" is today plain bad (or very outdated) English and not used by native English speakers, especially not in well-edited texts.
• I remember enough about relevant newspaper articles to be pretty sure that you're barking up the wrong tree with the genetic issue. As i already wrote despite the lack of statistically significant differences in terms of income, education, or genetic makeup between these population groups. --Espoo 14:40, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Espoo: I'd like to draw some conclusions. So, do we decide on the following:

1. we'll set "Swedish speaking Finns" as the norm thoughout Wikipedia, but mention that finländare, Finland-Swedes etc also exist and are used. "Finlander" should be mentioned, since it appears to be quite common, even though it's not a proper English word (which we should say, rather than saying that it's "bad" Englis, but that's a minor point).
2. that the Swedish speaking Finns today usually consider themselves to be ethnic Finns (we should link to the pages referred to above, both the Virtual Finland website and the Swedish speaking associations referred to) but also mention that this has not always been the case and that there is a debate/controversy about their origins compared to the Finnish speaking population (see this article on Finnish DNA analysis is quite interesting, although it doesn't say anything differences, or lack thereof, between Swedish and Finnish speakers. This article, in Swedish by I'm not sure who, does deal with the issue though)

OK?KarlXII 15:54, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

KarlXII, that "Swedish-speaking Finns" is the best term was already decided in this article's successful and very recent requested move. This move was exceptionally well supported by reputable sources, a majority of votes (all 5, in fact), and even participation and voting by professional experts on the topic, which is very rare on WP. There also already was a long explanation in the article explaining why it's the best term before this newest claim of violation of NPOV started. Obviously the supporters of this claim did not take seriously the arguments presented in the requested move. They perhaps didn't even bother to read them because their haphazard edits of the article showed that they hadn't bothered to read that either.

Obviously, we could have just reverted the unsupported changes and refused to respond to the accusations here on the talk page in any way except to demand sources for the wild claims. I however find it's better to take everyone seriously who bothers to state their case even when they don't supply reputable sources. The only source they provided is the same one you just listed too, which only has information in Swedish (which i don't understand) and is apparently written by an amateur with a private theory. He doesn't present this theory even on his Finnish pages, but what he writes in Finnish about family names shows that he is not an expert nor interested in unbiased reporting of historical research.

As for the rest of your proposed point #1:

- Finland-Swedes is an incorrect or at least outdated spelling for Finland Swedes

- We cannot say that finländare exists or is used in English because it isn't. We can say that this term is apparently used in Finland Swedish but not in Swedish (as far as i remember the discussions and other WP articles). We can say that this means "Finlander" but we should point out that this is term is not used in well-edited English texts. In fact, i can try to find some reputable source that says what is in fact the case, that this is an outdated term that labels its user as ignorant. You're right that when used by uninformed English speakers it should not be labeled as "bad" English, and i was specifically referring to texts written by non-native speakers. In that context, even linguists speak about "bad" English although they also use that term only on talk pages, as i did too. I was obviously not proposing use of that terminology in the article. When native speakers use a form that used to be called "bad" or "wrong" by linguists and still are by school teachers, modern linguists explain that that is unscientific because all "rules" and "correct English" are exclusively statistically more common and that they are continuously replaced by forms once considered incorrect once these become more common. This does not apply to people trying to use a foreign language though. Even if most Finns (both Swedish-speaking and Finnish-speaking Finns) and Swedes used the term “Finlander” in trying to speak and write English (very few do), WP should not say that this is an acceptable form if it is not used in carefully edited English texts (which even in Finland of course follow usage in English-speaking countries).

Your point #2: We already have enough reputable sources (and I found some more) to claim that Swedish-speaking Finns today usually consider themselves to be ethnic Finns, but we have no reputable sources that support other claims. We have private claims by two participants in this discussion that the majority of Swedish-speaking Finns don’t think of themselves as ethnic Finns and even don’t think of themselves as Finns and even think of themselves as Swedes. These are private opinions that are clearly incorrect as to their claims of representing the views of “most” and “all” Swedish-speaking Finns etc. and apparently represent an extremely small minority. I’m not sure what WP policy is on theories and opinions presented by extremely small groups of people. It would seem that these opinions cannot be presented in WP unless they have some kind of reputable source to back them up. I’m pretty sure that these people cannot find any serious researcher employed at any major institution that would back these claims. Obviously private pages written by amateur historians and other blog-like sources do not qualify as reputable sources. The only thing that might seem to suffice is if there were some kind of private organisation that printed material with these wild claims; then we could quote those eccentric claims and put them into the correct perspective by saying that the organisation has X number of members and that the Swedish Assembly of Finland has said Y and Z about these claims. --Espoo 10:06, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Espoo, I think you are being a bit too dogmatic/absolute on a couple of topics:

1. "Finland-Swedes" certainly does exist in English and is fairly common. It, apparently, used to be the most common term. However, today "Swedish speaking Finns" appears to be the more commonly used term. Finlandssvenskar is certainly the most common term in Swedish (to say svensktalande finländare is not so common). No need to be so black and white as you are making it out to be.
2. "finländare" certainly is used in Swedish (both in Finland and in Sweden, though the distinction is not as common) and is sometimes translated into Finlander in English. You are right, WP should state that this is not a proper English word.
3. as for the ethnic Finns or not discussion, I think it is sufficient to say that most Finland Swedes consider themselves to be Finnish but with a separate linguistic and cultural identity (finländare rather than finnar, in their own words).

• Since the term 'ethnic group' is so vague (most people would say that if you have a different language and, to a certain extent, different culture you are a separate ethnic group, while in this case it seems too harsh) this is probably best left unstated. No need to talk about 'extreme' minorities etc
• Perhaps just state that there appear to be very few consistent genetic differences between Swedish and Finnish speakers.

KarlXII 12:54, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

KarlXII, it seems you're again misunderstanding things i wrote or i'm writing them badly. I never said anything that contradicted what you're saying above. I have no idea why you think i'm being "dogmatic/absolute". It seems that you didn't realise that most of my post was not dealing with your comments but with the opinions of the people who started this debate without anything except incorrect personal claims and theories about what Swedish-speaking Finns are and consider themselves to be. I feel responsible for dealing with their comments in a mature way even if they've disappeared.

I never said "Finland Swedes" doesn't exist in English nor that it isn't fairly common. Nevertheless, i think it has never been as common in texts written by native English speakers as in English texts written by Finns and Swedes, and i think that many times native English speakers especially in the USA used it only because they copied the usage in English by Finns and Swedes although it was/is illogical according to the naming usage in use in the USA. I believe the term was even rarer in carefully edited texts by native English experts who weren't just rephrasing things they'd heard non-native speakers say about this exotic topic. I have no idea where i was "being black and white". I was simply pointing out that i agree with your proposal "we'll set 'Swedish speaking Finns' as the norm thoughout Wikipedia" because that "was already decided in this article's successful and very recent requested move". Nothing new in your proposal or my agreement, and definitely nothing dogmatic or black and white, just an attempt to defend our decision despite being against the wishes of the ghost participants in this discussion. Most of the rest of my post was also trying to point out that you and i agree on almost everything, but that we have to deal with the people who started this debate and have now disappeared and will suddenly appear again sometime in the future with the same claims and the same lack of reputable sources to back up their claims.

You know much more than me about the frequency of usage of "finländare" in Swedish and i specifically said "We can say that this term is apparently used in Finland Swedish but not in Swedish (as far as i remember the discussions and other WP articles)." Perhaps i remembered incorrectly or maybe the claims to that effect by others were wrong, but once again, nothing dogmatic in my post.

I also agree with most of your third point now because i seem to have convinced you to drop the previous idea of saying that although Swedish-speaking Finns today usually consider themselves to be ethnic Finns "this has not always been the case and that there is a debate/controversy about their origins compared to the Finnish speaking population". Since we have no reputable sources for these claims, we cannot put them into an encyclopedia. The same problem is with "appear to be very few consistent genetic differences". As long as we have no reputable source for that, we can't add it. On the other hand, http://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suomenruotsalaiset claims that the genetic makeup is 80% identical and no one has removed that claim, so we can probably copy it here. In fact, there are quite a few other interesting things in the Finnish WP article, and since most Swedish-speaking Finns speak Finnish fluently, we can be pretty sure that there is nothing in that article that the majority of them would disagree with. I will start to transfer info from there and provide any sources that i have. You may want to do similar translation and copy work from the Swedish article. If we run into serious disagreements, we can ask for comments exclusively by Swedish-speaking Finns (and no Swedes) on the relevant talk pages. --Espoo 23:11, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

This problematic issue indeed. "Swedish-speaking Finn", although the term was proposed by a Finland-Swedish institution itself is erranous. a "Finn" refers to Fenno-Ugrian, in Finland context that is Finnish-speaking individual. A study which found "considerable" different genetic differences between Finns and Finland-swedes (referred in the biology section) used the term "Swedes on mainland Finland". Culture, heritage and linguistics have clearly tied Finland-Swedish minority to Sweden (Tarkiainen, 2008). To apply the term Swedish-speaking Finn to Osterbotnian person who lives and breath Swedish culture and shares genetic history with Swedish( Hannelius, 2008) is simple flawed. The term simply erases history. 212.213.160.2 (talk) 09:36, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Editing History page

I'm editing the parts of the History section which discusses the 'ethnic' background of the Swedish speaking population of Finland, mainly because it is not properly sourced.

The first source, written by a Finnish professor in Japan about the situatin of Koreans in Japan has several shortcomings which means it's not a sufficient source for the claims made:

1. only mentions the background of the Swedish speaking population as a side note, and provides no source for this.
2. is not an academic or scientific paper, but a transcript of lecture (it starts "Good morning everyone")
3. given that it includes sentences like "Fortunately the Finns and Swedes have been able to put behind them the long history of Swedish colonialism (1155-1809) and the political attempts of Sweden to dominate regional politics (the most serious incident for Finland being the Swedish attempt to occupy the Åland Islands immediately after the Finnish independence)" means it doesn't feel very NPOV.

The second source, which unfortunately is only in Finnish and Swedish but gives a much more serious/academic impression, only deals with cultural (ie not the 'ethnic' issues means here).

1. it sets out the long and harmonious coexistence and integration between Swedish speaking and Finnish speaking culture in Finland and, as a result, the Swedish speakers do not consider themselves as a separate group in any other sense than linguistically (compared to eg roma or sami): "Den finlandssvenska kulturens djupa integration i det finländska samhället återspeglas också av det faktum att finlandssvenskarna som folkgrupp i hög grad identifierar sig som en språklig minoritet och inte som en folkgrupp med särskilda karakteristika, som till exempel samer och romer."
2. it does not anywhere mention that the Swedish speakers are mainly descendants of Finnish speakers (or vice versa, which has also been argued, a f a i k).

Therefore I am removing the text referring to the Swedish speaking population descending from Finnish speakers.KarlXII 10:50, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

As for the switching between languages, this appears to have been a two-way street, so it's not necessarily so that most Swedish speakers have orginiated from Finnish speakers (or vice versa). This is from the Swedish and Finnish language source mentioned above:

"I Finland har bytet av språk gått åt bägge hållen – från finska till svenska och från svenska till finska – och så är fortsättningsvis fallet. Före cirka 1850-talet gick bytet oftare i riktning mot svenskan eftersom språket vid den tiden kunde innebära sociala och andra fördelar. Kring sekelskiftet 1900 har vi däremot många exempel på ett medvetet byte till finska av språk- och kulturpolitiska skäl. Sedan drygt 50 år går språkbytet emellertid i regel från svenska till finska närmast som en mer eller mindre omedveten följd av dominansförhållandena i en tvåspråkig miljö (Wallén 1932, Finnäs 1981, 1986, Tandefelt 1988)."

As far as I know it was also quite common for Swedish speaking families to switch to Finnish during the nationalist period during the early 19th century. KarlXII

Well it did happen sometimes, but I do not know how common it really was. And to be precise, it happened during the late 19th and early 20th century, and definitely not during the early 19th century.--217.112.249.156 19:50, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

What I meant was that...

• since it was/has been a two-way street it would be incorrect for the article to only mention the switching which took place in one direction.
• As for the numbers who switched in either direction, I have never seen any figures.KarlXII 13:13, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

KarlXII, it seems you didn't read or understand what i wrote above. I'll quote the relevant part here so that you can take a stand on my proposal, but it's not a good idea to not react to it at all and to simply delete the section i translated from the Finnish WP article:

http://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suomenruotsalaiset claims that the genetic makeup is 80% identical and no one has removed that claim, so we can probably copy it here. In fact, there are quite a few other interesting things in the Finnish WP article, and since most Swedish-speaking Finns speak Finnish fluently, we can be pretty sure that there is nothing in that article that the majority of them would disagree with. I will start to transfer info from there and provide any sources that i have. You may want to do similar translation and copy work from the Swedish article. If we run into serious disagreements, we can ask for comments exclusively by Swedish-speaking Finns (and no Swedes) on the relevant talk pages.

And if you do nevertheless feel strongly about removing this section before asking for comments from the relevant talk pages of the Finnish and Swedish WP articles, there is no sense in removing the sources i provided. You're throwing the baby out with the bathwater. The first source may not be the best possible, but it's better than nothing and it provides more insight into some aspects than the second source. In any case, your removal of the second is clearly uncalled for because it is an official document on the topic drawn up by a committee of experts for the Finnish Ministry of Justice. More importantly, it contains the important sentence "Swedish-speaking Finns, so-called Finland Swedes, are also genetically Finns and not Swedes", which definitely would defend use of the 80% figure, even though the source for that precise number is missing in the Finnish WP article. (I will simply write "most", which i hope you will agree is OK.) Just because you don't understand Finnish and only understand the Swedish parts doesn't mean you can claim this article doesn't say something that i translated from there. According to WP policy, it's perfectly OK to use this Finnish source until we find an English version of this information. It is not OK to delete it on the basis of your lack of understanding of its contents. The experts who drew up this document include some of the most reputable Swedish-speaking experts on the topic!

And the quote from the first article is also relevant until we find something better because it well describes generally accepted opinions on the issue by educated Finns. It is completely irrelevant whether this opinion is expressed in a scientific paper or a lecture or a different public address. I suggest you only remove this quote if you can find any Swedish-speaking professors at any Finnish university that would object to its contents. Even a professor of political science is more of an expert on the issue of ethnicity than anything else so far presented in this article as a reputable source.

And please do not quote Swedish texts here without providing a translation. --Espoo 15:10, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Espoo, Gotta go, so I only have time for some comments:

1. that the Finnish Wikipedia states that 80% of the genes are the same and that therefore Swedish speaking Finns must be 'ethnic' Finns isn't really very helpful here. Also, then there is not possibility for the editors here to scrutinize the source. Finally, most Europeans will have more or less the same DNA profiles. I'm not sure that "80% of their genes" is that relevant. E.g. What's the correlation between Swedes and Finns?
2. you state that the second source mentions the "80%" figure - I can't find it. Which source are you referring to? Where in the text is it?
3. I don't agree about the first source you mentioned. It doesn't come accross as very serious and only mentions the matter for which you are using it in passing. You claim that it's important because it "describes generally accepted opinions on the issue by educated Finns", well, how do we know that? And why the mention of "educated" Finns? Are you implying that those who disagree are "not educated"?

KarlXII 15:34, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

KarlXII, I neither used the figure 80% nor did i say the document contained it. I specifically said i'd replace it with "most" because the document can be interpreted as saying even more than 80%. Please tell me what part of the following explanation and quote from the document you didn't understand:

More importantly, it contains the important sentence "Swedish-speaking Finns, so-called Finland Swedes, are also genetically Finns and not Swedes", which definitely would defend use of the 80% figure, even though the source for that precise number is missing in the Finnish WP article. (I will simply write "most", which i hope you will agree is OK.)

You may be right that i should find a better way of introducing the second source than by using the word "educated", but the fact that something on such a central topic is publicly stated by a professor of political science means that this is most likely not just a personal opinion but an opinion based on the extensive research of many experts on the topic. Very many "less informed people" in both population groups in Finland (and in Sweden) say completely racist and stupid things about the other population group because they are not educated enough and therefore believe too much junk that they hear and read. If we find a quote from another well-informed person saying something that contradicts the current quote, we can of course add that, but i'm afraid we won't find anybody professor of any discipline that would say something like that. You're right that a political science professor is not the best expert to quote on this topic, but political science is also concerned with this topic, and no political science professor would state something on this topic without having read more on this topic than almost all WP editors ever will... --Espoo 16:28, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Espoo, thank's for your respons. Unfortunately I'm not 100% clear here,

1. well, someone brought up the 80% figure to justify the whole genetic issue. What document/source is referring to 80% / 'genetic' finns issue?
2. I'm sorry, but the lecture notes of some professor on the situation of the Korean minority in Japan, where he makes a comparison to Finland, is not a good source. There are lots of professors out there with some very particular ideas and understndings of things which do not fit with the consensus.

KarlXII 23:49, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

KarlXII,

Why are you still talking about 80%? It's not in the article, so we don't need to find the source or hearsay that this claim in the Finnish WP article is (perhaps) based on. As i already pointed out, we have the statement by the committee of experts saying "Swedish-speaking Finns, so-called Finland Swedes, are also genetically Finns and not Swedes". Don't you understand what that means? That means Swedish-speaking Finns are genetically more or less identical to the Finnish-speaking Finns. If a small minority group's genotype is more or less identical to the majority's, that means that most of the minority's genes are inherited from the majority. We don't need a percentage; it's enough to say "most" to stop the wild claims of Swedish-speaking Finns being Swedes.

As for the second quote, you're right that we can and do need to find a better source than a statement by a political science professor, but it's completely irrelevant where he presented this statement or the fact that most of the lecture is about a different minority in a different country. And your derogatory comments about some professors in general are not really relevant either. Obviously, if this one's a crackpot, we can find statements by other highly educated people that will say completely different things. We can then remove this quote or, if it represents the opinion of a notable small group of crackpots or of well-informed people, we can have it in addition to the majority opinion. In any case, as i already said, a political science professor knows more about research results on this topic than almost all WP editors ever will. Much of the article now consists of unsupported claims added by people with much less knowledge about this subject and much less intellectual integrity and, most importantly, much more anonymity than this quote from a respected member of the international scientific community. Unless you have clear proof that this professor is talking nonsense, his statement is more reliable than most of what is in WP in general and than much of what is in this article.

I'd estimate that 90% of everything in most WP articles could be in principle removed by saying the content is not verifiable or at least has no source provided. The general practice is however not to remove any info without a source unless the info is disputed. It makes absolutely no sense starting the verification process by removing some of those parts of the 10% or so of WP that do have a source on the basis that they have "less good reputable sources". Even if a political science professor isn't the best expert on this topic, he's still better than none. And his statement does not contradict in any way the other reputable sources provided. Unless you can find a reputable source that contradicts this member of the international scientific community, there is no reason to doubt the reputation of the person or of the scientific verifiability of his statement.

The specific reasons i believe we should leave this quote until we find a better one by separate experts on genetics and genealogy and linguistics is because this quote specifically mentions these other aspects and also the reciprocity of the situation. He specifically points out that "many Finnish speakers can list among their ancestors more Swedish speakers than Finnish speakers", which will stop wild claims from the other side that Finnish speakers didn't inherit any genes from Swedish speakers. In the current situation of nearly identical genotypes, the average amount of genes inherited by the majority from the minority is obviously much smaller than the other way around, but there are many exceptions to the rule.

The rest of the quote is similarly important and informative, providing an insight not elsewhere in the article: "Many Finns simply adopted [the] Swedish language as their first language during the [period of] Swedish rule, but [for] centuries, many families and individuals used both languages." --Espoo 10:47, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Espoo,

1. you mentioned the 80% figure, not me
2. could you please point me to where in the article (page nr.) the "committee of experts" states this
3. I agree that everything doesn't have to be 100% verifiable. However, controversial, or very important, points, such as this, definately should be backed up by some kind of good source

KarlXII 22:52, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I'm sorry but i can't really think of doing anything except repeating my first paragraph above and ask you to say what you don't understand in it:

Why are you still talking about 80%? It's not in the article, so we don't need to find the source or hearsay that this claim in the Finnish WP article is (perhaps) based on. As i already pointed out, we have the statement by the committee of experts saying "Swedish-speaking Finns ... are also genetically Finns and not Swedes". Don't you understand what that means? That means Swedish-speaking Finns are genetically more or less identical to the Finnish-speaking Finns. If a small minority group's genotype is more or less identical to the majority's, that means that most of the minority's genes are inherited from the majority. We don't need a percentage; it's enough to say "most" to stop the wild claims of Swedish-speaking Finns being Swedes.

Well, let me try to rephrase it simply: The experts are saying that the genes of the two groups are now more or less identical. Since this is the result of intermarriage between 2 originally separate and probably genetically different population groups of which one was much smaller, this is only possible if the small group's genes were "diluted" so much by the big group's genes that the original differences are now statistically insignificant. It of course also implies that the genes of the small group spread out throughout Finland in smaller amounts but very extensively and homogeneously. (The only way that two groups that are now genetically identical could have inherited similar amounts of genes from each other is if the groups were about equal in size.) I'm no expert on statistics or genetics and don't know what "statistically significant" means in numbers, but i'd guess that this means that the Swedish-speaking Finns have apparently inherited more than perhaps 95% of their genes from the originally distinct majority. --Espoo 00:21, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Espoo,

1. Your source for the statement that the Swedish speaking Finns are genetically Finns is only in Finnish. Do you have any source in English? This would be helpful since it is such a, apparently, central issue (eg the "wild claims of Swedish-speaking Finns being Swedes").
2. Otherwise I'm completely happy with the text as it is now in the article.

RegardsKarlXII 10:09, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

The very next reference is in English: "Since the population genetic, ecological and socioeconomic circumstances are equal..." --Espoo 10:21, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

LOL! Are you serious? Your remark is referring to a sociocultural study and is not further validated b any genetic or medical reseach. BTW the study found out that Finland-Swedes live considerably longer and happier life than Fenno-Ugrians of Finland.These researchers have missed the study by Hannelius (2008) which found out that Finland-Swedes cluster with Swedes, not with Finns. Podomi (talk) 10:47, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Translation

Is it actually necessary to provide a translation for the term suomenruotsalaiset or finlandsvenskar. I am not a English speaker myself, but I think that they sometimes adopt foreign ethnonymes in English without translating them. Would it be possible to talk just about "the Finlandsvenskar" in English Wikipedia. That would avoid all the POV problems in tranlation. Oh, well, I do not know if this makes any sense, it is just a suggestion...--130.234.75.19 13:59, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

As a native English speaker who just happened to come across this article, I'd like to point out that English usage is more flexible than has sometimes been implied in this discussion, and thus while Swedish-speaking Finn, Finland Swede, Finno-Swede, Swedo-Finn, or any of several others could be considered sufficiently correct English, I think that User:130.234.75.19 is right that if there's so much dispute over translation, there is no reason the article can't be placed at Finlandssvensk.--Kineticman 09:00, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Swedishspeaking or Swedish-speaking

Is the current name of the article, Swedishspeaking Finns, correct English?--130.234.75.164 11:52, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Definitely not.JdeJ 12:25, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Please correct it; I do not know how to do it.--130.234.75.164 15:41, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Naming problem at Sweden Finns

Den fjättrade ankan keeps moving the article Sweden Finns to "Finnishspeaking Swedes" and "Finnish-speaking Swedes". I think this is wrong as it for instance excludes a large number of Sweden Finns that happen to be Finnish citizens. We could benefit from some more opinions at Talk:Sweden Finns. -- Jniemenmaa 11:52, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

The name may be a problem whichever way it goes. In my experience, both the Swedish-speakers in Finland and the Finnish-speakers in Sweden see themselves as Finns. For that reason, I think the names "Sweden Finns" and "Swedish-speaking Finns" are the best, although far from perfect. Dusis 20:31, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

In the newish section of the article about naming, there is a sentence that states that some Swedish speaking Finns would prefer to be known as "svenskspråkiga Finnar". I believe that is completely rubbish as use of such a term does not make sense in the Swedish language (especially in finlandssvenska) as finne/finnar refers specifically to a Finn or Finns who speak Finnish as their mother tongue. There is no equivalent distinction in the English language (i.e. the word "Finn" in English includes all Finns regardless of language, the equivalent Swedish would be finländare). I think it should be removed. Certainly as one myself, I know of no Finland Swede who would call themselves this. 94pjg 02:32, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Don't expect the article to be changed. It has been kidnapped by Finnish nationalist who use it to present their nationalist double standard views, regardless of what the Finland Swedes think themselves. Den fjättrade ankan 20:33, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

There does seems to be a detectable bias of a Fennomen nature which I think would be uncharacteristic of the general Finnish population's view on Finland Swedes (regardless of their mothertongue). I have noted significant changes in this article during the last few months, its quality has lessened and its bias increased. 94pjg 02:32, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Please do point out any false information and/or correct it. I find it interesting that you use a term of the late 19th century/early 20th century in a contemporary discussion. Clarifer 08:02, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

It is no use to correct any false information, because as soon as it is corrected some Finnish nationalist come and change it back to his nationalist view again. Den fjättrade ankan 20:05, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh please...you are not the right person to accuse anyone of nationalism.--217.112.249.156 15:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

It does seem to be at least true to an extent though. However, Den fjättrade ankan has a message on his user page stating he supports the "return" of Svenskfinland to Sweden. I have NEVER ever heard any Finland Swede suggest such a thing, and to the vast majority of us the idea is obscene. We are Finnish as much as a Finnish-speaker, and proudly so. That is what makes it even more frustrating when some of our fellow compatriots misunderstand our group and even also Swedes from Sweden who are often surprisingly ignorant of a group with whom they share our very small (in global terms) language with. 94pjg 22:02, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm a little baffled here. The article is quite clear that

"...the Finnish Government Research Institute for the Languages of Finland, which has consulted other English experts, recommends ([7]), the following use: "Finland Swede should be used about persons, Finland-Swedish as the adjective, and Finland Swedish for the version of Swedish that is spoken in Finland"."

Despite this, there is an unsourced argument for why the term "Swedish-speaking Finns" should be used instead. Most likely this is WP:OR. I realize this is probably due to some underlying debate about whether or not this group are actually Finns who speak Swedish or actually 'Swedes' who happen to live in Finland. Regardless of this, it would see pretty clear to me that if a Finnish government institute has looked into the specific matter and recommends "Finland Swedes" then that is what the article should be called. Of course other variants should be mentioned in the intro. CheersOsli73 (talk) 11:50, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

The link you mention is dead. On the other hand at this page, the Research Institute for the Languages of Finland uses Finland Swedish to describe the dialect and as an adjective for things pertaining to this dialect, but Swedish-speaking Finn for the speakers of this dialect. --MPorciusCato (talk) 12:45, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. All is well then. CheersOsli73 (talk) 16:10, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Sources validation

Seems like the sources claiming that Finnish Swedes/Finnish speaking Finns genetically are ethnical Finns not Swedes come just from the finnish side. Generally I think the article promotes just one point of view(i.e. finnish), it should be more balanced in my opinion. Why don't we see any info reagrding genetical research about the subject coming from Sweden or any third-party country? Also I haven't heard any Fenno-Swede calling himself/herself svenskspråkiga Finnar, I agree with 94jpg - seems like this term makes no sense. I believe Finlandssvenskar is the most used term.

By the way, I'd like to state that even if that reserach is correct, it doesn't mean that most of Finnish Swedes ancestors were ethnical Finns. Genetical studies about Finnish people say that up to 50% of their genotype is also Germanic. Probably, there were some Finnish people among Finnish Swedes ancestors but the thesis that they make vast majority does seem to be very doubtful and generally unprovable.Der_Ritter 15:20, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I think the discussion on ethnicity and the genome is both interesting and frustrating. One of the problem seems to be that people confuse terminology. 'Germanic' is NOT a genetic characterisation but a LINGUISTIC one. A person speaking a Germanic language can have a variety of genetic markers and the same is true for a person speaking a Finnic or a Balto-Finnic language. The statement 'Genetical studies about Finnish people say that up to 50% of their genotype is also Germanic' makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Compare: 'Genetic studies about Swedish people say that 50% of their genotype is also Indic. What makes sense geneticwise is (the numbers being uncertain): '50% of the genes found in Finnish speakers are shared with people speaking Germanic languages.' Genes are not Germanic or Finnic or Indic or whatever. Clarifer 10:06, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

• I am a "Finlandssvensk", and I do not consider myself a Swede - no way! My nationality is Finnish, but my mother's tongue is Swedish. This discussion has been held before (summer of 2005 IIRC), and then I interviewed several (about a dozen) Swedish-speaking Finns from different regions (all over southernn Finland, and Ostrobothnia). No-one of them considered themselves to be of Swedish ethnicity - not even the Ålanders, they are proud to be just that - Ålanders. Greetings, --Janke | Talk 08:30, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Der Ritter, the genetic research referenced here is by no means controversial in Finland. Therefore, it is unlikely that you find a group of Swedish-speakers doing this same research, as Åbo akademi does not have a faculty of medicine. Indeed, most of the research mentioned here is a result of wide international cooperation, so it is not just a nationalist fantasy of some fringe group. You seem to be concerned about the Finnish-speaking ancestors of Swedish-speaking Finns. The same research which shwos that Finns, regardless of their mother tongue, are a rather closed and homogeneous group, also show that the closest conections of Finns are with Western, nowadays predominantly Germanic ethnic groups. I wouldn't have any problems with genetic connections to east either, but the genetic links towards west are stronger. --MPorciusCato (talk) 12:53, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Janke, I do not say that Fenno-Swedes are Swedish, as I remember from talks to Finnish Swedes, they really don't consider their nationality Swedish, but they do say that their ethicity does differ from Finnish people of Finland... They call themselves Finnish by nation, but Swedisth by mother tongue and claim to have different heritage and traditions from Finnish people. So it seems like that people do belong to a separate ethnic group to my mind. And yes, I've met just one who was calling himself a Swede rather than a Finn...(actually this one was a Finnish Swede from Big Helsinki area).Der_Ritter 17:35, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

• • Hi Der Ritter, it may well be that the Finland Swede from Helsinki that you mention calling himself a Swede did not mean Swede as in Swede from Sweden. It's a confusing issue when translating from Swedish (in the way that it is used in Finland especially) to English. He quite likely did not consider himself a Finn, because to a Swedish-speaker the English word "Finn" can sound like a translation of the Swedish word "finne", the word finne in Swedish means "Finnish speaking Finn". The Swedish word finländare is used in roughly the same sense as "Finn" in English, as in to mean all the people of Finland regardless of language. As to his usage of the word "Swede", in Finland it is quite common just to say "svensk" (Swede) to mean Finland-Swede but without any meaning of "from Sweden". I know that sounds slightly confusing, but I guess it stems from a time when there was less contact with Sweden (no tv from Sweden, no internet etc) so there was less need to differentiate in conversation that you meant Finland-Swede or Sweden-Swede.

Interesting piece on this here (in Swedish though): http://www.kotus.fi/index.phtml?l=sv&s=2209 94pjg 22:04, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

This whole article and discussion revolves under false claims of genetic similarity with Finns and Fennoswedes. Rarely do we see any references. Unfortunately it looks like this site was hijacked by a group political activist with grudges to Swedish people in Finland. Furtunately, I´ve managed to to bring valid, scientific studies on the etníc origins of Finland-Swedes. Not that it is the most important issue, genetics, but since its the information here has been so twisted I see its importance regarding to the definition of "Swedish-speaking Finns". I am about to read the most current academic source of Swedish-minority in Finland (Kari Tarkiainen, Sveriges Österland) and will update the page as I progress with my "studies". Podomi (talk) 10:00, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Ålanders

This article is about Swedish-speaking finns. Translated into Swedish this would be Finlandssvenskar. Finlandssvenskar is an ethnic group in Finland, but as far as I am concerned the inhabitants of Åland are not considered as Finlandssvenskar, yet this article considers the Ålanders as swedish-speaking finns. This would be accurate on the basis that they are citizens of Finland and that they speak swedish. We have to keep in mind that Åland is an autonomous part within the finlandic borders. The dialects resembles the most the swedish ones spoken on the swedish side north of Stockholm (Roslagen). Finnish speaking finns normally consider them as Ålanders and not finns or finlandssvenskar for that matter. Among Swedes (In Sweden, Åland and in Finland) there is no notion: svensktalande finländare - Swedish-speaking finns so why inventing this notion on en.wiki? It would be more accurate to use the swedish notion, "finlandssvenskar", i.e finland swedes, to avoid this article to be an expression of original research. Nirro (talk) 22:18, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I would dispute the statement that finlandssvenskar are an ethnic group. That is not agreed by all, including finlandssvenskar themselves. Many people consider themselves to be of the same ethnic group as Finnish-speaking Finns. So, therefore it is more of a language group than a n ethnic group in the views of many. I agree though, that Ålanders are often not considered to be finlandssvenskar, as many consider that they don't speak finlandssvenska and than the dialects on Åland share more in common with rikssvenska. Then again, there are lots of words in åländska that would be understood by a finlandssvensk and not by a rikssvensk (with some that perhaps might at least be found in usage in Norrland). So, really åländska lies somewhere in between - which makes its classification problematic. Ålanders are represented in institutions such as Folktinget and their MP has always sat with SFP to form the Swedish parliamentary group in the Finnish parliament - so you could use these as evidence to say that they also, at least partially, have a binding relationship to Svenskfinland.

94pjg (talk) 15:15, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Terminology

How many percent of the Swedish-speaking Finns/Finland-Swedes might be willing to denote their own group "svenskar" either in Finland or outside? Clarifer (talk) 14:34, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

We do refer to ourselves as "svenskar" often, at least in Finland or within certain contexts where it's clear it doesn't mean anything to do with Sweden. I suppose you could argue we mean it as a shortening of finlandssvenskar. It's perhaps fair to say it was even more used in the past when there was far less contact with Sweden (i.e. no Swedish tv channels or internet) and thus less room for confusion with "rikssvenskar". But people certainly use it today still, i.e. if a new family moves in next door, you might ask "are they svenskar" or say my doctor is "svensk" and not mean to be referring to anyone from Sweden at all. Confusing perhaps, but in the context it makes sense. I guess you could make a comparison with the fact that there are institutions etc called Svenska handelshögskolan or indeed Svenska folkpartiet. Again, in their context they make sense and it's clear they don't refer to the country of Sweden in any way. 94pjg (talk) 00:01, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

In this article, Mikael Reuter of the Research Institute for the Languages of Finland discusses the usages of svensk, finsk and finländsk in Swedish language, unfortunately only in Swedish. It seems that the Finnish Swedish-speaking and mainland Swedish terminology is quite different. In Sweden, the words svensk and finsk is used to describe nationality: Munsala i finska Österbotten (Munsala in the Finnish Ostrobothnia), which is factually correct. Munsala is indeed a village in Ostrobothnia, a Finnish province. However, a Swedish-speaking Finn would say: Munsala i svenska Österbotten. (Munsala in the Swedish-speaking Ostrobothnia), which is also factually correct: Munsala is in the Swedish-speaking part of the bilingual region of Ostrobothnia.

Reuter goes on to show, with statistics of the Stockholm-based Dagens Nyheter, Vaasa-based Vasabladet and Helsinki-based Hufvudstadsbladet, that in the texts of his corpus, the Swedish newspaper Dagens Nyheter used word svensk almost exclusively as a nationality attribute. On the other hand, for the Finnish, Swedish-speaking newspapers, the word svensk was used in two different meanings: as a nationality attribute (relating to Sweden) in 55% of the uses, and as a language attribute (relating to Swedish-speakers) in 45% of the uses. I think that Reuter shows very clearly, with examples, that the words svensk and finsk have a two separate meanings, both usual and easily distinguishable.

Reuter also discusses the uses of finsk and finländsk. He notes that finsk is also used both as nationality and language attributes in Swedish texts, both in Sweden and in Finland. Especially, certain Swedish terms require the use of word finsk instead of finländsk, even when talking about the nationality: finsk mark, finsk medborgare (Finnish terrain, Finnish citizen). In addition, in some cases the writer or speaker may feel the need to tone down the language question and decide not to use either word. Then, the forms Finlands and i Finland (of Finland, in Finland) is usually used: Finlands folk stod enat. (The people of Finland was united.) In such usage, choice between finsk and finländsk would undermine the meaning of the sentence.

So, this is the Swedish usage. In addition, I note that the Research Institute of Languages of Finland has changed to using the form Swedish-speaking Finn[15]. --MPorciusCato (talk) 07:49, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

There is awareness of the difference between finne / finländare etc in Sweden. It's just not universally known in Sweden. The confusion is generally due to ignorance, i.e. it's not on purpose - it's lack of awareness. For instance, some Swedes have the impression that Finland-Swedish (in a linguistic sense) actually refers to the way Swedish sounds when it is spoken by someone who has Finnish as their mother tongue. The awareness does seem to be improving though. It's noticeable, especially in sports commentary etc, on Swedish tv. A few prominent Swedish-speaking Finns have come to view in Sweden, that might be to do with it (e.g. the longest running programme on tv in Sweden (a film review show) now has a Swedish-speaking Finn as the presenter). There was an article a few weeks back in Dagens Nyheter saying that "Finland Swedish is in" (i.e. "cool".) But yes, you're quite right, often in the Swedish language it's correct to say finsk, as Reuter says. 94pjg (talk) 23:23, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Finland-Swedes genetically considerably different from Finns.

I´ve recently noticed lot of myth of the genetics of Finland-Swedes and attempts to question their etnic status. Historical experiences are probably influencing Fennoman Finnish posters too much and hence the speaking of differences between Swedish speakers and Finnish speakers is sensitive issue for Fenno-Ugrians of Finland (Finns). So far, I haven't managed to tap into a study which would say Finland-Swedes do not differ from Finns. Claiming that Finland-swedes and Finns are genetically identical on the basis of one socioanthropologic study is dubious to say the least.

Now, here´s some facts.

1) A a recent study (Hannelius, 2008) the author found that The Ostrobotnian Finland-Swedes stood out from their neighboring Fenno-Ugrians and formed a seperate genetic cluster with Swedes.

"Clear East-West duality was observed when when the Finnish individuals were clustering using Geneland. Individuals from the Swedish-speaking part of Ostrobotnia clustered with Sweden when a joint analysis was performed on Swedish and Finnish autosomal genotypes.|Ulf Hannelius: Population genetic association and Zygosity testing on preamplified Dna"

2) In this study "significant" genetic differences were found among Finland-Swedes and Finns.

"The difference between the distribution of ADA phenotypes in the Finland-Swedes and in Finns is significant".

"Table 1 shows the distibution ADA (Adenosine deamiase) phenotypes in three samples each from Finland-Swedes (population 1, 2, 3,) and Finns (4,5,6). Brief preliminary reports of these data have been presented elsewhere. The ADA2 gene frequency is about 0.6 in the Swedish population investigated in Finland and 0.10 in the Finns.|Adenosine deaminase polymorphism in Finland (Swedes, Finns, and Lapps), the Mari republic (Cheremisses), and Greenland (Eskimos). A W Eriksson, M Kirjarinta, J Fellman, M R Eskola, and W Lehmann.

3) Again, This study found "considerable" differences with Swedes on Finnish mainland and etnic Fenno-Ugrians.

"Among Alanders and Swedes on the Finnish mainland the frequency (around 20%) was comparable to Swedish values but considerably higher than among Finns (13-14%).|ABH secretion polymorphism in Icelanders, Aland Islanders, Finns, Finnish Lapps, Komi and Greenland Eskimos: a review and new data. AW Eriksson, K Partanen, RR Frants, JC. Pronk, PJ. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3752918

According to this data we fairly well postulate following conclusion:

-Finland-Swedes represent seperate Germanic population within Finland. They are an etnic minority.

Podomi (talk) 10:33, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I hope to point out that the studies you cite notice the genetic differences between Ostrobothnians and Ålanders with four Swedish-speaking grandparents, and between the Finnish mainstream. Such results do not reflect on "ethnicity", which is a much more diffuse concept. For example, Swedish-speaking Finns include a very large percentage of persons with mixed ancestry, and the genetic makeup of the Swedish-speaking Finns of Helsinki, Turku or Uusimaa seems not to be different from the Finnish mainstreame. If you wish to defince the "ethnicity" of Swedish-speaking Finns on the basis of genetics, you exclude a large number of people who, in their own opinion, are clearly Swedish-speaking.

In addition, I hope that you will not make any "fairly well" founded "postulations" in Wikipedia. This would clearly violate WP:OR. I took the liberty of tabulating your text in such way that it becomes more readable. If you disagree, feel free to revert. --MPorciusCato (talk) 11:23, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

The studies I presented addressed Ostrobotnians, "Swedes on Finnish mainland"/Nylanders and Ålanders. Your point is valid, though. The studies established strict criteria for ancestry (All grandparents must be belong to the identified etnicity). However, the point was to study Finland-Swedes not Half Finland-Swedes and Finns. Bi-lingual marriages between the etnic lines Finland-Swedes and Finns have been on a rapid increase in the past few decades. Previously they were very rare exception. One doesn't need but to look for old Finland-Swedish newspapers wedding announcement to discover that. What would be a purpose of studying Africans and Finns if the African individuals sampled would constitute half-Africans, Half-Finns? Mainstream Finland-Swedes from every region of the country differ from Finnish mainstream. The difference of a Swedish-speaker and a Finn indegious to Swedish-speaking coast is obviously smaller. However Finnish mainstream do not originate from Swedish-speaking coast. Here´s another study addressing morphological differences between Finland-Swedes and Fenno-Ugrian Finns."Social background adult body-height and health".

"Body height among the Swedish-speakers minority was taller than among the Finnish-speaking minority" [16] 212.213.160.2 (talk) 12:33, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, you are citing correctly, yet somewhat misleadingly. The difference was, for men, 1.14 cm, so we are not talking about anything very visible. However, your main point is absurd. The Swedish-speaking Finns are, as a population, Finns who by conscious choice or due to family tradition speak Swedish and identify as Swedish-speaking Finns. If I wish, I become officially a Swedish-speaking Finn by visiting the register office and ticking a box on a form. Functionally, I become a Swedish-speaking Finn if I start to use Swedish as my main language (which I well could do). Similarly, a Swedish-speaking Finn becomes a Finnish-speaking Finn by choosing to speak Finnish and by self-identifying as a Finnish-speaker in different contexts. Ancestry plays no role in this selection. That is the legal definition of "Swedish-speaking Finn", accepted very clearly by the Folktinget. Your ancestry-based definition has no visible support in the Swedish-speaking community. If it has, please inform us by citing notable sources.

In addition, you forget that the marriages across the language boundary have been rather common. However, in a Finnish-dominated environment, they have usually resulted in a Finnish-speaking family, especially in lower social classes. Thus, wedding announcements in Swedish-speaking newspapers would only report those bilingual marriages which resulted in Swedish-speaking families, even then concentrating on upper and middle classes who have the custom of putting such notices into the papers. On the other hand, the Swedish-speaking working class of Helsinki and Turku has all but assimilated into the Finnish mainstream, often due to mixed marriages. --MPorciusCato (talk) 13:10, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I removed some irrelevant info from the "Biological origins" sub-title. The only reliable study is actually the recent one in which Finland-Swedish sub-population (Ostrobotnian reference population) was screened through genome-wide SNP scans for the first time ever, (2008). I also inroduced some earlier studies (Virtanen & Knowles et. al..etc) however, in terms of population genetics the old methodologies (blood groups and ABH antinges..etc) are no longer in usage for their lack of credibility. So, basically the only good piece of info we have is the most recent study.

Podomi (talk) 13:03, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Finland-Swedes and Finns; genetic differences

Finland-Swedes are genetically considerably different from Finns. I´ve recently noticed lot of myths revolving around the genetics of Finland-Swedes and more or less poor attempts to question their etnic status. Historical experiences are probably influencing Fennoman Finnish posters too much and hence the speaking of differences between Swedish speakers and Finnish speakers is sensitive issue for Fenno-Ugrians of Finland (Finns). So far, I haven't managed to tap into a study which would say Finland-Swedes do not differ from Finns. Claiming that Finland-swedes and Finns are genetically identical on the basis of one socioanthropologic study is dubious to say the least.

Now, here´s some facts.

1) A a recent study (Hannelius, 2008) the author found that The Ostrobotnian Finland-Swedes stood out from their neighboring Fenno-Ugrians and formed a seperate genetic cluster with Swedes.

"Clear East-West duality was observed when when the Finnish individuals were clustering using Geneland. Individuals from the Swedish-speaking part of Ostrobotnia clustered with Sweden when a joint analysis was performed on Swedish and Finnish autosomal genotypes.|Ulf Hannelius: Population genetic association and Zygosity testing on preamplified Dna"

2) In this study "significant" genetic differences were found among Finland-Swedes and Finns.

"The difference between the distribution of ADA phenotypes in the Finland-Swedes and in Finns is significant". "Table 1 shows the distibution ADA (Adenosine deamiase) phenotypes in three samples each from Finland-Swedes (population 1, 2, 3,) and Finns (4,5,6). Brief preliminary reports of these data have been presented elsewhere. The ADA2 gene frequency is about 0.6 in the Swedish population investigated in Finland and 0.10 in the Finns.|Adenosine deaminase polymorphism in Finland (Swedes, Finns, and Lapps), the Mari republic (Cheremisses), and Greenland (Eskimos). A W Eriksson, M Kirjarinta, J Fellman, M R Eskola, and W Lehmann.

3) Again, This study found "considerable" genetic differences with Swedes on Finnish mainland and etnic Fenno-Ugrians from Finland.

"Among Alanders and Swedes on the Finnish mainland the frequency (around 20%) was comparable to Swedish values but considerably higher than among Finns (13-14%).|ABH secretion polymorphism in Icelanders, Aland Islanders, Finns, Finnish Lapps, Komi and Greenland Eskimos: a review and new data. AW Eriksson, K Partanen, RR Frants, JC. Pronk, PJ. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3752918

Based on this data we can reach following conclusion:

-Finland-Swedes represent seperate Germanic population within Finland. Finland-Swedes differ genetically from Finns and represents seperate, germanic genetic entity among Fenno-Ugrian population. They are an etnic minority. Podomi (talk) 12:10, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Dear Podomi, some notes for your convenience:

• you are making gross personal attacks when labeling the other editors as "Fennomans". Please stop that immediately.
• you are not allowed to remove any fact tags without providing the source
• scientific criticism do not belong to Wikipedia; you are not allowed to dismiss or cricize research you dislike, unless the researcher himself admits that his/her study is superficial, obsolete or so on. Otherwise, you must present the conflicting view-points only as conflicting view-points.
• it is rather silly to call Finns "Fenno-Ugrian", unless you call the Swedish-speaking Finlanders as "Indo-European" at the same time. In other words, Fenno-Ugrian is only a linguistic, and not cultural, ethnological, ethnic, or racial concept. There is not such thing as "ethnic Fenno-Ugrians".
• Only Neo-Nazis talk about "Germanic genetic entities"

AFAIK it is possible that your view on this matter is the correct one, but Wikipedia is not a suitable place to proclaim new truths. Wikipedia is all about verifiable view-points, not about the ultimate truth. --84.251.4.253 (talk) 15:50, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I was labelling other editors as "Fennomans" since I feel there are people who are desperately keen on making the differences disappear at any cost. Poor arguments without any references. Username Espoo insisted there are no genetic differences based on sociocultural study a by Hyyppä and Mäki (2001) who merely addressed that the genetics alone cannot explain huge disparity in life expectancy rates of Finland-Swedes and Finns. Hyyppä and Mäki (2001) did not conduct genetic population study nor referred to one.

By denying the Swedish etnic background these people try to unjustify the Swedish identity in Finland. I understand there´s historic burden to carry for many Finns and Finland-Swedes alike for what has happened in the past. However Finns should not feel offended or threatened if someone tells them the Swedes in the country are genetically different. Obviously both Finns and Swedes are Northern Europeans and by default very close to each other, however there´s differences at certain level between the groups. And as Hannelius (2008) showed Ostrobotnian Finland-Swedes belong to the Swedish group (genetic cluster).

Finland-Swedes are a Germanic folk group and this shows in their genetics. There´s nothing controversial in that. Finns are Fenno-Ugrians who show strong affinities with other Northern Europeans but also with other Fenno-Ugrians in the Ural parts of Russia.

I remove your reference since you are pushing a citat which already referred in the article (Virtanen & Knowles 1991). That study is just among one of the few already introduced. You try to make it appear twice as it was the ultimate truth and had more weight than the other studiesn Podomi (talk) 16:48, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Frankly, I am not interested why you have labeled other editors; I am only asking you to not to do it.

Personally I want to stress that ethnicity (not "etnicity") is a form of self-identification. It has nothing to do with genetics. If the Swedish-speakers in Finland consider themselves as a distinct ethnic group, then they are a distinct ethnic group. Unless you are a rascist, it should not matter whether they actually are genetically distinct or not. So all this stressing of the genetic difference seems rather odd to me. I think that studies that address the Swedish-speaking identity discourse are more interesting and relevant. But if you find the genetics important, then discuss them by all means. I have been suspicious towards you because you have made repeatedly drastic changes withput any kind of conversation, as well as quoted some sources in a mis-leading way. But the situation seems to be improving now.

Swedish-speakers in Finland speak a Germanic language. In the present-day usage, "Germanic" is mainly a linguistic term, not an ethnic label. Swedish is a "Germanic" language, just as Finnish is a Fenno-Ugrian language, but this does not make the Swedes German. As a distinct group of people, "Germanic" refers primarily to certain groups Iron Age or early medieval Continental Europeans. Serious texts do not extend its meaning to the present-day peoples speaking Germanic languages.--84.251.4.253 (talk) 18:19, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

It matters to me that Finland-Swedes are genetically distinct from the Finnish-speaking group because I view population and etnicities in relation to others. Language alone does not make etnicity, ancestry does. At the time of multiculturalism I consider it a richness that Finland comprises different etnicities which differ from the mainstream. Finland: two languages, two etnicities. Wasn´t that the way they once expressed it? 212.213.160.2 (talk) 09:15, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, it makes me rather sad that you want to maintain an absurd and unscientific connection between present-day identities and ancient roots. Historians and social scientists are nowadays well aware that ethnic identities and biological origins of populations are different things. Ethnicity lies in and only in the present-day cultural constructions, not in the genes, even if some ethnic groups happen to be genetically distinct due to historical circumstances. There's nothing more I want to say on this matter.--130.234.68.211 (talk) 10:17, 10 July 2008 (UTC) EditActually I am aware only of the slogan "two languages, one nation".

There are plenty of Finnish poster who care about genetics hence they do everything to make Finns and Finland-Swedes appear genetically similar; twisting sources, giving false arguments without references, lying...etc. I just wanted to correct the misunderstandings. Ofcourse culture including linguistics is much more important definer of identity than population genetics, however they are important as well. They reveal heritage in relation to others. 212.213.160.2 (talk) 12:05, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I always thought that the bulk of research has shown that Swedish-speaking Finns are not genetically distinguishable from Finnish-speaking Finns. I don't know of any Swedish-speaking Finn (and in this, I'm not including Ålanders as Swedish-speaking Finns) who considers him or herself ethnically Swedish. Unfortunately many articles on Swedish-speaking Finns and related subjects do tend to find their Talk pages (and sadly often also content) very disproportionately affected by extremists from both sides (both so-called Fenno-nationalists (for want of a better word) and the more recent reactionaries who hold the Finlandssvensk samling type viewpoints. 94pjg (talk) 00:00, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

It´s largely a myth that studies have shown no differences between Finland-Swedes and Finns. The studies today are even showing a great deal of differences between East and West Finns. Whether previous studies claiming that Finns and Finland-Swedes do not differ exist or not they´ve been debunked. In the 70´s Nevanlinna showed that Finns are 25% Assian which has been totally refuted. In his methodology also Swedes would have been 25% Asian.

Some Finnish scientist have probably been politically motivated with old grudges to make Finland-Swedes look similar with Finns. The first genome wide SNP scan (Hannelius, 2008) which tested Finland-Swedes in Österbotten (50% of all Finland-Swedes) showed that they clustered genetically with Swedes not with Finns.

Finland-Swedes represent seperate Germanic, Swedish extension in Finland. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.213.160.2 (talk) 08:05, 11 July 2008 (UTC) Podomi (talk) 07:04, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Anyway, I admit that the studies which are speaking of "Significant" and "Considerable" differences among Finland-Swedes and Finns are speaking in a Northern European context, not global.´212.213.160.2 (talk) 12:27, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, if it were a disgruntled scientist skewing the results to suit his own politics (which I very much doubt), it could have equally been one of us wanting to stress our Finnishness and that we have as little to do with the Swedes as possible (other than sharing a language). But I doubt any of the studies in recent times have been motivated by politics in either direction. 94pjg (talk) 12:17, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I removed the list of historical population components, as it was unreferenced and the aggressive POV-pusher Podomi disturbed it by removing repeatedly parts he personally found disagreaable.--130.234.5.137 (talk) 10:21, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I removed some irrelevant info under the "Biological origins" sub-title. The only reliable study is actually the recent one in which Finland-Swedish sub-population (Ostrobotnian reference population) was screened through genome-wide SNP scans for the first time ever, (2008). I also inroduced some earlier studies (Virtanen & Knowles et. al..etc) however, in terms of population genetics the old methodologies (blood groups and ABH antinges..etc) are no longer in usage for their lack of credibility. So, basically the only good piece of info we have is the most recent study. Podomi (talk) 13:04, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I wish to point out that your methodological criticism belongs somewhere else, but not into Wikipedia. It is clearly original research, which is unallowed. In addition, it would greatly increase your credibility as an editor if you did not label all studies not concurring with your POV as "lacking credibility". --MPorciusCato (talk) 13:15, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Don´t worry, the remaining studies are still there. I just wanted to make things clear on the discussion part. Podomi (talk) 09:04, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

After browsing this discusion I cannot be but amazed, the prevailing logic seems to be or atleast was that since the Swedish minority in Finland does not genetically differ from Finns the term "Swedish-speaking Finn" is legitimate. As the studies clearly indicate this is simply false. a Sample which represents 50% of all Finland-Swedes already showed their belonging in a genetic cluster with Swedes, not Finns (Hannelius, 2008). Rest of the 50% will be screened soon. I am going to take these studies to Wikipedia administration along with other historical sources. Proper title for this site would be "Swedish minority in Finland" or "Finland-Swedes" (see, Irish-Scotts), not "Swedish-speaking Finn". Finland-Swedes are Swedish extension in Finland, these are culturally, linguistically and by heritage different from the Fenno-Ugrian languages speaking Finns and thus have very little to do with them.

Två språk, två folk. Podomi (talk) 09:46, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

The prevailing consensus is not based on genetics. That kind of thinking was definitely popular in late 19th century, and in early 20th century, but became somewhat unpopular after 1940's. Genetical approach to the identity issues of population groups is restricted to some fringe groups supporting rather narrowminded, though forceful, political agendas. The terminology we have chosen is based on the self-identification of the Swedish-speaking minority and the usage of English language, supported by the Folktinget, and by the Kotus. Even the Finlandssvensk samling, the most extremist Swedish-speaking organization, does not agree with your view. --MPorciusCato (talk) 11:40, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

It is simply ridiculous to maintain that genetical origin dating back to the medieval period would determinate anybody's ethnicity, whether this is argued from a Fennoman or Svecoman point-of-view. Cultural differences between the Swedish-speakers and Finnish-speakers in Finland are actually very small, if not quite non-existent. On the other hand, ethnic identities are not based on "objective" linguistical, cultural or genetical distinctions, but simply on the subjective and situational categorizations between "us" and "others". It is possible that the Swedish-speakers in Finland should be considered as a distinct ethnic group, not ethnic Finns (linguistical distinction) but not quite ethnic Swedes either (belonging to the Finnish society and culture). The concept of "Swedish-speaking Finns" may not fully reflect this situation, but as M.Porcius Cato shows, it is firmly based on the current consensus on this matter. Personally I could accept "Swedish-speaking minority in Finland" as well, or why not "Fenno-Swedes". --130.234.5.136 (talk) 12:46, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, first it is not what is "ok" for you. Finland-Swedes shall themselves decide what they are; some Finland-Swedes consider themselves bluntly as Finns speaking Swedish, for some it means seperate etnic Swedish, settler identity. What comes cultural differences or lack of them I suggest you acquint yourself with a study of Hyyppä and Mäki, 2001. The culture of the Swedes on Finnish mainland (that´s a term I am ok with) is obviously very farm from standard Finnish culture, its even so big that it can explain the significant differences in life-expectancy rates among Finns and Swedes on Finnish mainland (Hyyppä & Mäki, 2001). Swedes on Finnish mainland not only live longer but live happier, mentally richer lives, according to Hyyppä and Mäki that is. Finland-swedes have throughout the history connected to the faith of Sweden (Tarkiainen, 2007) just because things have gone on a slighly different rails the last hundred years does not suddenly erase that past 600 years. Podomi (talk) 13:52, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually, you are now repeating some of the points I tried to explain to you previously. I agree with you in the sense that Swedish-speakers in Finland shall themselves decide what they are. Not me; not you with your obsession with ancient genetic roots. As you have noticed by yourself, the Swedish-speaking Finlanders are themselves divided on their ethnic identity. My closest Swedish-speaking friend tells me that she feels very insulted when she is called as a "Swede"; I have heard some other people have different feelings on this. I might be wrong, but I have always believed that many of the Swedish-speakers think themselves to be ethnically distinct and contrasted both to Finns and "proper" Swedes.

The fact that many Swedish-speakers in Finland react aversively when they are called Swedes makes it very hard to define the whole minority ethnically Swedish. As the major distinguishing feature of the said group is the language, I think that they should be called as "the Swedish-speakers", leaving their problematic ethnicity open.

Your concept of "standard Finnish culture" is dubious. Finland has different regional cultures, as well as upper class, middle class and working class cultures, agrarian and city cultures etc. However, I agree that the research you are pointing to is interesting. Maybe the Swedish-speakers really tend to invest in the social capital more readily than the statistically average Finns do. That might be a significant and interesting cultural difference. But cultural differences are not ethnic differences at such. It is more like ethnic differences being constructed on the basis of real or imagined cultural differences.--130.234.68.211 (talk) 14:15, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Thre´s hardly any Finland-Swedes in Ostrotnia f.e, whom consider him-herself as Finn. Again, you view of Finland-swedishness is very narrow-minded with heavy emphasis on the Swedes in Helsingfors.

212.213.160.2 (talk) 06:50, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Podomi, I suppose it's you, I think we are in the semantics mire again. How do you define a "Finn"? In en-Wikipedia articles, we use Finn mainly to mean "Finnish citizen". That means: the Somalis who came in early 1990s are Finns, if they have acquired the citizenship. You seem to mean by "Finn" the same as the Swedish means by finne (natural, considering your mother tongue). However, English "Finn" and Swedish finne are not the same word. The translation of Finn in Swedish is finländare. So, do you really propose to mean that major part of Swedish-speaking Ostrobothnians feel that they bear allegiance to Sweden instead of Finland? I find this very hard to believe. --MPorciusCato (talk) 07:15, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I define a "Finn" as a speaker of Baltic-Finnish languages, that´s the way it´s been used in traditional literature. The popular meaning of the word has obviously shifted more towards nationality (passport & allegiance), not etnicity. Finland-Swedes are Germanics, speakers of Germanic languages, that is. Obviously a "Finn" is not a proper word, despite any allegiance issues. --Podomi (talk) 08:55, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Now you are completely mistaken. Estonians, Votes, Izhorians, Archangelsk and Onega Karelians and Vepsians speak Baltic-Finnish languages but are not generally considered as Finns. On the other hand, an ethnic term like "Finn" is never stable, but it absorbs new meanings and definitions and loses previous ones. So its not your business to define the concept. But I do not object looking for a new title for this article, as some view "Swedish-speaking Finns" as a non-neutral expression. However, it is not easy to find out a synonymous term that is neutral and commonly used. "Finland-Swedes" would be a direct translation of the words finlandssvenskar and suomenruotsalaiset, but some native English speakers seem to think that it is horrible and unnatural as an English expression.

And, again. It is most clear and certain that a distinct group calling themselves as finlandssvenskar exists. But as the finlandsvenskar themselves are divided on their views of their ethnicity, their ethnicity cannot the defined. Some of them apparently feel themselves as ethnic Finns, some as ethnic Swedes, many as ethnic finlandssvenskar. Ostrobothnian Swedish-speakers are not a privileged group and they cannot define the essence of being finlanssvenskar.--130.234.68.211 (talk) 10:00, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I think people are getting confused over the meaning of the word 'Finn' in the English language. This is English Wikipedia, we need to use the word with the English meaning. Finn, in English, means a person of Finland. It has no linguistic (i.e. Finnish/Swedish-speaker) connotations. That's why Swedish-speaking Finn makes perfect sense in English as a way to refer to a finlandssvensk. I think sometimes people think that Finn in English has the same meaning as the word finne in Swedish, which is wrong. Having said that, I don't see the term Finland Swede in such a problematic light as some English speakers. Often people cite the examples of French Canadian as an example for why the word order should be Swedish(-speaking) Finn. However, English refers to German speaking Swiss people as "Swiss Germans" not German Swiss. From this, it seems there is simply no hard and fast rule in English for deciding this kind of thing. The difference with Swedish-speaking Finn vs Finland-Swede and the other examples (French Canadian, Swiss German etc) is that the Swedish-speaking Finns are not widely known. That means there is no term in common everyday language in English that overwhelmingly is the one used. 94pjg (talk) 01:46, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

After reading the introduction part of the article I cannot but conclude how poor it is. The origins of Finland-Swedes has noot been a debated subject ever since the 1920´s when the mainstream view agreed unanimously that the Swedish minority in the country is not from an acient Scandinavian migration but sheerly from medieval colonialist background. The Swedish population shifts were supported by Swedish crown and it received characters of mass deportation in the 14th. Settling Swedes to Finland became thus very organized (Kari Tarkianen, 2008). The introductionary part should not put emphasize on philosophic view of linguistic/national identity, early 20th language tussles nor the birth of Helsinki slang it should cover briefly Swedes of Finland. The whole chapter is very confusing, it doesn´t say anything what and who are the Swedes in Finland. I have access to most recent studies and sources and I am about to rewrite the whole introductionary part very soon. Obviously we can leavesome parts as they are but the first few paragraphs must be rewritten for sure. --Podomi (talk) 06:15, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I might add that who on earth has conducted the list of Swedish families of Finnish descend? I seriously wonder what names such as Creutz and von Alfthan are doing there, this families are only of "Finnish origins" if that is measured by geographic orgins, they were Swedish families who reigned in Finland and were ennobled, nothing to do with Fenno-Ugrian population of the country. I am going track down every single name in the chart and obviously rewrite that chapter as well or atleast define the term "Finnish origins" in a bit more detailed manner. --212.213.160.2 (talk) 09:09, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Could you already stop using the racialist concept "Fenno-Ugrian population." And your non-neutral re-writings actually ruined the good introductory part.--91.156.108.170 (talk) 17:02, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

This is actually getting unbelievable. Since when has linguistic and etnic term such as "Fenno-Ugrian" became racist? Fenno-Ugrian implies a person speaking Fenno-Ugrian languages which Finnish is reckoned to be. To some extent it also implies of commonly shared roots in terms of shared proto-Uralic origins. What we have here is basically group of people who´ve hijacked the site in order to prompt their own agenda stemming from a very Fenno-Ugrian perspective of things. This is about Swedish-speaking Finns, it´s not aabout philosophic attitudes about nation and language nor language tussles of the 19th century nor the alleged or actual elite status of Swedes of Finland. It´s about Swedes of Finland. Period. These above mentioned issues are part political history of Finland, obviously very important to Finnihs-speaking audience but they should definitely not be in a spotlight in wikipedia article covering Finland-Swedes. Too bad you don´t like what I´ve contibuted, but I really cannot change the content of recent studies and sources. Finland-Swedes are not sometimes viewed as etnic minority, they are an etnic minority, whether a Finnish-speaking person views them as such or not is not relevant. --212.213.160.2 (talk) 10:52, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Nonsense is a fair description of the above post. It it unbelievable that you think that a purely linguistic concept "Fenno-Ugrian" is an ethnic term (or an "etnic" term as you stubbornly keep misspelling it). Ethnic term refers to an identity, and such thing as Fenno-Ugrian ethnic identity does not exist, has never existed. Your non-sensical claim about Swedish-speaking people in Finland being self-evidentually "Swedish" is reminiscent of chauvinistic, in fact fascist Blut und Boden thinking of the 1930's. It is an opinion ( a very nauseating opinion with appalling implications), not a fact. Period.

Too bad (indeed, it is really bad) you do not realize that Swedish-speaking identity in Finland depends on and only on how the Swedish-speakers identify themselves. Many (I believe majority) of them do not identify themselves as ethnic Swedes (not necessarily as ethnic Finns either, but perhaps rather as ethnic Swedish-speaking "Finlanders"). Their genetical ancestry is absolutely irrelevant so far; it becomes relevant only if the Swedish-speakers generally start to consider themselves as ethnic Swedes and adopt the genetics as an argument. The Swedish-speakers have absolute to right to do so if they wish, but as it has not been proven that they have done so yet. You might not like the fact, but that's your problem. Due to historical reasons, the identity of the Swedish-speakers in Finland is a very complicated issue, and it cannot been adequately and neutrally desribed without an analysis of the history of the ethnic discourse.-130.234.68.212 (talk) 10:44, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

I consider the first sentence of the paragraph as intelectually very dishonoust. The mainstream Finnish history has never considred Finland-Swedes to be language shifters, the only people who do so cannot bring any valid references to the discussion. Pretty much equivalent to those people who claim the man never went to the moon. Hence I remove it. I am about to rewrite the whole section very soon. I have sources from the year 2008, so there´s shouldn´t be any confusion. BTW I corrected the date from "12th to 15th century. Finland´s Swedish coastal population came in several waves, Eastern Nyland and Ostrobotnia was settled last and received waves of Swedish people as late as 15th century. But I´ll be back with these events later, together with references that is. --212.213.160.2 (talk) 11:02, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

I did some changes. To the intoductionary part. I felt that the text did really not answer the question of who are Swedish-speaking Finns, when did they first appeared, where and for what?. The stuff is basic mainstream Finnish history taught in the principle courses of high-school history. However, i backed everything with sources from 2008. I reckon the information does not really fit the views of most Finnish wikipedia editors, but I really cannot help. I still feel the intro is not good. But this is a good start. Politics, philosophic views of nationality should not be debated in the opening paragraph. It should serve for quick, easy and convinient information of a given topic.

  Podomi (talk) 16:37, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Philosophiv views must be discussed in the opening paragraph, as we cannot present lies or myths about pure or self-evidential ethnicities.--130.234.68.212 (talk) 10:44, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

This article about Swedish-speaking Finns has been hijacked by extremists. So far, there´s been one single scholar who has questioned the existance of the first Swedish crusade to Finland. The big philosophic question is should wikipedia article´s introductionary paragraph cover the voice of a every single dissident? Should we be obligated to include the opinion of 1% scholars in an introduction section? I definitely wouldn´t worry too much if we´d only stick in the interpretations of the remaining 99% of historians has agreed upon and in which the source I´ve recently used also belongs (Kari Tarkiainen). Erik and bishop Henrik have been historical individuals, that´s a fact. Hence, I remove the speculation part of first crusade, if someone feels that this constitutes a great misdemour he or she shall re-edit it and include the concern which the one single historian has presented. Podomi (talk) 13:24, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Where have you got those weird ideas? Actually, most scholars are nowadays highly sceptical of the historicity of the First Crusade. King Erik is a historical figure, but there is no proof of him being in Finland. Bishop Henry is a uncertain case, although he probably existed. You have been reading very poor, obsolete or confused sources.--91.156.108.170 (talk) 18:26, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Another issue which slightly concerns me is the unnecessary emphasis put on the language shifts. Í´ve personally never encountered a source which would have implied that even Finnish farmers would have adopted Swedish language, this has happened only through intermarriage between the linguistic groups which have been extremely rare atleast if church´s records are to be believed (Kari Tarkiainen, 2008). I think the language shifts receives too much weight. Lot of these myths are derivived from false interpretation of a book by Olavi Linnus (Linnus, 1935). He correctly assessed that 25% of aristocratic class in Finland has come from Sweden, they´ve come from Sweden in an era when church record has been kept. About 48% of aristocratic class are "foreign", this are overwhelmingly from Germany and from Germans in the Teutonic Ritterschaft in Baltics. Few families from Switzerland, France, Scottland and Russia, but mostly German. In sweden the "foreign" component among aristocracy is about 45%. The remaining share is of "Finnish origins" according to Linnus. Now, here comes the trick, or rather three tricks. First, the "Finnish origins" does not imply etnicity but everyone who has been in Finland before the time when church records were established. This category includes many Finland-Swedish families, such as the Count family Creutz from Pernå. Second, aristocrats and upper classes represents actuallly only few percent of Finland-Swedes, not a good reference class to base arguments upon. Third, only 55% of Aristocrat class today are Swedish-speaking Finns. 45% of aristocrats as most of the tradional upper-classes, "estate" families, (clerics, bourgeoise) are Finnish-speaking. The fact that many of these people have once had a good competence in Swedish does not make them Fennoswedes. Fennoswedes are an etnic class, you don´t become a Swedish-speaking Finns, you only born as a Swedish-speaking Finn.

Podomi (talk) 13:24, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Third, issue which bugs me is that I´ve been referred as pusher of source manipulations and POV, or whatever, misdemours. I´d like to see an example of one manipulation I´ve done. I believe that this is actually due to Nevanlinna´s study from 1980 which I used in order to back an argument that Finland-Swedes are descended from Swedes. The founding population of Finland-Swedes are Swedes, not Finns. Thus they are descended from Swedes as Nevanlinna address, according to his research based on nucleus genetic markers (blood groups) Finland-Swedes have Finnish admixture at the rate of 60%, still does not mean they are descended from both Finns and Swedes, because they haven't. Nevanlinna reckoned that every 1/10 marriage of a Finland-Swedes has been cross-lingual, in a period of nine genration this would have turned to 60% of Finnish admixture. Yet, they have not decended from Finns and nowhere does Nevanlinna claims so. Now, here comes the trick, I could have chosen not to introduce the Nevanlinnas´source, why? Because, blood-groups are no longer used in population genetic studies and they haven't been that for about 30 years why? They are inaccurate, or rather estimations of admixture rates becomes inaccurate. Based on blood-markers Nevanlinna estimated Finns to carry Asian admixture at the rate of 25-30% while Guglielmino who studies the same material reckoned the asian influence upon Finns as 10%. Unlike Nevanlinnas estimations, Guglielmos interpretations based on blood group analysis is supported by latest genome wide SNP scand done upon Finns. I could say that the only thing we know about Finland-Swedes is that Ostrobotnians (50% of Finland-Swedes) cluster genetically with Swedes. Despite, I personally reckon Nevanlinna to be a complete whackjob with completely outdated methods for population genetics I still introduced his study, why?....hmmmmm....good question actually.....

Podomi (talk) 13:42, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, I found this source [17] about the Finnic toponyms in today's Swedish speaking areas of Finland. It also suggests that a "large population of native Finnish speakers existed in the south-western archipelago until Early Modern Age" and sice no massacres are known from that time the only other possible event to explain today's demographics in the area is language shift. Clarifer (talk) 14:35, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

And what´s the value your source brings to the discussion if I may ask? The fact that many of ther place names settled by Swedes implies that Finns have been there first. However, the Swedes brought permanent settlements to many of these places. North-America has loads of places with Indian names, however the bulk of the population on this places have very little to do with native Americans. I remove your source because the origins of Finland-Swedes are already discussed in a another paragraph. Your source brings no value to the discussion. It´s hardly not rocket science that Finns had visited these coastal areas before the arrival of Swedes.

128.214.30.138 (talk) 14:43, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Please see my second edit in the article. The same paper suggests indeed that the Finnish settlements were permanent in nature. Please do not remove sourced information or you will gain much ill-will. You may add a contra-argument with a proper source if you want to. Clarifer (talk) 14:46, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Which of these sources back the notion of Finns melting with Swedes?

"However, this does not mean that Swedes would have inhabited only settled areas that were completely unpopulated. Indeed, it is probable that no such areas were available. We can assume that the rest of the coastal area was inhabited by Finns at the time when the Swedish settlers arrived in the country. Our assumption is based on place names: the Swedish place names on the coast include numerous Finnish substrate names— incontrovertible proof of early Finnish settlement." 

"Another indication of older Finnish settlement is evidenced by the fact that native speakers of Finnish named so many different types of places in the area that the substrate nomenclature seems to consist of names referring to village settlement rather than to names of natural features."

"This seems to support our conception that there was a large population of native speakers of Finnish in the archipelago and that it remained Finnish-speaking for a longer period than was previously believed."

.......none of them. One can as well conclude that the Finns there have retreated from the completely alien group to them. Like I said, the biologic origin of Finland-Swedes are already discussed. It´s hardly not relevant to the topic Finland-Swedes that there has been also Finnish-speakers in the coast. 128.214.30.138 (talk) 15:02, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

None of my edits in the article directly refer to the process of either language-shift or population mixing. I simply report what the source states. The reader may reach conclusions of his/her own. Before my edits, the beginning of the paragraph held the information that the settlers from Sweden started to live in uninhabited areas. It seems, however, that there are sources postulating an opposite event. I believe both possible scenarios are worth mentioning since this clearly is part of the age old battle of "mostly settling or mostly language-shift?". Such discussion should indeed be placed in the history section as it deals with possible events in time and not e.g. allele frequencies. Clarifer (talk) 15:14, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

The settlers from Sweden came largely to unpopulated areas yes, not wholly. As the source says Åbolands coast had indeed lot of Finnish origin names, there also might been vivid Finnish communities which melted to the Swedish population. It can also be the opposite, the settlers formed sort of apartheid which happened in England with Angles against the Celts. However, I think genetics comes much better with these issues. And as the genetics are already discussed we don´t need to go with this again. I make deal with you, I remove your quote and incase you put it again, I will make a new section for place name science and trust me, it will be such a bravado to Sweden and Swedish that the reader starts to wonder whether Finns have anything for their country. And this stuff would be fully backed up with academic sources. I could also include important Swedes such as Michael Agricola who invented written Finnish. On the other hand we could keep this article clean so that all parties are pleased? Howabout?

128.214.30.138 (talk) 15:25, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I believe Your own speculation is irrelevant to this matter. I have tried to follow the source in my edits with the utmost accuracy. The story at hand is far more complex than the mere genetic information can reveal and can be approached from many directions. I'm asking you once more not to remove validly sourced information. Clarifer (talk) 15:36, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

LOL, you following sources with utmost accuracy. I beg to laugh. I happen to know lot of origin of the place names in Finland. Åbolands coast has indeed lot of old Finnish derivived names, as does Österbotten. Österbotten had previously fully finnic population, however at the time Swedish came the area was deserted, finns used svedjebruk, a form of agriculture which was very destructive to the land, thus they could no longer dwell in Österbotten. Nylands Swesdish coast, is depending on a region 70-100% Swedish in place names. Helsingfors even gives strong indication of where the settlers came from. But don´t worry you´ll learn lot more tomorrow when I am back editing the place name section.

128.214.30.138 (talk) 15:53, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Dear anonymous user, you are perfectly free to disagree about any topic on Wikipedia but I would encourage you to remain civil. Threats of deliberately turning articles into WP:POV is disruptive and violates several Wikipedia policies. Argue your case dispassionately and with sources instead JdeJ (talk) 16:00, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

At least this stuff about Finnish swidden agriculturalists ruining their land is complete nonsense and fantasy, not based on any serious sources. Finnish-speakers were never exclusively hack and burn farmers, and in any case Iron Age population was too sparse to destroy the forests with swidden agriculture. Swedish palaeo-botanic researchers working in Ostrobothnia has found evidence of manured fields already around AD 500.--91.156.108.170 (talk) 19:07, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

No Edit Wars

Both 128.214.30.138 and Clarifer have violated WP:3RR and with no good reason to do so. On the one hand, I agree with 128.214.30.138 that the source is not ideal. That is not intended as criticism towards the source itself (my quick reading of it suggests it's a good one) but it did not appear to be as direct as what it is intended to source here. I would hope to see a bit more nuanced text when we are dealing with things experts can only speculate about. On the other hand, I see this as a reason to discuss the source, not just delete it point-blank as 128.214.30.138 has been doing. I hope you, and everybody else interested, can try to reach an understanding here on the talk page first. Any further violation of WP:3RR will be reported. JdeJ (talk) 15:57, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I feel that I have to correct a small issue here. I did exactly three reverts on 'Swedish-speaking Finns' and numbered them in the edit summary so I didn't violate the three reverts per 24hours rule. I'm glad that someone was paying attention to this article through that. Sorry for the close call. Clarifer (talk) 16:38, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Finns on Finland's coastal areas around AD 1000

There´s not hardly any debate about this. The coast settled by Swedes was MOSTLY uninhabitet (Kari Tarkiainen, 2008). The only exception to this is Åbolands coast. And even that was only sparsely populated by Finns. Kari Tarkiainen actually even recites the study which clarifier presented. Eastern Nyland was literally empty when the Swedes came. Same with most of Österbotten eventhough the place names were largely of Finnish orgins. Place names around Sibbo and Helsingfors are 100% Swedish by origins. Thanks to the extremist the reader now gets the impression that all of the coast was heavily populated by Finns at the time Swedes came. The reason for lack of Finnish communities in the coast was due to svedjebruk, Finns simply found coast not as productive place to settle. I will make sure extremist do not have a room in this site anymore. 128.214.30.138 (talk) 16:49, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

It should be noted that Tarkiainen's book presents very conservative and traditional, some say obsolete, views of on some issues. It must be acknowledged that the possible existence or non-existence of Finnish settlement on those coastal areas is a debated issue. There absolutely nothing "extremist" in this. The anonymous poster above it is obviously not aware of the fact that many inhabitants of Finland had adopted agriculture based on manured fields already in the Iron Age. (Archaeologists have dug up several Iron Age fields in Finland). They were not dependant of swidden agriculture (Sw. svedjebruk). These kind of obsolete national-romanticist stereotypes and simplifications will not be presented as facts in the article--91.156.108.170 (talk) 18:22, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Sure archeologist have dug up iron age field where non-svedjebruk reigned, however, whether these people were Finns or Scandinavians is another story.

Yeah, a field does not tell us what language its cultivators spoke. But presumably there were not many Scandinavians in Mikkeli around AD 1000. There's nothing to suggest that Finnish-speaking populations were only swidden agriculturalists, in fact there is lot of evidence to maintain an opposite view.--91.156.108.170 (talk) 18:57, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Like I said, this stidy which Clarifier presented only reckons the Finnish derivied names in Åbo-trakten, and like I said there´s no bigger debate on this 70-100% place names in Nyland are of Swedish origins, thus we need to clarify this a bit so that the reader won´t get too twisted view. Podomi (talk) 18:51, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Please read the source (Ritva Liisa Pitkänen (Helsinki, Finland) Finnish-Swedish Contacts in Finnish Nomenclature [18]) more carefully. The Turunmaa/Aboland archipelago is taken only as an example for a possible settlement scenario as suggested by the toponyms.

"The etymological and historical background of the old Finnish substrate nomenclature was also studied. The most detailed studies concerned the old loan names of Finnish origin in the Turunmaa archipelago (PITKÄNEN 1985, 1990, 1993, ZILLIACUS 1989, 1994, NAERT 1995). So far, publications on Finnish loan nomenclature in Uusimaa have concerned the composition of the collected data and the distribution of name types (PITKÄNEN 2001,2002). We do not have a general overview of the loan names in Ostrobothnia, so even their number is unknown. It seems that, with a few exceptions, there are no place names of Finnish origin in Åland (HULDÉN 1982: 95–102)." "In order to draw attention to the features of the individual regions, as well, I shall consider the research not only from the point of view of THE MATERIAL AS A WHOLE, but also from the perspective of the two largest regional material collections of the research with different backgrounds. One of these was collected from the easternmost bilingual region on the coast of the Gulf of Finland, the municipality of Pyhtää (Sw. Pyttis, PITKÄNEN 1975). This collection includes nearly 400 Finnish-Swedish place name pairs" As for percentages, it seems that in all Swedish-speaking areas (except Aland) the number of Finnish place name loans is VERY small but significant: "The substrate names of Finnish origin are relatively numerous everywhere in the Swedish-speaking areas along the Finnish coast. I shall look at the substrate names in the area that has been studied most, that is, the Turunmaa archipelago, where ca. 1,000 place names in the Swedish-language nomenclature have been found to be of Finnish origin. However, compared to the Swedish-language nomenclature, the share of substrate names is minimal. Even in those municipalities which have the most names of Finnish origin,their share of the entire nomenclature is less than 3%. Yet, the Finnish language names are prominent and striking in the onomastic landscape of the archipelago. The reason for this is that they belong to the major names in the area: the names of parishes, villages, and important natural features, such as islands and bays (PITKÄNEN 1985, 1990). "For example, in the Lockvattnet region, which is nowadays strongly Swedish-speaking, the loans from Finnish into Swedish (58%) outnumber the loans from Swedish into Finnish (41%) by far, because the majority of the names in the region originate from old Finnish substrate names. In Pyhtää, however, the differences between the languages can be seen in the types of places whose names have been borrowed. The Swedish-speaking population has borrowed more names of natural features than other names from Finnish, whereas the Finnish-speaking population has mainly borrowed the main names of settlements and cultivated land from Swedish." "Another indication of older Finnish settlement is evidenced by the fact that native speakers of Finnish named so many different types of places in the area that the substrate nomenclature seems to consist of names referring to village settlement rather than to names of natural features."

etc.etc. sorry for long direct quoting. I believe by calling me "the extremist" you (sorry) anonymous 128.214.30.138 violates WP:NPA. Clarifer (talk) 09:01, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Pheww........

"Efter kolonisationen fick kusten nästan helsvensk bosättning; bynamnen är till 70-100% av svensk ursprung. Enligt beräkningar av Saulo Kepsu (Kepsu, Saulo, Uuteen Maahan, Helsinki 2005)är bynamnen mest svenskdominerade i väster (Pojo-Karistrakten) och i öster (Borgå-Pernå) med en svacka i mellersta Nyland)". (Kari Tarkiainen, 2008)

"Östra Nyland var vid 1200-talets mitt ett ännu jungfruligt område än västra Nyland. Landskapet hade karaktären av en ofantlig, nästan obebudd ödemark med en havskust som endast sporadiskt, vid tiden för strömnings och laxfiske, besöktest av finnar från Tavastland samnt troligen även av samer". (Kari Tarkiainen, 2008).

"Finska ortnamn är ovanligt få inom Sibbo, vilket tyder på att området var praktiskt taget folktomt när svenskarna kom" (Christer Kuvaja & Arja Rantanen, Sibbo sockens historia fram till år 1868, 1998)

You try to depict a view that the whole coast was heavily settled by Finns when the Swedes became when in reality there was only sporadic Finnic communities in Åbo-trakten, I might also point that Åbolandscoast holds about 7-10% of all Finland-Swedes, 85-90% of them live in Nyland and Österbotten which were indeed mostly unsettled and definitely lacked permanent settlements before the arrival of Swedes. After Kari Tarkiainen had covered the origins of place names in a very detailed manner using latest research in Åland, Åbo coast, Nyland and Österbooten he refers the situation in follwing chapter: "Inflyttarströmmen från Sverige gick inte bara till de GLEST befolkade kusttrakterna i Finland. De folktomma kusterna i västra och norra Estland började ochså locka folk". The direct translation of "glest" is "sparse". We are not going to make the introductionary chapter of Swedish-speaking Finns as the playground of fenno extremists, we stick in science, hence I remove your quotes and edit the article "The Swedes came to coastal areas of Finland which were sparsely populated at the time".

I might also add that Tarkiainen has written his book in 2008 and had access to about every single study regarding the etymology on place names and archeology in Swedish Finland. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.213.160.2 (talk) 10:52, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Podomi (talk) 10:19, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not trying to do anything but improve the quality of the article and possibly defend a neutral point of view. I'm not saying anything myself. I'm sorry if the bits of sourced information that I present aren't in line with your own information but that's the way it often goes. You cannot remove sourced information just like that. The proper thing to do is to try and counter-argue the source with another source. So far you're not doing this. I will add my sourced info about the possible demographic situation of Finland's coastal areas as presented by doctor Ritva Liisa Pitkänen of the University of Helsinki [19]. Clarifer (talk) 13:50, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh and please stop putting words in the mouth of other editors. None of my edits or my comments here have suggested that I assume a dense population anywhere in Finland around 1000AD. Sigh. Clarifer (talk) 14:30, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I did some changes to the list of Swedish speaking Finns. The big concern is that there´s a list of names of "Finnish origins". This list contains names which were already in the country before church established its records. Names such as Creutz from Pernå and Boije (af Gennäs) from Pojo are from purely Finland-Swedish origins.http://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boije_af_Genn%C3%A4s .http://www.riddarhuset.fi/fi/index.php?id=13&sukunro=A001 Moreover, the list of "foreign" families is gathered from names which came to Finland at the time church records were in usage. I believe the list is gathered from Olavi Linnus book, (Linnus, 1935) which suomalaisuuden liitto´s website also advertises. I introduced few names as well, such as the former president of Finland Svinhufvud af Qvalstadt, the family originates from Dalarna, Sweden. Mannerheims paternal ancestor was ennobled in Gävle, Sweden, his paternal side is von Julin from Södermanland, Sweden. Both of thefamilies came to Finland in 18th century. Out of the Mannerheims 32 closest ancestors not a single one was born in Germany apart from the maternal´s maternal von Schantz side. Podomi (talk) 12:05, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Please note that we are talking about the Mannerheim family, not about C.G.E. Mannerheim. The family has several very notable members in addition to Marshal of Finland, and on that line, the family's origin are a topic of interest. It is well founded that the Mannerheim family's founder was Hinric Marhein, a mill owner who immigrated to Gävle in early 17th century and whose son was ennobled.

On the other hand, the list of Swedish-speaking business families should be added with the places of origin. (For example, Ahlströms originate from Merikarvia, founder Antti Ahlström was a Finnish-speaker whose children shifted language, Fazers come from Germany, Sinebrychoffs from Russia etc.) --MPorciusCato (talk) 12:24, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I reckon Mannerheim´s Swedishness is very sensitive issue for finnish audience, well atleast to the patriotic one. It´s aknowledged that the paternal founder indeed came from Germany to Sweden. The family had lived there (Sweden) about 15 decades and ennobled there. One of the family members came to Finland from Sweden in 18th century, not from Germany. At this point there was hardly anything left of Germany in their culture, linguistics, let alone genome. Mannerheim´s moternal family is von Julin, a family from Södermanland, Sweden which also settled the country in 18th. To say that Mannerheim´s were anything but Swedish is intellectually pretty dishonoust, I reckon. Ahlströms founding father was fully Finnish, there was hardly never been a single Swede in Merikarvia. However, the trick is that Ahltsröms, today are mostly Finnish-speaking as Ahlström himself was, although married Finland-Swedish lady. One can hardly refer that as Finland-Swedish family. 212.213.160.2 (talk) 12:43, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Podomi, it would greatly enhance the quality of this discussion, if you would make all your edits with your account instead of using several IP addresses.

Please note that I am not disputing the mother-tongue of C.G.E. Mannerheim. I'm simply pointing out your very selective choice of sources in forwarding your bias. In particular, when we are discussing families of 16th, 17th, 18th and 19th centuries, it is very interesting to hear the origins of those families. The "ethnicity" or "nationality" of those families is a useless concept, as upper class of those days did not pay any special note to language they used and even changed affiliations to monarchs rather liberally.

I'm surprised about your pointed lack of sophistication when using English. I'm glad to note that C.G.E. Mannerheim was a native Swedish-speaker, yet I would hesitate to call him even a Swede, as this word is not the equivalent of svensk. Words "Swedish" and "Swedishness", without any modifiers, imply loyalty to the Swedish state, which is rather inappropriate when discussing finlanddsvenskar, the Swedish-speaking Finns.

In particular, I find the concept of naming persons finlandssvensk before the advent of the Folktinget and Svenska folkpartiet very odd. Before the era of language strife, all Finns of importance spoke and used Swedish (and called themselves finnar, by the way). The separate concept of being finlandssvensk was invented by Freudenthal. Ever since after that, the finlandssvenskar have been recognized through self-identification, which is still the only method accepted by all Swedish-speaking organizations in Finland. That is, can we call persons who were born Swedish-speaking but did their life's work in Finnish, knowingly supporting other movements than Folkpartiet (or the small Swedish-speaking socialdemocratic fraction), Swedish-speakers? They clearly lacked the self-identification. For example, P.E. Svinhufvud was born into a Swedish-speaking family, but consciously became a Finnish-speaker. Was he a Swedish-speaker in the sense of finlandssvensk? --MPorciusCato (talk) 16:47, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Dear, clarifier,

Ritva Pitkänen has not conducted a study but rather drawn a synthesis of studies, ironically all of the studies she recites are recited by Tarkiainen as well, the only difference is that Tarkiaianen has covered multiple times more sources and had access to latest research (Saulo Kepsu, 2005). And unlike Tarkiainens work Leena Pitkänen´s synthesis does not even cover Österbotten. Tarkainen, does not say Finland´s Swedish coast was largely unhabitet, he says the coast of Österbotten was largely unhabitet including Western Nyland, Eastern Nyland has been according to him and multiple other sources deserted; literally lacking permanent settlement and only received sporadic Tavastian visitors before the Swedes came. The things is that 85-90% of Finland Swedes came to the SPARSELY populated areas, not wholly deserted unlike previously thought. 10-15% of Finland-Swedes were subjected to areas in Abo coast with vivid Finnish communities, how big the Finnic population was is largely unknown. In which extend the coast was settled is perfectly known, it was only sparsely settled prior to Swedes, previously it was though to have been totally empty, this has been the case only in Eastern parts of Nyland. It´s all perfectly known, my little extremist.

"We do not have a general overview of the loan names in Ostrobothnia, so even their number is unknown". (Ritva Pitkänen)

128.214.30.138 (talk) 16:23, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

This site was a playground for fenno extremist, it´s not that anymore. The first Finnish crusade is not semi-legendary it´s mainstream interpretation which, unlike I said yesterday, has been questioned by few historians.

"Det finns ochså en mera kritisk syn, enligt vilken det första korståget aldrig har ägt rum. Uppphovsmannen till denna tolkningen är Curt Weibull, som menar att kung Erik inte kan ha varit den drivande kraften i företaget, än mindre deltagit i det. Flera sentida forskare har anslutit sig till Weibull och menat att berättelsen om det första korståget är en ren saga. En av dem är Dick Harrison, som dock gör det förbehållet att kun Erik kanske ändå `kristnade det finska kustlandet under en av sina plundringsråder på andra sidan Östersjön".

"I motsats till Weibull anser Jarl Gallen att Erikslegenden inte förfaller att vara en hopfantiserad litterär produkt, utan en istort sett trovärdig källä som har skrivits endast ter generation efter helgokungens död....det första korståget passar enligt Gallen fullständigt i miljön. Det va ren härfärd avsedd att etablera kristendomen i Finland och skapa fred bland svenskar och krista finnar i området".

"Ochså en modern forskare, Per Olof Sjöstrand, skriver att ett korståg till sydvästra Finlands norra del passar rätt bra in i bilden av 1150-talets händelseförlopp. Han menar att denna operation, som hade sina rötter i Östergötland, efetr landstigningen fortsatte som ett fälttåg till Aura å, som på 1100-talet för en tid fungerade som Sveriges Östgräns".

Tarkiainen, 2008

So, all in all, the first crusade is mainstream history which has only been questioned by handfull of historians, these views are supported by majority of modern historians, hence we do not use the term "semi-legendary". We can change it to "recently debated". Podomi (talk) 16:55, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Bullshit. Use a better source.Tarkiainen's book is substandard shit in this regard. Majority of Finnish and Swedish historians are highly sceptical of the historicity of the Crusade. Read Seppo Suvanto, Tuomas M. S. Heikkilä, Jouko Vahtola. Learn basic facts.--91.153.126.178 (talk) 19:41, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Clarifie keeps insisting his biased views. The extend which the coast was settled is very well known, all in all it was sparsely populated. Previously it was though the coast was totally empty but this has proven to be false, and if true only was the case in Eastern Nyland. There´s does not exist any debate around this.

Podomi (talk) 17:01, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I resent the repeated violation of WP:NPA. I think it relevant to the subject that there are Finnish substrate toponyms in today's Swedish speaking areas. If this proof is not mentioned in the text I'm afraid someone will just remove the interpretation that the areas were not uninhabited when settled by people from Sweden. I think the example from Turunmaa/Aboland archipelago is relevant in that it may suggest an event of language-shift which in itself seems a very relevant phenomenon to consider when addressing the Swedish language presence in today's Finland. What do others think? Are my additions relevant and interesting or not? Clarifer (talk) 17:48, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

The issue is not whether your arguments bears relevance or not, the issue is that you try to give falsified view of history. Pitkänen, does not cover Österbotten nor even Nyland, she only covers Åbo coast and Pyttis which is in Kymenmaa. Yet you make it sound like the all of the Swedish speaking coast was heavily settled. Like I said 85-90% of the area´s in which Swedes settled were MOSTLY unsettled. As an extremist you are engaging in source manipulating practises. We know from the most recent studies (Saulo Kepsu, 2005) that 70-100% of the place names in Nyland is of Swedish origins. Small share of them are of Estonian origins. The question is do we really need to cover place etymology in the introductionary chapter of Swedes in Finland. We don´t see that in an article covering English colonialist to new world. Every population has absorderd foreign elements in their genepool, however we don´t see anyone else going nuts about it like the Finns. So far I haven´tmet single Afro-centrists who keeps insisting of language changes of britons and spaniards who´ve absorded the about 200 000 African slaves in middle ages. The Germanic Scandinavian raiders in Åbo coast have might indeed absord the few Uralic tribes existing in the area, the key issue is that the Uralics were absorded, not the other way around. This tells something about the balance of power in the area. However, Pitkänen does not insunsiate of language changes, that´s done by you. These Finns could have simply retreated to inland parts of the country towards their Uralic tribal mates. 212.213.160.2 (talk) 07:54, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I could engage in a long debate about your sources and my sources, however we should engage in to that in the opening chapter of Swedish-speaking Finns. Hence I removed all remarks indicating how settled the coast was. Now, it´s in neutral form "Swedes settled the Southern and Western Coast of Finland". Incase we want to speculate with this more, we should open new section for the topic. About the first crusade, Tarkiainen does not take a heavy stance in it. He only introduces sources. However, he says that there´s been some kind of Swedish led military operation to Egentliga Finland around 1150 for certain. Whether the trip was led by Erik and whether it had emphasis in expanding christianity or simply annex land is still uncertain according to Tarkiainen. It is certainly not "semi-legendary", if its taught in the school books and still supported by the majority of modern researchers. 212.213.160.2 (talk) 07:59, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Again, I'm not trying anything. If you think that I quote my sources in a bad way then correct them do not remove them. I believe this quote states that Dr. Pitkänen used all the current (as of 2007) material on Swedish place names in Finland. She bases her deductions BOTH on the whole material AND makes it clearer using two separate local examples. Please read her text more carefully. ""The etymological and historical background of the old Finnish substrate nomenclature was also studied. The most detailed studies concerned the old loan names of Finnish origin in the Turunmaa archipelago (PITKÄNEN 1985, 1990, 1993, ZILLIACUS 1989, 1994, NAERT 1995). So far, publications on Finnish loan nomenclature in Uusimaa have concerned the composition of the collected data and the distribution of name types (PITKÄNEN 2001,2002). We do not have a general overview of the loan names in Ostrobothnia, so even their number is unknown. It seems that, with a few exceptions, there are no place names of Finnish origin in Åland (HULDÉN 1982: 95–102).""In order to draw attention to the features of the individual regions, as well, I shall consider the research not only from the point of view of THE MATERIAL AS A WHOLE, but ALSO from the perspective of the two largest regional material collections of the research with different backgrounds. One of these was collected from the easternmost bilingual region on the coast of the Gulf of Finland, the municipality of Pyhtää (Sw. Pyttis, PITKÄNEN 1975)." Clarifer (talk) 08:25, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I would like to note, dear Podomi, that it is extremely unco to edit with three different usernames or IP addresses. Please log in when you are editing. In addition, you are repeatedly making personal attacks. Calling somebody an extremist is not acceptable. You should also note that this is a clear case of differing opinions. We, and that means each and every one of us, must present all sides compassionately and in neutral manner. Tarkiainen may be a good author, but he is not the only person with a notable opinion. All notable opinions must be presented. --MPorciusCato (talk) 12:34, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I beg to laugh. The thing is that Pitkänen has not postulated that the coast of Finland was heavily settled by Finns prior to Swedes, she only postulated that finnic settlemenent can be assumed to have been existed in Åbo coast in Kymmene region (Pyttää, her whole article is based on the information from these regions, not the core regions of Swedish settlements Österbotten or Nyland, I cannot even believe how clarifier has balls to refer himself as "Clarifier" the man is nothing but extremist. The whole reason why Clarifier wants to include the work by Pitkänen is to give reader the appearance that linguistic change has happened. He doesn´t care about Swedish-speaking Finns, his sole concern is to make them appear Finns. Well, Pitkänen´s work doesn´t support the idea of language shifts. She claims that there were Finnish named persons in the coast as late as 15th and 16th century. At this period church records were established and these records shows that the intermarriages between the linguistic groups have been extremely few until the very last few(Kari Tarkiainen, 2008). Since Clarifier does not even bother to clarify and recite his source correcrectly I have to do it.

my proposition

"based on extensive reserach on the etymology on place names the extend which the coast was settled is largely known, according to Pitkänens data on the etymology on place names we can gather that Abo Coast and Kymmene region had finnic settelements already prior to Swedes, however according to most recent research the core area´s of Swedes settlements have been largely unhabitet and in some areas deserted" (Kari Tarkiainen, 2008, Saulo Kepsu, 2005, Kuvaja & Rantanen, 1998)"

Or what the heck, I got a better idea, why don´t I just let the Fenno´s extremist manipulate their sources as much as they wish, I just the direct quote by Tarkiainen (2008)

"Från senare tid vet man genom släktforskning att den svenska kustbefolkningen har varit starkt endogam i sin fortplantning, på så sätt att äkta mankar kom från familjer som levde närä samma varandra, ofta i samma by. Så var fallet överallt bland allmogen, även den finska, och man gissar att antalet bland äktenskap mellan kontrahenter från olika språksgrupper under den tid som kyrkoböcker har har förts har hållit sig stadigt under en procentenhet".

Clarifier perhaps you want to clarify your wrtings so that no one start accidently assume what you are assuming? Podomi (talk) 13:55, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Clarifier,

the next time you once again go and launch your little source twisting sabotases, remember to mention Tarkiainen´s work last and Pitkänen´s first. Tarkiainen makes his assumption bases on latest research and represents fresher touch, his work is more recent (2008) although, i must mention that there really is no debate around this nor controversalities. Remember to also add Saulo Kepsus work (Uuteen Maahan, 2005) which addresses that after the colonisation the Finnish coast received almost fully Swedish population and that 70-100% of places names in Nyland are of Swedish origins. Make sure to also recite Kuvaja and Rantanen, 1998 who addressed that place origins around Sibbo are 100% Swedish which indicates that the Swedes settled deserted land. And since you are so much into truth and science make sure also to pay a remark on church records in regards to intermarriages between the linguistic groups. Podomi (talk) 14:04, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Ahem, please see the history log of the article. The last two latest reverts was were not done by me. You cannot be the sole judge of what will be added to a wikipedia article and what will be left out. You seem to have different sourced information than what Pitkänen writes. Then go ahead and add this info alongside of Pitkänen's info and interpretations. So far you seem to have shown little good-will, even less co-operation abilites and seem very quick to interpret things according to your own world-view. I personally think you are not being a very helpful wikipedia editor at the time being. Clarifer (talk) 08:11, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, I apologize. If I accused you of something you haven´t done. Anyway, I think it´s fully thanks to me that this site has gone more accurate and informative in regards to who Swedish-speaking Finns are. Before me this site was a mess dominated by few ill-willed fenno extremists, who were only interested in denying etnicity and history of Finland-Swedes. It was fully 100% political history from Fennoman perspective. Still I find lot of unnecessary info which should be in articles dealing the political history of Finland, not Swedish-speaking Finns.

No, excuse me but I began to work with the laughable new sub-section.

BTW why do want to include this speculation, we already have biologic origins chapter.

128.214.30.32 (talk) 13:00, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

BTW just curious, why do you Finns want to depict Finland-Swedes as language shifters. The odds based on latest genetic research is definitely against you. Even though the Scandinavian raiders would have absorded the Uralic tribes in the Åbo coast, it doesn´t language shift happened. It implies that the Uralics melted to the Scandinavians thanks to intermarriages. I´ve never heard Afro-Centrist claim that English and Portuuguese would have been language shifters althought the people absorder the 200 000 African slaves in Europe which have dissapeared. The Finns in Åbo coast however never dissapeared the area has never been 100% Swedish. Maybe the Scandinavians formed an apartheid and exluded the Uralics from the club. That´s what happened in England during the the Anglos´s and Jutes arrived, the celts were excluded.

With all due respect. There seem to be differences between the views of some of the contributors to this article (and other related articles). This is a normal state of matters and is usually dealt with by trying to find wordings that cater for all the sourced information presented. What is much more disconcerting is the distrust and even hatred that some editors seem to bring into this discourse repeatedly. Some editors speak of myths that need straightening out. At the same time, things like "Simultaneously the growth of population resulted in Swedish settlements in some coastal areas of Finland, largely unsettled at the time." can be found in the article with no mention of the fact that throughout these "largely unsettled" areas a stratum of substrate toponyms exists. This was the start of my contribution. Instead of a repeated myth I tried to present data from the actual situation. Whatever the interpretation might be (and the reader is welcome to make his/her own), I find it an interesting and a relevant fact that this toponym stratum exists. No-one really knows the proportions of the newcomers to the older inhabitants (nor is this necessarily even relevant). The constant "going to extremes" seems to be another trait of the current discussion: the matter is dealt with an either-or approach with little intermediates where in reality typically the "truth lies somewhere in between". There is the talk that this article had been hijacked by "Fennomans" (do the accusors even know what a Fennoman is?). Then how is the situation made better by bringing in the ideas of Freudenthal etc. (See: Finns). These obsolete concepts belong to the 19th early 20th century (not the least because the Fennomanic goal has become reality: There is a Finland with Finnish as an official language.) If it is important for the Finland-Swedes to define themselves in a certain way (and could there there perhaps be more ways than just one?) and if it is important for the minority to differentiate clearly from the majority then so be it. However, when this is done by attempts "basing on objective truths" (and less with simple self-identification), one must be prepared for conflicting information and interpretations rather than clear cut deductions. In the end, an identity is just that: one's self-perception. Clarifer (talk) 09:35, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

If I still see speculations in the article which the scientific studies do not inunsiate, I will add my own speculations as well. Podomi (talk) 13:51, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Obvious sociological bias is evident in these article discussions. The simple choice of words, referring to Finnish speakers as "Uralic" and "Finno-Ugrian" and at the same time not using the term Indo-European but instead referring to Swedes as linguistically Germanic (in which case the equivalent term is Baltic-Finnic for Finns) is a clear example of ethnic bias. Stressing the ethnic distance by choice of words, intentional or unintentional. Whenever one reads someone juxtaposing terms such as Germanic Swedes and Uralic Finns instead of Indo-European Swedes and Finno-Ugrian Finns you are displaying ethnic bias. And also misusing linguistic categories for such a purpose. So in the future, do refer to both groups with equivalent terminology. Such biased use of wording has no place in science. Germanic/Baltic-Finn, Indo-European/Finno-Ugric etc. --Peterkrister (talk) 09:16, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

List of surenames at the end

What on earth does the lists of surenames add to the quality, that hasn't been mentioned earlier? It also incorporates a lot of references, which are to the Finnish language wiki...no good. --MoRsE (talk) 16:26, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I actually agree. If it´s up to me we could just have the "notable Swedish-speaking Finns" list, and just add Mikael Agricola in it. Podomi (talk) 07:09, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Actually, as I noted earlier, using the term "Swedish-speaking Finn" for persons who were active before 20th century is an anachronism. There has not been such group as Swedish-speaking Finns before the Svekomanic awakening caused by Freudenthal. Before the introduction of Finnish as a national language, there were two definite, separate Swedish-speaking groups in Finland. There was the Swedish-speaking population of the coastal areas, and there were the upper and middle classes, which spoke almost consistently Swedish. The interaction between the Swedish rural population and the upper and middle classes was non-existent, and there was no self-identified group of finlandssvenskar. So, as the Folktinget and other Swedish-speaking organizations consider the finlandssvensk identity to be based on self-identification, no one could have that self-identification before the work of Freudenthal. Especially, the Swedish-speaking educated class of early and mid-19th century self-identified as finnar. --MPorciusCato (talk) 18:47, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I removed the older genetic studies which I had personally added. I think the older antingen and blood marker studies have very limited value compared to modern genome-wide SNP scans. The older methodologies are not in usage anymore and have not been for about 30 years. Incase someone wants these results back, we could discuss about it, but so far I think it´s better this way. I will be adding new genetic material regarding Finlands Swedes when published.

Podomi (talk) 16:00, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Who is pushing this line constantly?

"This age old question remains largely unanswered with positions emphasising a settler nature in one extreme and a language-shift phenomenon in the other".

This is wholly pseudo-science, there has never been any debate about the origins of the Swedish minority in mainland Finland. Never. The debate was about whether the Swedish minority in Finland was a "left-over" from ancient Swedish migration from Central-Russia. According to this theory held by many Scandinavian scholars Swedes arrived to Sweden through Finland proper and Åland and the Swedes in Finland were just offshoots of those who never made it to the mainland. This idea was first refuted by the linguistician Axel Olof Freudenthal in the 1860´s, after the 1920´s the scientific mainstream has assessed that the Swedish minority are descended from Swedish settlers in the 12-15th century. This verdict is also supported by modern genetics. There´s never been any speculation of language shift nature of Finland Swedes apart from the modern Fennomans in online discussions. 128.214.30.9 (talk) 11:20, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Now, let´s put this into pieces, shall we.

1) The origins of Finland-Swedes has never been debated, there is no unanswered questions. The question is answered. This is based on the most latest population genetics and genetics in this issue has an upper hand.

2) Speculations of language-shift has most likely been presented, however I don´t see any sources presented. You haveto remind yourself that these speculations have never been issue in the mainstream historic interpretations.

3) Even if your alleged language-shift would have happened, would this had any impact on Finland-Swedish identity? Hardly. Linguistic and culture are the ultimate definers of etnicity. Genetics plays a trivial part but in the case of Finland-Swedes it seems to be rather important.

I have no other choices but remove your ridicukous chapter. I´ve said this many times before it´s ok for you to recite your sources by saying that there has been Finnish settlements in the areas subjected to Swedish colonization. However, do not exceed your authority with speculations your sources have no share in. If some ought to get banned it should be you. You are desperately keen on your biased views which was already refuted this month along with the forensic Y-STR study by Palo et al. -cheers,

Podomi (talk) 12:01, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

The myth regarding the language shift among Finland-Swedes

Dear all,

once again, the following line is being pushed in its various forms.

"This age old question remains largely unanswered with positions emphasising a settler nature in one extreme and a language-shift phenomenon in the other".

I would like to make this clear fof once.

1) Finland-Swedes are a settler group directly descended from Swedes and thus represents Swedish population extension to Finland, etnoculturally an integral part of mainland Sweden, from strictly nationalistic perspective more or less part of Finland - This is what we know based on modern history reseach and population genetics.

The myth on the language shift nature of Finland-Swedes has revolved in the online discussions for many years now. It´s mostly being based on book by mr. Linnus (1935). In the book mr. Linnus correctly assessed that only 25% of the noble families in Finland have originated from Sweden. This probably resulted in a wide-spread believe that the remaining 75% of the noble families are of Finnish origins and thus the 75% of all Finland-Swedes are of Finnish-origins. No. Here´s the trick

1) Noble class makes only 5% of Finland-Swedes (Raunio, 2000). And out of the noble class only 50% are Swedish-speakers. Czar ennobled many Finnish originated families during the Russian era, most of these families are big and fully finnish-speaking. All in all the noble class is very poor reference group of Swedes in Finland.

2) 50% of the nobility are descended outside of Finland. Mostly from Germany and from the Germans in the Baltic Ritterschaft. In Sweden foreign born noble families account to nearlt 45%.

3) Mr. Linnus assessed that 25% of the noble class were of Finnish origins. They were deemded as Finnish origins since the families had been dwelled in the country before the establishment of church records. Most of these "Finnish"-origin families originate from the Swedish minority of the country (Creutz from Pernå, Boije from Pojo..etc).

I don´t rule out the possibility of language shift, every population has absorded "foreign"-material. However, in the case of Finland-Swedes it would be more proper to discuss about the language shift from Swedish to Finnish.

So, basically what we are seeing is a speculation of language-shift based largely on myths and false information. For most Finns the Finland-Swedes are still only the "5% group" of nobility in the capital of Hälsingfors.

"Från senare tid vet man genom släktforskning att den svenska kustbefolkningen har varit starkt endogam i sin fortplantning, på så sätt att äkta mankar kom från familjer som levde närä samma varandra, ofta i samma by. Så var fallet överallt bland allmogen, även den finska, och man gissar att antalet bland äktenskap mellan kontrahenter från olika språksgrupper under den tid som kyrkoböcker har har förts har hållit sig stadigt under en procentenhet".

Kari Tarkiainen, 2009

Podomi (talk) 11:38, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm not saying that you're wrong, on the contrary, you may very well be right. However, Wikipedia is about verifiable data and you need to source these claims. Claiming something categorically on the talk page is of course a way to open up a discussion, but nobody can claim that they know the truth on a talk page without proper verification by good external sources. Cheers JdeJ (talk) 11:53, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

The article denotes a lot of effort to make all differences vanish between Swedes and Finns. If this really is the case, then why such a fervent aspiration to push the "Swedes are just Finns who changed their language"-agenda? If this article was about gypsies in Finland or other minority groups I wonder whether the Finns would insist the same stuff. I am sensing a dilemma here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.214.30.9 (talk) 12:50, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

dear, Jded,

why do you keep constantly pushing this sub-title ==Mostly endogamous settlers, language-shift or both?==. It looks pretty funny when measured against the recent genome-wide SNP which which showed that a sample representing 50% of Finland-Swedes clustered with mainland Swedes, not with Finns. Your actions are borderline trolling. Could you provide atleast one source which would have speculated language-shift from finnish-to-Swedish among Finland-Swedes? No. You cannot because such a source does not exist.

Do you read Swedish?

"Från senare tid vet man genom släktforskning att den svenska kustbefolkningen har varit starkt endogam i sin fortplantning, på så sätt att äkta mankar kom från familjer som levde närä samma varandra, ofta i samma by. Så var fallet överallt bland allmogen, även den finska, och man gissar att antalet bland äktenskap mellan kontrahenter från olika språksgrupper under den tid som kyrkoböcker har har förts har hållit sig stadigt under en procentenhet".

Kari Tarkiainen, 2008

Podomi (talk) 13:00, 30 September 2008 (UTC):

You cannot because such a source does not exist. Quite untrue. Whether it is correct or not, several historical and linguistical studies have claimed that Finnish-speaking Swedes descent partially from language shifters. In fact, it has been the dominant scholarly view. Ph.D. dissertation by Felicia Markus, Living on the Other Shore (2005) has a chapter about the research history of Fenno-Swedish studies, mentioning several such sources. Podomi's view might be right, but at leasts he misrepresents the research history. Podomi, please realize that Wikipedia does not present the ultimate truth of the Fenno-Swedes. Wikipedia refers to various view-points, and there are various view-points on the origin of Swedish-speaking population in Finland. All of those must be referred to in this article in a neutral and positive tone, and that includes the sub-titles! Wikipedia does not define which results or theories are obsolete. I you cannot accept that, Wikipedia is not a right place for you. If you do not believe me, kindly read the Wikipedia rules.--212.146.44.208 (talk) 16:58, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I´ve only herad speculations of Finland-Swedes marrying Finnish women, however I don´t understand how the children of these marriages can be considered language shifters?

1) Historic nor linguistic studies has absolute zero relevance when measured against genetics.The interpretation will be obviously builded on population genetics in the long run.

2) No of your excerts enunciate language shifts. The fact that Finns have resided near Swedes and in the areas prior the Swedish settlements does not indicate of language shifts.

I remove all your speculation untill I will see direct quote which insist of language shift (preferably from academic source). Wikipedia is about sources not your private speculations upon them. Hence I will remove your edits, they are intellectually dishonoust and fails to support your agenda.

I will also add new genetic material based on very recent study (2008)from university of Helsinki. "The effect of number of loci on geographical structuring and forensic applicability of Y-STR data in Finland".

The y-dna diversity was measured in Finland. Finland-Swedish sub-population from Larsmo (LMO) was included in the study here´s the main the results.

Here´s about the sub-populations used.....

"The samples were assigned to 12 subpopulations according to the current place of residence of the donors: Turku (TU), Uusimaa (UU), Häme (HA), Vaasa (VA), Kymi (KY), Central Finland (CF), Mikkeli (MI), Kuopio (KU), Northern Carelia (NC), Oulu (OU), Lapland (LA) and Larsmo (LMO; Fig. 1)These subpopulations correspond to the former Finnish administrational provinces,except LMO which is a relatively isolated island region of the Vaasa province. This locality was included in the study as it is an almost exclusively Swedish-speaking community".

and the results.

"The subpopulation LMO differed significantly from all the other populations".

again, according to the study Swedish-speaking reference population formed a seperate genetic cluster outside the Finnish-speaking populations.

The difference was extreme when measured against the population of Kymi which is staggering since there is only 400km which seperates them.

"The geographical substructure among the Finnish males was notable when measured with the ΦST values, reaching values as high as ΦST=0.227 in the Yfiler data. This is rather extreme, given that, e.g., subpopulations Larsmo and Kymi are separated by mere 400 km, with no apparent physical dispersal barriers between them".

so I will add this, "The subpopulation LMO differed significantly from all the other populations" in the text. Podomi (talk) 11:57, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

You cannot have just give a name of an author you have to give the direct source as well. I might just point to you that genetics has answered to your age old questiions and speculations.

These questions are answered. It was once again obvious in the recent study I referred to. It´s rather ridiculous from you to claim that emphasizing the settler nature of Finland-Swedes is extreme while we just last month we heard how the difference in y-str diversity among Finland-Swedes sub-population and Finns is significant and even extreme at best (J Palo et al, 2008). The mainstream view of history has never denoted any weight on language-shift theory of Finland-Swedes. This is all myths and your wild imaginations. If you disagree, I am still waiting the source. Wikipedia will not become a haven for your wild agenda, we stick to to science and when it comes to deciding about the settler nature of Finland-Swedes the population genetics will have an upper hand.

BTW

Do you have any idea how Genaland clustering works? It is not based on interpretations of results, it is a result. The methodology reads genetic data and assigns populations to a given clusters, interpretation has no value in it, unlike in your sources.

(2008). Podomi (talk) 12:19, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

The only problem here is the fact that you do not understand at all what Wikipedia is. You must now realize that this is not a science site. Personally I might agree with you regarding the relative merits of population genetics and history, but not everyone might agree. Wikipedia does not have any opinion on this question! Wikipedia does not discuss the relative merits of different theories and does not support claims of any science having "upper hand" on any issue. Your (and mine) personal opinions of this matter are, really, of zero relevance in Wikipedia. Wikipedia is absolutely neutral, not scientific. Do not whine to me, check out the rules instead. I have absolutely no interest to continue a historical debate with you. Wikipedia is not a proper place for it anyway. The only thing that matters is the fact Wikipedia is not about truth, it is about claims, theories and view-points discussed in the sources we refer to. Unlike you, I have no political or ideological agenda regarding this issue. I am only aware that different theories do exist. I do not claim that the language-shift theories are correct, I am not trying to disprove you. I am only trying to make sure that all various theories are presented in a neutral tone. This is how Wikipedia works, but you have violated the principle of neutrality again and again. It is vandalistic and abusive behavior, and if you continue it, you will be reported.--130.234.5.137 (talk) 14:02, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Have you ever heard of ethics of science? None of your sources enunciate your point, your argument and your agenda. This is something you made up yourself. The very moment I see an academic article or another source by academian which insist of language-shift, then the source is valid. So far you´ve failed to back your agenda with credible sources. I refer to your argument as an agenda because you are so desperately keen on it, despite the genetics and church records work against you despite no of your sources enunciate it. The credibility of the whole chapter is being questioned. It´s unnecessary chapter which I will remove. The article of Swedish-speaking Finns deserves better. It´s ridiculous to claim that a side emphasizing the settler nature of Finland-Swedes is extreme. Extreme is to insist the opposite, that´s against mainstream history interpretation and modern population genetics.

Podomi (talk) 16:19, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

I will remove our questionable chapter; whether Finns have lived in area´s prior to Swedish settlement is irrelevant issue for Finland-Swedishness. We are not going to dedicate a chapter of whether sub-saharan africans resided South-Africa prior the arrival of Afrikaaner in a chapter discussing briefly of Afrikaaner people, language and culture. The history of Finland-Swedes is the history of Swedish-people. Not the history of Finnish settlement or the lack of them. There´s enough discussion about it in the discussion page.

The article already now puts too much emphasis of Finland-Swedes and Finland-Swedishness in relation to Finns. Probably because the whole article has been subjected to contributions mostly by Finns.

So howabout? Let´s dedicate this thread to Swedes in Finland, the Finns already have their article.

Podomi (talk) 16:24, 6 October 2008 (UTC) Podomi (talk) 16:24, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

I have no fucking argument. It is only the neutrality principle I am trying to defend here.--195.237.90.72 (talk) 16:31, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Don´t get obscene, if you´d care about neutrality you wouldn´t start to speculate with your sources and twist them, instead you´d just present them how they are.

Podomi (talk) 16:32, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

do not add your chapter aimed to support your biased argument. We already have chapters of Swedes biologic origins and their identity in Finland. Podomi (talk) 16:35, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

It would be more easy to maintain patience if you followed the Wikipedia rules and stopped distortive claims of my imagined "agenda". I have presented an academic source, citing a philologist, presenting an interpretation of Finnish farms and villages becoming Swedish-speaking. I do not know if it is a correct theory, in fact I do not care so much - but obviously there is a suggestion or at least hypothesis of some kind of settlement and population continuity, as the source do not mention a genocide of the Finns. You cannot delete referenced information of theories you find unlikely or displeasant.--195.237.90.72 (talk) 16:39, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

In any case, the debate of the origin of Swedish-speakers in Finland is a part of the whole finlandsvensk discourse, and hardly an irrelevant matter for the minority. The chapter could be expanded to cover even more diffuse range of various theories, such as the suggestion of Swedish-speakers living around already in the Viking Age.--195.237.90.72 (talk) 16:44, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Look, you are nothing but agenda. You have presented a study which address that Åboland archipelago and Kymmene region of Finland, both peripheral parts of Swedish settlements in Finland, had Finnish population prior the arrival of Swedes. Fine. Now where does your study insist a language shift happened? The area still has Finnish population. Your argument might be valid but it´s a speculation not based on the authors verdict. You insist about lack of genocides as the ultimate proval of assimilation. There´s multiple other choices like finns abanding their settlements or co-existing with the Swedes. We don´t know and we certainly do not speculate.

Podomi (talk) 16:50, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Could present the study as the it self elaborates it. That there was a Finnish population prior the arrival of Swedes in Åboland and Kymmene region. Do not exceed your authority by speculation of language shifts which no of your studies enunciate. So long you keep speculating I will keep erasing your chapter.

Podomi (talk) 16:53, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

There´s no various points of the origin of Finland-Swedes. The genetics will be taken by default. The origins of person is revealed in his or her genome, not in the linguistics or the fact that Finns have lived in Swedish-speaking regions. The best we have is the most recent scientific studies. Science develope whole the time and after twenty we know lot more. Let´s not speculate

Podomi (talk) 16:56, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

In fact the results of the recent study on Y-STR´s I posted implies that the founding fathers of Swedes in Finland have had very different genetic make-up as the Finnish founding fathers had and it´s apparent in the present genetic structure of the two populations. This is very good additional information on the biologic origins chapter. So much of your language-shift theory. Moreover, I could add that the genetic diffrence of Finland-Swedes and Finns represents biggest genetic border in Europe. This is an obvious conclusion one makes after this and genome wide-SNP studies + plenty of others. However, since I am not an authority to say that, although it´s apparent, I will not address it in the text. I would address it if the scholars would have put in the way I put it. That´s the difference between me and you, I don´t speculate with sources. I deliver them as they are. I expect you do the same in the future.

Podomi (talk) 17:04, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Did you get upset and marked the whole article as being questioned. Is it so depressing that the Swedes of Finland are actually Swedes. Whoopydoo. Poor you. It´s really sad that your "The origins of Finland-Swedes is heavily debated issue"-argument or rather trolls does receive support from scientific community. If it did you´d already presented the non-existing sources.

Podomi (talk) 17:29, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Unlike you insists, the genetics will not be taken by default in Wikipedia. Nor will any other science.- Actually, even the pseudo-scientific views should be presented in the article, if they are widely supported among non-scientific community. I repeat: Wikipedia is not a science site. Read the god-damn rules at last!!!! Wikipedia rulers insist on absolute neutrality: all view-points should be presented in a neutral tone. You cannot change that principle, although you make heroic efforts attempting that. This makes you a troll - the only troll involved in this discussion. As you kept deleting an important part of the article, you imbalanced and disturbed the neutrality of the whole text.

Professor Lars Huldén maintains that in one area of Svenskfinland there were early medieval Finnish villages and farms who became Swedish. Obviously, this theory has no room for the co-residence as the explanation: at least some Finns were assimilated. It is extremely strained and naive to suggest that the Finns simply moved away and left their abodes for the Swedish settlers with their topographical names and all. You cannot be seriously maintaining that as a possibility, if you know anything at all about settlement history. Either Lars Huldén is wrong with his theories or assimilation of some Finns in this one area is very likely - at very least, it is an hypothesis to be taken seriously. Okay, I admit that this my conclusion based on one citation; however, it is not speculation but the only conclusion logically possible. But I must check out the Huldén's book to see what conclusions he explicitly presents. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.234.68.222 (talk) 09:56, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Of course it is fine to point out that the idea of Finland-Swedes being almost exclusively language-shifters has no support among scientists. Some scholars have presented evidence of early Finnish settlement in some parts of Svenskfinland, implying at least that there may have been a degree of population continuity from Finns to Swedes. Recent DNA studies seem to imply that this cannot have been a very significant element in the core areas. Fine. An interesting piece of information. I must add, however, that my knowledge on this issue in limited in your presentations - and I have absolutely no trust of you being an neutral or trustful editor, as I believe that you are motivated by fanatical Blut und Boden nationalism. If someone else with less obvious ideological interest in the issues confirms your presentations, I have absolutely no need to disagree with you. In other words, I believe that the your claims of the Swedish-speaking Finns being genetically identical with Swedes might be completely true. However, I won't accept it because of your word only. And even if I accept it, as I probably will have to do, Wikipedia will continue presenting even the alternative, less well supported or pesudo-scientific theories. And even if Finland-Swedes are genetically same as Swedes, this does not automatically make them ethnic Swedes, as the ethnicity resides in the self-identity and not in the genes. The self-identity of the Swedish-speakers in Finland is a very complicated issue, but only a disgusting bully can make sweeping claims of the Swedish-speakers being simply "Swedes". I know Swedish-speakers who have a very strong finlandssvensk identity and who would kick you on the balls because of sucha generalization, reminiscent of the Nazi racial "science". Do you think that they are traitors of the Swedish nation? Why on earth must you mix DNa studies with an authoritarian nationalist ideology?

As you notice, I am not trying to prove your arguments wrong, because I tend to believe that they are more or less correct. Results of the DNa research might not be quite as clear-cut or black-and-white as you like to present them, but I find it probable that core of your argument is basically true. However, Wikipedia does not give a s**t about your or mine personal convictions. The only reason I am opposing you is the way you are violating the NPOV principle and abusing Wikipedia as a tool of nationalistic identity policy, disguised as science.

Your accusation of my "agenda" are rather pitiful. Perhaps you are so deeply involved with a ultra-nationalistic black-and-white world-view that you are unable to conceive anyone working on the basis of neutrality. However, I believe that a some kind of a compromise is attainable. The article can include a research historical over-view presenting the most influential theories of this politically over-sensitive issue.

Well, I can admit one "agenda". I dislike of all kinds of nationalist chauvinism, including the Svecoman and Fennoman ones. In Finnish Wikipedia, I had an argument with Finnish nationalist who claimed that Swedish-speaking Finns are nothing but language-shifters.--130.234.68.222 (talk) 09:24, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

PS. Before you delete the chapter again, please check out my recent compromise-oriented edits and think if you can edit the chapter in a NPOV way. So far, you have repeatedly violated the practice, and that might result of you being banned.--130.234.68.222 (talk) 09:30, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Now, let´s put this into pieces, shall we. Please, no more "My friend tells me you are wrong and would kick your arse"-argument.

1) The origins of Finland-Swedes has never been debated, there is no unanswered questions. The question is answered. This is based on the most latest population genetics and genetics in this issue has an upper hand.

2) Speculations of language-shift has most likely been presented, however I don´t see any sources presented. You haveto remind yourself that these speculations have never been issue in the mainstream historic interpretations.

3) Even if your alleged language-shift would have happened, would this had any impact on Finland-Swedish identity? Hardly. Linguistic and culture are the ultimate definers of etnicity. Genetics plays a trivial part but in the case of Finland-Swedes it seems to be rather important.

I have no other choices but remove your ridiculous chapter. I´ve said this many times before it´s ok for you to recite your sources by saying that there has been Finnish settlements in the areas subjected to Swedish colonization. However, do not exceed your authority with speculations your sources have no share in. If some ought to get banned it should be you. You are desperately keen on your biased views which was already refuted this month along with the forensic Y-STR study by Palo et al. -cheers,

Ouh, what comes to Finland-Swedes, there´s no pure populations, once again. Every population has absorded "foreign" elements to a given degree. I think it´s rather naive to imply that Finland-Swedes would not be Swedes, because in Sweden there happens to one more "pure" Swede. Finland-Swedes are simple Swedish population extension to Finland, Eastern Swedes, no more no less. The fact that Finns disdain the idea of Swedes in Finland being Swedes is rather sad and tells about a dilemma. State borders and passport changes in a lot more faster pace than etnicity. Podomi (talk) 12:10, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Podomi (talk) 12:01, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

someone mentioned that genetics alone do not determine etnicity, no they certainly don´t. Language and culture are the most important issues. Now, Finland-Swedes speak Swedish, lives in Swedish culture and are genetically......defining Swedes of Finland is really not rocket science.

Podomi (talk) 12:13, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I am willing to compromise to the extend that we can have your place-name semantic studies but we present the, as they are. Directly recited. Your own private speculation and interpretations have no room here.

I personally refrain from speculations and stick to direct citats, I expect you do the same. Podomi (talk) 12:19, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I'll check the Lars Huldén's book when I can. Until then, the current form of the article can prevail. Of course, the only person pushing biased views here are you. You still don't get the fact that any objective condition do not define the ethnicity of anybody - not the genes, not the language nor even the cultural traditions. The only thing that defines the ethnicity is the prevailing discourse maintained by the group in question. Language, culture, genes etc. influence the identity only inasmuch they are referred to in the identity discourse. According to my knowledge - and my knowledge here is equally good than yours - Finland-Swedes tend maintain a separate identity distinct of both Swedes and Finns. Language and some cultural traditions separate them from the ethnic Finns, native country and the feeling of historical affinity with Finns separate them from the ethnic Swedes. So they are ethnic Finland-Swedes, a small nation of their own. Simple, isn't it? If you think I'm wrong, provide sources and stop your meaningless speculations.

At least so far you haven't presented any evidence for the suggestion that the traditional Swedish-speakers in Finland generally consider themselves to be Swedes. I believe some do, but some others are offended by the whole chauvinistic concept of "Eastern Swedes". This is the only thing that matters. Yes, this is not exactly rocket science, so it is astonishing that you miss the whole point and continue your incoherent nationalist rants. It is quite ridiculous that you claim to have refrained from speculations, when your whole message seems to be wild unreferenced speculation of the Finland-Swedish ethnicity.--212.146.44.208 (talk) 13:58, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

you raise interesting issues, but again I could point out that the whole discourse on finlandssvenskhet is rather a joke, Finland-Swedishness lies on an artificial groundings. The (eastern) Swedish linguistican, doctor Leif Höckerstedt (2000) views Swedes of Finland only as continuum of Swedish population, an eastern extension of Swedes, Östsvenskar. This is also my personal view of the matter which I so far haven´t expressed in the text at all, though. Finland-Swedishness is such even exist is only an extension of the greater Swedish community. The two hundred years which the Swedes in eastern part of the former kingdom has been seperated has diverged them culturally from their ethnic Swedish brethren in proper Sweden, but the differences are minor. It´s just extension of the greater Swedish ethnic family.

You are not a proper person to raise a debate about (eastern)Swedishness, that´s for sure.

128.214.37.123 (talk) 15:01, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

"but some others are offended by the whole chauvinistic concept of "Eastern Swedes".

As Leif Höckerstedt pojnts out in his book (2000) Finland-Swedes, atleast in Helsinki are raised to not raise a fuss of their Swedishness out for a sympathy for Finns. This is rather sad kind of persion of the politically correct culture which reigns in Finland. Ethnicity and sense of love for fatherland is two diffrenet issues. 128.214.37.123 (talk) 15:07, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Identity

I am not wasting my time by answering Podomi, who sticks to his obsessive nationalist ideas as if they were the only possible way to conceive the finlandssvensk identity. It is profoundly disgusting and shocking to see how he dismisses the whole Swedish-speaking identity in Finland as a "joke". He tries to declare who should not be allowed to even discuss this issue! That is behaviour suitable for an extremist bully. Truly sad, because I believe that Swedes and Finland-Swedes in general dislike authoritarian bullying ("your identity is a joke") and nationalist extremism. Unfortunately for Podomi, historians and social scientists tend to agree nowadays that all ethnic discourses are more or less artificial - this does not mean that they inessential or devoid of value.

Perhaps we could have something like this in the article (of course, references must be found and vagues expression of "some Finland-Swedes" should be defined).

Identity of the Swedish-seaking Finns is historically complicated. The concept of finlandssvensk was widely adopted around 1890 - 1920, when the traditional Swedish-speaking upper class first found a common identity with Swedish-speaking farmers, fishers and industrial workers. During the 20th century, some of the Swedish-speakers in Finland have explicitly identified themselves with the ethnic Swedes living in Sweden. The identification of the Swedish-speaking Finns with the ethnic Swedes is based on the shared language, cultural affinity and the common historical origin. On the other hand, many/some Swedish-speaking Finns are hesitant or refuse to identify themselves as ethnic Swedes, because of the separate home country, separate history since the early 19th century and affinity with the Finnish society. According to the study by N.N., especially the Swedish-speaking Finns living in the bilingual cities in South Finland tend to blah-blah-blah, whereas the Swedish-speakers in Ostrobothnia tend to this-and-that. According to a study published in xxxx, the Åland Islanders tend to identify themselves as ethnic Swedes more often than the... + 128.214.37.123 (talk) 15:01, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Of course, I am assuming now that such studies of the finlandssvensk identity exist, but it would be astonishing if they didn't.--130.234.5.136 (talk) 15:12, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

First, I don´t understand what the fuss about. I have not implied in the text that Finland-Swedes are (eastern) Swedes. In fact I have written nothing about the ethnic identity of Finland-Swedes. I have only added recent genetic data and corrected false speculations. Nevertheless people has accused me of being extremist. The ones refusing and denying the right of Finland-Swedes for ethnic Swedish identity should ask whether they are chauvinist and xenophobic themselves.

Podomi (talk) 15:22, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

At least I am nor refusing anything for anyone. I am only trying to respect what different people think on themselves. If the Swedish-speaking Finns start to think "We're Swedes after all", fine and OK and respectable. But no one can tell them that they should do so.--130.234.5.136 (talk) 15:28, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

anyway, rather sad insults I am receiving. Not once have I offended Finns in the thread, I am wondering what´s so vicious and mean for Finland-Swedes to be Swedes, part of greater Swedish community in Finland. There´s very little room for chauvinistic and xenophobic attitudes in wikipedia.

128.214.30.44 (talk) 15:38, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

There´s very little room for chauvinistic and xenophobic attitudes in wikipedia. At least I can agree on this. If you are offended by the word "chauvinist", why did you label Finland-Swedish identity as a "joke"? If that was not chauvinism, I cannot imagine what is. And you keep distorting all my comments. I haven't suggested anywhere that it is vicious or mean if Finland-Swedes consider themselves to be ethnic Swedes. The point is that not all of them do, not at the present at least - and it is vicious and mean to bypass what they think of their own identity.--130.234.5.136 (talk) 15:55, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I referred Finland-Swedish culture as a joke, because that what it is. Finland-Swedishness cannot be perceived seperately from Swedish culture, you have to look beyond. Talking about "Finland-Swedishness" as some seperate entity is a ridiculous as starting to talk about "Västerbotten-Swedish culture". Regional cultural varieties exist but we cannot tear Finland-Swedishness apart from greater Swedish family.

I am adding citats from a book by Leif Höckerstedt (2000) Leif Höckerstedt is Finland-Swedish linguistican and scholar in the university of Helsinki.

From the chapter "Finlandssvenskarna och riksvenskarna hör samman".

   "Det är naturligt att betona Sverige-kontakten då man gör en analys av finlandssvenskarnas 
    språk, kommunikation och historia. Ideologiskt kommer det att närma sig Axel OLof 
    Freudenthals bygdessvenskhet och Sverige närheten kring sekelsskiftet. Finlandssvenskarna 
    är ju helt enkelt svenskar, närmare bestämt östsvenskar".

Östsvenskar is rather natural term considering that the dialect of Finland-Swedes is referred as "Östsvenskamål" by Scandinavian linguistics.

This is very important idea of Leif Höckerstedts book.

   "Med finnarna har finlandssvenskarna åter en viktigt politisk gemenskap, men detta innebär 
    inte en etnisk gemensam grupptillhörighet".

Finns and Swedes in Finland are united by common political interest, however in terms of ethnicity and culture there´s no common ground. Podomi (talk) 07:58, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

BTW Höckerstedt also refers to Pitkänens semantic studies of geographic names. He address that the Swedish settlers encountered Finns, atleast in Åbotrakten, from whom they took the names. I see paraller situation with Anglo-Saxon settlers in US, they met aboriginals (indians) and took their names for their new lands. However, speculating that the American settlers would have been language-shifters, from asiatic languages to english is rather ridiculous.

Podomi (talk) 08:04, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Höckerstesdt's view-point is respectable - but of course it is also a completely subjective view-point of a single man, who cannot dictate how all others should think and feel. Too bad you cannot accept that not all Finland-Swedes consider themselves as "East Swedes". That's your problem. I have no problems with Finland-Swedes who consider themselves as Swedes and I am not calling their Swedish identity as a joke - but I'm not a chauvinistic bully-boy after all.

Are you really unable to comprehend that identity is not based on measurable cultural differences or similarities, but only on subjective feelings of distinction and affinity. You cannot change that simple fact by repeating your offensive and authoritarian generalizations. Your bizarre claim that Finns and Finland-Swedes have no common cultural ground is nothing but petty xenophobic and rascist nonsense. Although some differences certainly exist, there are more shared features in the cultural traditions of those two groups. Of course, Finns have a lot of shared culture with the proper Swedes as well.--130.234.68.223 (talk) 16:02, 8 October 2008 (UTC) Edit This debate is complete waste of time, and I'm not going to continue it.

By defining culture, I took rather strick view. Swedes in Finland and Sweden are obvioysly very different compared to finns in terms of linguistics and ancestry.

128.214.30.147 (talk) 13:04, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Why are Finnish speaking people, (we) that have Swedish speaking ancestry, never viewed as being partially Finland-Swedes? It's because the Swedish-Finnish identity is only skin deep. Once the language is gone, so is the identity. Gypsies in Finland are viewed as being gypsies no matter what language they speak. Their identity is in culture and customs, not in language or genetics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deliriumus (talk • contribs) 10:47, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Finnish-speaking people with Swedish ancestry are never viewed as partially Finland-Swedes because that would not be politically correct. Remember that after second half of the 1800´s Finland was caught by romantic fever of one people with one national character. The concept of nationhood among finns is pretty much similar even today, speaking about differences between swedish-speakers and finnish-speakers in any other linguistic level is almost criminalized. I define person´s ethnicity judging by his or her parentage, not language. To me you are definitely are partially Swedish if you have Swedish ancestry.

128.214.30.60 (talk) 13:20, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Wrong and unscientific title

To say that Finland Swedes are Finns are unscientific and completely wrong. Genetical studies have shown that Finland Swedes are generally genetically identical to Mainland Swedes, and are different from the Finns. Se e.g. http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0003519. The title for this article should thus be Finland Swedes. Östsvensk (talk) 13:39, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

What do the genetics have to do with the identity of this group? I know a number of Finns who have descended from Russians, and my family tradition tells about a Hungarian forefather in the 17th century. Indeed, I know Finns with African ancestry. The Swedish-speaking Finns themselves note that genetics and family ties do not play a role in the group's self-identification: you're a Swedish-speaking Finn, if you tell you are one. So, I fail to see why the name of this article should be changed on the basis of genetics. --MPorciusCato (talk) 14:05, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I'll position myself between the two of you. First, I agree with MPorciusCato about the irrelevance of genetics. If we started to use genetics to describe the nationality of people, we would end up with very surprising results. There's no such thing as a "genetic people" coinciding perfectly with an "ethnic people", a "language group" or a "culture". Having said that, most Swedidsh-speaking Finns call themselves Finland-Swedes in English, and I find that rather more relevant than genetics.JdeJ (talk) 14:24, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure if most do refer to themselves as 'Finland-Swedes' in English, but if so, it's highly likely to be influenced by attempting to directly translate from the Swedish without taking context into account, a common mistake when translating if not a professional (i.e. jag är finlandssvensk, I am a Finland-Swede'). As for genetics, I've read reports that suggest both things. I think the recent one that found many similarities to Swedish-Swedes only looked at Swedish-speaking Finns in Österbotten. It didn't take into account Nyland or Åboland, for example. Other surveys in the past have found it more or less impossible to distinguish between the two language groups using genes. So, I think the jury is out. In any case, it's not that relevant to self-identification. 94pjg (talk) 14:49, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Without denying what you say, I'm a 'finlandssvensk' and a linguist and I would hesitate about calling myself a "Swedish-speaking Finn". My impression is that most of the people I know with a higher education use "Finland-Swede" while those less familiar with English (and using it less often) may say "Swedish-speaking Finn". This is just a personal observation, of course. As for genetics, once again, I've also read very conflicting reports but no matter what the outcome of that debate will be, it's unlike to influence self-identification. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JdeJ (talk • contribs)

That's interesting. I am also a Swedish-speaking Finn, and that's the term I use in English in order to emphasise the Finnish part rather than 'Swede', which I find tends to confuse non-Finnish friends/colleagues etc (who end up not understanding and asking you some weeks later "where abouts in Sweden are you from?" etc ;) ). I think many Swedish-speaking Finns also avoid this construction in favour of the direct 'translation' Finland-Swede because they assume Finn has the same connotations in English as the word finne, which it of course does not. I must say, I have not really paid enough attention to the matter to make any observation on the types of people employing the various terms. However, I would not consider myself lacking in higher education and I use English daily. I have no problem with either term, I just find that non-Finns find 'Swedish-speaking Finn' easier to understand. 94pjg (talk) 10:25, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

He he, I certainly didn't mean to imply any inferior education :) I agree about the problem with Finland-Swede, and I'm not to keen on that term either. What I usually say is that come from Finland and Swedish is my native language, but that's not a very suitable title, to say the least. JdeJ (talk) 15:34, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I did some changes to genetic section; it included a reference to a study from 1979 by Nevanlinna, if old studies are to be included, then for the sake of neutrality of the article, we have to include international studies which have implied "significant" and "considerable" genetic differences between Swedes in Finland and Finns and from the same era, furthermore these studies have implied indistinguishablenes of Swedes on both sides of Baltic sea. The 80´s stuff is methodologically very outdated,I are the technology of the period is no longer used in population genetics. I also removed some text which was very speculative, unreferenced and against the neutrality principles of Wiki.Podomi (talk) 20:37, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

"I am also a Swedish-speaking Finn, and that's the term I use in English in order to emphasise the Finnish part rather than 'Swede', which I find tends to confuse non-Finnish friends/colleagues etc (who end up not understanding and asking you some weeks later "where abouts in Sweden are you from?" etc ;)"

I am part of the Swedish minority of Finland. In english context I always use the term Swede while speaking about myself. Incase of a further inquiry I tell that I am from Finland. Finns do not have a monopoly over Finland, nor do artificial state-borders in the Baltic sea divide Swedes. Based on history, ancestry and culture, the term Swedish-speaking Finn makes as much of a sense as "Somali-speaking Finn". The term is basically made up to cater political goals and the low self-confidence of Finns. Then again I understand that many offsprings of the recent bi-langual-(racial?) marriages want to emphasize the Finnish part. That´s ok, however I think we shouldn´t let these people hijack the Swedish identity debate.Podomi (talk) 06:18, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Podomi, I suspect you are misinformed. Term "Somali-speaking Finn" makes perfect sense, indeed. --MPorciusCato (talk) 17:48, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Majority of Somali´s do not want compromise their ethnicity with Finns nor do they believe their somalic ethnicity shrinks into a "somali-speaking" while they cross the borders of their ethnic homeland. You are obviously very disinformed whith the matter; could you please provide me one example of usage of "Somali-speaking Finn". Finland harbors three traditional ethnicities, Swedes, Finns and Sami´s. Swedes and Sami´s are not Finns unless they agree to identify themselves as such. This is not only about the language itself which is only one pilar of ethnicty. The term "Swedish-speaking Finn" is an insult to my heritage, culture and ethnic self-identity, obviously it´s not a neutral term as opposed to "Finlands Swede". Although, even the terms Finland-Swede (finlandssvensk) is a product of political compromise from the aftermath of WW2 when the Swedes of Finland wanted to show that they are loyal to Finland but not quite Finns. However the term "Finland-Swede" is more approriate and direct translation of the term "finlandssvensk" which bears also ethnic connotation which is not only restricted to language.

"It is concluded that Finland-Swedes are over-represented in the total migrationprocess from Finland to Sweden. As such, the process is culturally embedded in the group´s ethnic identity, which causes migration both through the pratical minority situation in Finland and through ethnic affinity with Sweden".

Hedberg, C. 2004.The Finland-Swedish wheel of migration.Identity, networks and integration 1976-2000.

Leif Höckerstedt writes very well today in HBL: "Nu har det blivit opportunt att använda svensktalande eller svenskspråkig finländare eller finne (på engelska swedish-speaking finns, ej Finland-Swedes) och samtidigt antyda att det bara är frågan om språk, ett kommunikationmedel, som skiljer svensk och finne i Finland". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.214.30.15 (talk) 12:38, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Is there any possibility to change the title of the article to more propriate title?Podomi (talk) 08:55, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

A Finn = Finnish citizen. If a person has a Finnish citizenship, then she is a Finn, regardless of "ethnicity". This means that finne is a completely different concept. --MPorciusCato (talk) 16:48, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Can you show a source which illustrate the semantic construction of the word "Finn"? In my opinion it implies simply Fenno-Ugrian or more specifically a group of Baltic-Finns. Moreover, even if "Finn" would be entirely term of nationality, an expression "Swedish-speaking" is non-neutral term as it has no ethnic connotation unlike the term finlandssvenk. Swedish-Finn would be more appropriate, given the "Finn" is indeed only a term of passport. Although the most appripriate would be Finland-Swede, which is still used in academic context. Podomi (talk) 09:02, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

All in all, the term "Swedish-speaking Finns" is part of similar political tactics which the Chinese exercise against the Tibetians, in other words, an attempt to illegitimise the status and peculiarity of national minority in order to advance political goals under the strategy of "one folk, one state, one ruler".

The English language meaning of Finn (i.e., somewhere along the lines as MPorciusCato suggests) has everything to do with what the meaning of the word 'Finn' is in the English-speaking world of 2009, not what it's semantic history meant. The words that are behind the origin of 'Finn' may well have referred to the Sami and general northern people in the very dim, distant past, but that has little relevance to its contemporary meaning. I am happy to say that I am a Swedish-speaking Finn when using the English language, as I am completely aware that no English-speaking person will confuse Finn to mean exclusively those Finns who speak Finnish as their mother tongue (along the lines of the way at least we Swedish-speaking Finns use finne; of course, we shouldn't kid our selves, even many of the Sweden-Swedes are ignorant of the nuances finländare-finne-finlandssvensk etc in our own common tongue). 94pjg (talk) 13:53, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

You failed to bring anything but your own personal view on the matter and semantic construction of the word "Finn". I find the term "Swedish-speaking Finn" as somewhat insulting to my own ethicity, I am a Swede, a Finland-Swede. I am also a Swedish-speaking, but there´s more than just language. Incase you are sure that no English speaker assume that not all finns speak finnish as their native tongue, then why do you bother to say you are "Swedish-speaking", shoulnd´t you just say you are a Finn?

Finland-Swedish scholar Leif Höckerstedt recently wrote about history of the of the word "finlanssvensk": [b]"Från början var det självklart att man kunde vara svensk i Finland. Då Finland blev självständigt var det politiskt befogat att använda finlandssvensk för att markera statstillhörigheten. Begreppet riksvensk användes för att hänvisa till svenskar i Sverige. Nu har det blivit opportunt att använda svensktalande eller svenskspråkig finländare eller finne (på engelska swedish-speaking finns, ej Finland-Swedes) och samtidigt antyda att det bara är frågan om språk, ett kommunikationmedel, som skiljer svensk och finne i Finland"[/b].

It would never cross my mind to refer Sami´s as "Sami speaking finns". It´s clear to me and to Sami´s that the ethnicity of Sami´s are nor defined by artificial state borders in Northern Europe. Perhaps that´s the reason we don´t have wikipedia article by the name of "Sami speaking finn". Why would Swedes make an exception? Does anyone know about the procedures of how to change to name of the article from the politically motivated term "Swedish-speaking Finns" to "Finland-Swedes"?Podomi (talk) 12:54, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

But you also do nothing other than bring your own personal opinion, which seems to be that Swedish-speaking Finns should not be considered ethnically Finnish, rather ethnically Swedish. That is a matter of contention in itself with no single answer. In other words, you base your terminology on ethnicity primarily. I do not do that. There are plenty of people that I would call Finnish (of both language groups, Finnish and Swedish) that ethnically are neither originally from Finland or Sweden. There are many, many Swedish-speaking Finns who do not have their roots in Sweden at all. But, we are talking about the article in the English language Wikipedia here. We must not forget that. In the English language, Finn does not carry language-based connotations. It is an inclusive term, or perhaps more accurately, it simply ignores the matter of language completely. I would happily say that I am a Swede in the Swedish-language - in a Finland-based context. But, in the English-language, the term Swede clearly has far, far stronger connotations as meaning "of Sweden" than it does in Swedish when used in Finland. Of course, again, we shouldn't kid ourselves to think that most Sweden-Swedes think of the word svensk as referring to anything more than Swedes from Sweden. For that reason, I probably wouldn't say that I am svensk to a rikssvensk. It may be an unhappy reality, but reality is what this Wikipedia article must try to represent as closely as possible. As I have said above, I have no problem with the term Finland-Swede, but I think it's a questionable term when one considers how it may be understood in the English language. 94pjg (talk) 21:28, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I bring personal view on the discussion and the view is that I consider the term "Swedish-speaking finn" to be insulting, well, insulting may be a harsh word, but let say that I am not confortable with this politically motivated term. As response to inquiries of the correctness of the term, I´ve only received personal opinions of the semantic construction of the term Swedish-speaking Finn. We don´t have a wikipedia article of "Sami speaking finns" nor "Finnish-speaking Swedes", about the finns who live in Sweden. The term, "Finland-Swedes" is often used in English-speaking academic context, even the just the plain "Swede" is used in the context of Finland-Swedes.

"It is concluded that Finland-Swedes are over-represented in the total migrationprocess from Finland to Sweden. As such, the process is culturally embedded in the group´s ethnic identity, which causes migration both through the pratical minority situation in Finland and through ethnic affinity with Sweden". Hedberg, C. 2004.The Finland-Swedish wheel of migration.Identity, networks and integration 1976-2000.

"Among Alanders and Swedes on the Finnish mainland the frequency (around 20%) was comparable to Swedish values but considerably higher than among Finns". ABH secretion polymorphism in Icelanders, Aland Islanders, Finns, Finnish Lapps, Komi and Greenland Eskimos.

"The Finland Swedes: A Compensating Minority", http://web.abo.fi/fak/hf/folklore/projekt/migration/TheFinlandSwedes.pdf

Your speculations of heritage is rather ridiculous, not all Swedes in Sweden are either direct descendants of Swedes. Direct etnicity, in the ancestral form is only one aspect of etnicity, self-identification play much more bigger part. The term "Swedish-speaking finn" is mostly used by political organisations who have political goals to advance. The title of this article should be changed to "Finland-Swedes", those "Swedish-speaking finns" who are not happy with the term already have an wikipedia article of their own, and that´s "Finns", the english speakers don´t assume all finns speak finnish as native, right?Podomi (talk) 13:05, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

I still don't understand your argument. Of course, ethnicity has a lot to do with self-identification. On the grounds, your argument is even more weak. I don't know a single Swedish-speaking Finn who would not consider him/herself as a Finnish person and would consider themselves "of Sweden", me included. Again, this is English-language Wikipedia: English's 'Finn' does not mean 'finne'. In any case, I don't understand how Finland-Swede and Swedish-speaking Finn convey a significantly different meaning in order to justify getting so irritated. As I said above, I see no problem with either term, with the possible only problem with Finland-Swede being that in English this may well imply the idea that it refers to actual rikssvenskar living in Finland.

I'd imagine an extremely high percentage of English-speakers in the world, who are not particularly familiar with the region (and even some that are), probably do overlook that Finland is a bilingual country with native Swedish-speakers as well as Finnish. From living in Sweden, I can tell you that there are even a great number of Swedes who don't realise that we exist! 94pjg (talk) 14:05, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Some observations and a possible compromise:

1. I really dislike ethnic articles in Wikipedia
2. if we are to have them, they should be as sparse and general as possible
3. an ethnic group is defined by itself - there are not any objective criteria (genetics certainly isn't one of them)
4. the Virtual Finland site uses the term "Swedish speaking Finns". The Swedish Assembly of Finland also uses this term.
5. Based on no. 4 above I would prefer to stick with the current title.
6. could a possible compromise be to call the article "Finlandssvenskar" and then follow up by including the various English language translations in the intro?Osli73 (talk) 15:36, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Incase people would carefully read what I say, things would take less time. I have already stated that the term "Swedish-speaking finn" is mostly used by political organizations with political goals to advance, and which are in the leash of Finnish goverment. Non-govermental organizations such as Finland-Swedish Association does not use the term and neither does Finland-Swedish Think-Thank magma. As many members of the Swedish in Finland are not comfortable with the term, including me, it should be changed to the most neutral term, which is "Finland-Swede", a term which most Swedes are comfortable. This is also the term which the Swedes of Finland are used in most of academia. I am going to write about the topic to English wikipedia administrators. Does someone have information about the particular procedures one must take? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Podomi (talk • contribs) 17:40, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Here´s what Miriam Webster dictionary has to say about the term "Finn"; "1: a member of a people speaking Finnish or a Finnic language, 2 a: a native or inhabitant of Finland b: one who is of Finnish descent". I already wrote the primary construction of the word "Finn" refers to speaker of finnic languages, only secondaty meaning refers to inhabitant to Finland, something which most english and speakers of other languages, including me, are unware of. All in all, why would anyone, and particularly the Swedes themselves, want to use a term "Swedish-speaking finn", when we have better, less confusing, less controversial, less politically motivated, more faithfull to the original Swedish term of finlandssvensk, and mostly, more neutral term in our disposal?Podomi (talk) 17:50, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

The Finland-Swedish Association is the Finlandssvensk samling, a ten-year-old NGO with a membership of a few hundred persons, considered extremist by the mainstream finlandssvenskhet. The Folktinget is a voluntary organization of the finlandssvenkar, the members of which are elected on the basis of the Finnish municipal elections in municipalities with Swedish-speaking population. The election is made so that such votes that are given to Swedish-speaking candidates of each party count towards that party's list of Folktinget representatives.[20] Of course, the Folktinget is only one facet of the finlandssvenskhet but it probably represents the Swedish-speakers better than a minor private association. In Wikipedia, both organizations' views must be presented neutrally, compassionately and at length which is relative to their importance. --MPorciusCato (talk) 18:17, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

So, how about my compromise solution of using the "Finlandssvenskar" as the title and redirecting (and naming) "Swedish-speaking Finns" and "Sweden-Finn" and any other variants in the first sentence?Osli73 (talk) 21:55, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

I only used Finland-Swedish association and Finland-Swedish think thank as an example of the terminology used in non-govermental organizations and organization not under the direct indfluence of the Finnish administration. By far the most common english traslation of Swedes in Finland is the term "Finland-Swedes", that´s the term mostly used in academia as well. I also point out this has nothing to do with anti-finnicism, but cultural identity which the term "Swedish-speaking" poorly reflects, as its downgrades etnicity in it all components which are, ancestry, language, culture, self-identification, social constructions and restricts it only to language, "Swedish-speaking". "Swedish-speaking" is clearly a politically motivated term. Integral aspect of Swedish identity is the sort of feel of statelessness. Finland is the fatherland, but Sweden is the ethnic homeland. There´s no need to stick with a term which aims to illegitimize this part of the identity of Finland-Swedes and serves only the purpose of politics.

"It is concluded that Finland-Swedes are over-represented in the total migrationprocess from Finland to Sweden. As such, the process is culturally embedded in the group´s ethnic identity, which causes migration both through the pratical minority situation in Finland and [b]through ethnic affinity with Sweden"[/b].

Hedberg, C. 2004.The Finland-Swedish wheel of migration.Identity, networks and integration 1976-2000.

"Men notera: det är varken ofosterländskt eller antifinskt, varken mot språket eller mot den finska kulturen att försvara och värna om en gammal gränsöverskridande kustsvensk kultur som via havet förenat våra svenska kust- och skärgårdsbygder med hela den svenska östkusten från Kvarken till Roslagen!" Håkan Eklund. http://web.abo.fi/meddelanden/veckans_skribent/2005_04_eklund.sht

I am for the compromiss, but howabout if we just use neutral english-tranlation on the word finlandssvenskar. Finlands= Finland, svenskar = Swedes, that is Finland-Swedes, or Finlands Swedes.Podomi (talk) 11:04, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

I believe we have discussed the move to "Swedish-speaking Finns" earlier, with a larger audience. Then, there was a wide consensus for a move. Now, Podomi has exhausted about everyone, so I do not think we three are in a position to make compromisses.

And Podomi, why do you talk about organizations under "direct influence of the Finnish adminstration"? (BTW, Finland has a government, the U.S. has an administration.) Folktinget is funded partly by the Finnish government, but that money is not conditional. There is a law guaranteeing the independence of the Folktinget. The SFP has been in the Finnish government for three decades. Presently, the Minister of Culture is the chairman of the SFP and in the Swedish-speaking communities, the SFP continues to enjoy a strong mandate of the Swedish-speakers. I fail to see how on earth could the Finnish government be perverting the Swedish-speaking community organs, when the state organs that could theoretically do this are controlled by the Swedish-speaking party. The most I can see is Swedish-speakers arguing rather violently about their identity. --MPorciusCato (talk) 17:38, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Folktinget and SFP and generally very poor representants of Finland-Swedish affairs, these govermental organizations are mostly concerned of keeping the majority happy and positive on the forced swedish-language instruction for finnish-speaking students. These organizations are generally very nonchalant and non-interested in preserving Swedish culture in Finland as all of their energy goes to pleasing the finns. Anyway, what was the past concensus for a move? How are article titles moved in wikipedia?Podomi (talk) 20:57, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

A few notes. The term 'finlandssvenskar' isn't really the same as 'Finlands svenskar'. It is indeed a more or less unique construction in the (Finland) Swedish language from the early 20th century (Pipping) and very politically motivated in its time. No equivalents of the type 'sverigesfinnar' or 'kanadassvenkar' etc. exist but one speaks of 'svenskkanadensare' or 'svenskamerikaner 'instead (the equivalent would be 'svenskfinnar' (rikssvensk) or 'svenskfinländare' (finlandssvensk)? The claim that the English term "Finland-Swedes" would unquestionably be closer to the original term or that it be inherently more neutral seems erroneous. Another erroneous claim seems to be that the term 'Finland-Swedes' would be wider spread than 'Swedish-speaking Finns'. Google, for example, returns 4420 matches for the former and 9810 for the latter. (Ironically, if anything, the term 'finlandssvensk' seems to be closest to and seems to have taken its model from it's Finnish language equivalent 'suomeNruotsalaiset'). Clarifer (talk) 09:43, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

It may be that you disagree violently with the Folktinget and the Svenska folkpartiet on public policy. However, considering that Finland has free elections and that the SFP receives the clear majority of the votes in communities where Swedish-speakers dominate, you might wish to consider whether it actually enjoys public trust. The Folktinget is even more widely representative of the Swedish-speaking population, as it includes also other parties. I still posit that the opinions of SFP and the Folktinget are more notable than those of Professor Höckerstedt and Finlandssvensk samling. Whether they are more correct, I cannot say. It doesn't even matter. Here, in Wikipedia, the notability is what matters. --MPorciusCato (talk) 15:33, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Finland-Swedish scholar Leif Höckerstedt, gave a brief analysis, "Från början var det självklart att man kunde vara svensk i Finland. Då Finland blev självständigt var det politiskt befogat att använda finlandssvensk för att markera statstillhörigheten. Begreppet riksvensk användes för att hänvisa till svenskar i Sverige. Nu har det blivit opportunt att använda svensktalande eller svenskspråkig finländare eller finne (på engelska swedish-speaking finns, ej Finland-Swedes) och samtidigt antyda att det bara är frågan om språk, ett kommunikationmedel, som skiljer svensk och finne i Finland".

The Finnish referred Swedes in Finland as "Swedes" similarly as Swedes themselves. The term "finlandssvensk" really came popular only after the 1940´s, when there was need to address the coherence of the people Finland. The term Finlandssvenskar is nothing but Finlands svenskar. As said there are members of Finland-Swedish minority who are not comfortable with the term, the term Finland-Swedes has wider consensus, the question is why would we need stick on the "Swedish-speaking finn" and the term which more faitfull to the Swedish translation, more neutaral, less confusing.?Podomi (talk) 13:33, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

The question is should it be Finland-Swedes or Finlands Swedes. Both forms are often used? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.214.30.140 (talk) 13:38, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

The term "Swedish-speaking finn" is a grose example of political chauvinism; I fully understand the discontemt that the members of the Swedish minority feels about the term in Finland. The whole Finland-Swedish cultural (ethnic?) identity is veing stripped to language. What would happen if the Turkish goverment would start to refer kurds as Kurdish-speaking Turks, or Chinese referring Tibetians as Tibetian speaking Chinese, which they probably already do. The Germans in Russia f.e were referred as Volga-Germans, not German-speaking Russians. I think the title of the article should be seriously reconsidered without the influence of finns. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.214.30.51 (talk) 14:15, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

I found an interesting article of Swedes in Finland by Swedish Carl O Nordling, http://www.carlonordling.se/finlandssvenskar/intro.html

"Less well known internationally is the 6 percent minority of ethnic Swedes in Finland. While we never hear of "Sami speaking Norwegians", "Hebrew speaking Palestinians" etc., one often stumbles on the term "Swedish speaking Finns" to denote a certain group of ethnic Swedes. This is a way of denying the group their ethnic identity. Admittedly, something similar is practised in Turkey, where the Kurds are called "Mountain Turks" in official quarters".

As Nordling puts it term "Swedish-speaking finn" could be viewed as violation of basic human right principles, the right to exist. Along with the usage of the "swedish-speaking finn", the whole ethnicity of Finlands Swedes is denied and restcrited to only language.

Unconventional move

Podomi moved the page to the name Finland's Swedes and created a non-history for the resulting redirect to prevent further moves. I asked for administrator action and moved the page back. However, the move of the talk page was unsuccessful, for which I apologize.

I implore all editors involved in the editing of this page to remain civil. Any moves should be made using the Request for move process, as the name of this article is contested. It is good to be bold, but we should respect the opinions of others. --MPorciusCato (talk) 17:51, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, what do want to discuss, I gave my opinion which remained unanswered for days, after that I made my unilateral decision and moved the title to its original name which was Finland-Swedes, based on three reasons. And after that you suddenly became active again.

1) The term "Swedish-speaking Finn" does not include ethnic connotation, it can be considered as an attempt to deny the ethnic aspect of Finland-Swedish minority. It´s confusing, who are Swedish-speaking Finns" are they finnish post-war immigrants to Sweden who have more or less assmilated to Sweden, or are they perhaps Finnish language teachers who have learned to speak Swedish?

2) The term "Swedish-speaking Finn" is a term which many members of the Finland-Swedish minority are not comfortable with with the reasons that Kurds are not fond with the term "Mountain Turks". We don´t refer Sami´s as Sami speaking Finns, nor the Roma minority as "Roma-speaking finns", Jews are not Hebrew speaking palestinians. Should de facto Swedish minority made exception and subjected to term which aims to deny their whole group and ethnic identity and restrict it to language. Is there something we need to compromise here? The Estonian Swedish minority is referred as Estonian Swedes hwich is fully equivalent to Finland-Swedes. I eagerly waiting to hear your commnents Marcious Cato?

3) The members who identified themselves as part of the Finland-Swedish minority are either non-comfortable with the term or remain nonchalant. Thus the alternative which is most neutral is "Finland-Swede". Unfortunately I personally see the term "Swedish-speaking finn" is no less than violation of human right principle, an attempt to deprive the ethnicity of de facto national minority. It´s should be clear that this page cannot continue with the sole title of "Swedish-speaking finns".Podomi (talk) 20:06, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

First of all, you did not start a "Request for move" but an idle discussion on the subject. As we both exhausted all the avenues for discussion and did not find any meaningful agreement, it became tedious answering the same arguments time and again. As you see, I'm about the last person who has had the endurance to discuss with you. On the other hand, you have not had any support. There is no clear consensus for a move, so that should not be made.

There is clearly a non-consensus inside the group finlandssvenskar about the English-name for the them. However, in Wikipedia, all opinions must be covered according to the support they receive. The most notable Swedish-speaking organizations use "Swedish-speaking Finn" and do not seem to have any human rights concerns about this. The groups which use "Finland-Swede" have much less support but are very vocal on the Net. The wording seems to reflect very basic ideas about the Swedish-speaking identity. Users of Swedish-speaking Finn seem to subscribe to the Topelian model of "two languages, one people", while your side supports the Freudenthal model "two languages, two peoples". So, do you think we talk about the same group at all? Are there perhaps two different Swedish-speaking ethnicities in Finland? --MPorciusCato (talk) 21:30, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Some comments again:

1. I agree we all have to follow due process
2. After reading Podomi's arguments above I have to agree that "Swedish speaking Finns" does imply that they are not a separate ethnic group just Finns who happen to speak a different language. The Mountain Turks / Kurds examples is actually quite good.
3. How about Swedish-speaking minority in Finland as a good compromise description? The article can then go into greater detail and explain the Swedish name, the differnt English versions of the name and the general discussion about the differing opinions/arguments whether or not they are a separate ethnic group.

How about it?Osli73 (talk) 21:41, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

MPorciusCato, this not an issue of anti-finnish sentiments, which you try to enunciate. Finns were never restricted about speaking "Ingrians" while referring to the Ingrian minority in Russia during the 90´s, did you ever heard the term Ingrian-speaking Russian being used? We refer finns in Sweden as Sweden- Finns, but you we cannot refer Swedes in Finland as Finland-Swedes, instead we must restrict ourselves to only Swedish-language, why? Historical burdens perhaps, issue of self esteem perhaps, politics and the general attempts of Finland-Swedish political organizations to hide their Swedishness for not scaring finns, perhaps? What ever it is, Finland-Swedes should be used as an exception in the world on conventional naming customs for national minorities. This is a matter depriving the ethnicity of de facto national minority, a minority who we should not treat as exception of all conventional terminology being applied to various national minorities. As for for Osli73 compromise, I am actually surprised, I couldn´t imagine any compromise term, but atleast this is more neutral, as it seem that we have wiki members who won´t accept the word "Swede" or "Swedish" in the context of Finland-Swedes, I think Osli73´s suggestion is the most neutral we are able to conjure. Although, it lacks ethnic component as well, it does not outrule it and is more clarifying, and leaves further definitions open to reader. I am for the "Swedish-speaking minority in Finland", although I still feel the title should be retain its original name Finland-Swedes as we have Estonian Swedes as well. What do others think?

We have members here who are all very active in getting their way, and pushing titles such as "unconventional move" once they´ve got what they wanted, they disappear and all the sudden nothing is heard from them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Podomi (talk • contribs) 08:45, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Seriously, any editor with any experience should know that labelling ethnic groups are always sensitive and potentially controversial matters. Moving established articles in that area to another name without having reached consensus is just stirring up problems. Unless it has the format of polling, with one or more clearly stated proposals, and participants clearly stating their opinion in polling-format, a general discussion that has stalled does absolutely not imply consensus. With a talk page of this length, many constructive editors lose interest in participating in discussions that don't go anywhere and instead spend their time improving articles. If you make a clear proposal you tend to attract more editors of that sort, in my experience. Tomas e (talk) 09:31, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

By the way, this talk page is 386+ kb, roughly eight times more than the article. I'm afraid that IMHO that's not a sign of a constructive dialogue going on. Tomas e (talk) 09:35, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, one thing is clear we cannot continue with Swedish-speaking Finns, has someone ever heard of "swedish-speaking finnishness" as cultural phenomenon, (finlandssvenskhet)? Just one example how politically opportunistic phony term we are operating here. The problem crearly arises when wikipedia readers should be informed about the minority in Finland who also speaks Swedish among other things, in neutral expressions, something which the Swedish-speaking finn clearly fails to convey.

"McRae distinguishes a gap in Finland between the formal ´linguistic peace´ and the practical ´linguistic instability´ which put the Finland-Swedes in a ´sosiological, psychological and political´ minority position. Consistent with this, Allardt(2000:35) claims that the most serious contemporary problem for the Finland Swedes is the members of the group themselves: their ´submissiviness´and willingness to ´conceal their FINLAND-SWEDISHNESS´ in the face of the majority. Furthermore, the Finland-Swedes relations to Sweden are considered a sensitive isssue in Finland. Höckerstedt (2000:8-9) argues that an emphasis on the ´Swedish´part of the Finland-Swedish identity is ´taboo-laden´ and regarded as unpatriotic".

Hedberg, C. 2004.The Finland-Swedissh wheel of migration.Podomi (talk) 09:51, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Nomination?

Should this be nominated to Wikipedia:Lamest edit wars? Just get over it. It is completely irrelevant what the article title is, as long as all versions of the name are mentioned. --Vuo (talk) 09:41, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Quit your chauvinistic rants, no Tibetian would like to be referred as "Chinese who resides in Tibet", nor no Kurd wants to be referred as "Mountain Turk". This should be matter of persons who have previously identified as members of the Finland-Swedish minority to decide. The term should be closest to the language of the given minority, it should be not subjected under the speculation of the hostile majority with little interest to distinguish the peculiar characters of the minority, especially not in the case of Finland-Swedes who are subjected to severe conspicious from the behalf of the Finnish majority, due to historical burderns, as my citat above explains.

My proposal is Finland-Swedes, which is consistent with "Sweden Finns", "Estonian Swedes", "Volga-Germans" etc, that is the term in consistant with general naming principles of Northern European minorities, plus it the closest to original Swedish form of "finlandssvenskar" and the original title of the article. However, I am willing to compromise with Osli73´s proposal of "Swedish-speaking minority of Finland", given that it receives supportPodomi (talk) 09:56, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Don't make ad hominem attacks, people who do so are stupid. ... Anyway, please recognize the extreme lameness of this sort of debate as seen by the outsider. --Vuo (talk) 15:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

You can't compare the situation of the swedish-speaking minority in finland (finlandsvenskar) with the kurdish minority in Turkey (and Iraq, Iran and Syria). In Turkey, the kurdish language and expression of kurdish culture has been banned since the modern state of Turkey was founded. As we all know, this isn't the situation in Finland. The main organisations representing the swedish-speakers sees no conflict in being part of the linguistic minority (finlandsvenskar), with its own cultural expressions, and being a finn as everyone else. This is also the most common view represented within the swedish-speakers themselves, according too the polls refered to in all the articles regarding the issue here on wikipedia. People who themselves belong to the minority has expressed similar views in this discussion above. You clearly are not representive for those who you are trying to represent, Podomi.

Nationhood and identity is all about self-identification, nothing else, and you can't impose your own classifications on people who dont want them (your freqvent use of genetic studies on this matter is quite embarrising). What's your next step, walkin up to a french-speaking swiss and tell him that he belongs to another people than his german-speaking swiss fellow on the basis of language and descent? This is a quite more striking comparision than the one you made with the kurds.

Lastly, i'd like to answer to the thing you said about "Finland-Swedes who are subjected to severe conspicious from the behalf of the Finnish majority, due to historical burderns, as my citat above explains.". Almost a week ago, the organisation Magma, which you refered to earlier in this discussion as a "Finland-Swedish Think-Thank", published a poll where the finnish-speakers had been asked about their views on biliungualism, the swedish-speaking minority, language etc. The results of this poll contradicts your statement above severly.

According to the poll the majority of the finnish-speakers says that the swedish language is a important part of finnish society, that it would be a loss if the language and culture disappeared, that leading politicians should know how to speak the swedish language, etc. etc. [21] [22] --WorldsBestCarlsson (talk) 00:52, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Dear Podomi, I believe that your edit warring and and over-long posts are genuinely embarassing for the traditional Swedish-speaking minority in Finland. You are not a champion of the finlandssvenskar, only of your personal opinion.--130.234.5.136 (talk) 10:44, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Dear, anonymous, lets put ad hominens aside and debate the subject. My views certainly are embarassing for the Swedish political interest groups affiliated with the Finnish goverment, and the message these institution are feeding for the majority. Whether my views are embrassing for the majority of the members of Swedish minority in Finland is another story, whether you are sincerely interested in the neutrality of wiki is another story as well.

På tal om den finlandssvenska identitesdebatten (Håkan Eklund)

"Poängen är den att genuina kustsvenskar med rötter i den gränsöverskridande svenska kultur som ännu lever och mår bra längs den österbottniska kusten, på Åland och i skärgårdssamhällen längs sydkusten, med naturliga kontakter till ursprungskulturen i Sverige, inte har något behov av att ifrågasättas av urbana finlandssvenskar i storstadsområdet. Det är lätt att förstå varför ålänningarna inte vill kalla sig finlandssvenskar; kanske termen finlandssvensk inte längre är vad den varit?"

"FÖR ÅBOLÄNNINGAR, österbottningar och ålänningar är det fortfarande en del av vardagen att leva som ett gränsfolk med starka band till kusten och kulturen i Sverige, och många känner sig mera hemma i Umeå och Stockholm än i Helsingfors".

"Det är också att märka att våra kust- och skärgårdsbor mera sällan syns och hörs i identitetsdebatten, eftersom de inte ser någon orsak att debattera självklarheter. De vet vem de är och var de har sina skandinaviska ursprungsrötter, både historiskt och kulturellt sett.

Leif Höckerstedt, 2000. Helsingfors uni

"Det är naturligt att betona Sverige-kontakten då man gör en analys av finlandssvenskarnas språk, kommunikation och historia. Ideologiskt kommer det att närma sig Axel Olof Freudenthals bygdessvenskhet och Sverige närheten kring sekelsskiftet. Finlandssvenskarna är ju helt enkelt svenskar, närmare bestämt östsvenskar."

Unless our debate falls in the this level, I considered it finnish, and thus I will change the title to Osli´s73 compromise, I am sure that´s ok for all you guys?Podomi (talk) 11:28, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Vuo, I think a nomination might be suitable. This edit war has been a low-intensity conflict for over two years now, and it takes place in the fi-Wikipedia, too. --MPorciusCato (talk) 16:37, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

I checked, and it seems this edit war is on also in the sv-Wikipedia. --MPorciusCato (talk) 16:40, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Actually we should try some form of dispute resolution first, but I don't know which mechanism to select. There is no need for overt administrator action. Instead, we should recruit disinterested third parties, preferably native English speakers, who know little about the subject beforehand, to say which term seems most natural to an English-speaker. The last thing we need is a Finland-Swedish svekomanic vs. nationalist fight --Vuo (talk) 15:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

---

Proposed lame edit war description:

The title of the article is Finland-Swedes Swedish-speaking Finns Finland-Swedes Swedish-speaking Finns Finland's Swedes Swedish-speaking Finns Swedish-speaking minority in Finland Swedish-speaking population in Finland Swedish-speaking Finns Finlandssvenskar Swedish-speaking Finns, or maybe Swedes in Finland or Swedish Finns today depending on the phase of the moon and location of the planets. The page has been move-protected. The dispute is over how finlandssvenskar translates to English.

Any other ideas? --Vuo (talk) 10:12, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Straw poll

To avoid the usual trench warfare, I suggest we have a non-binding straw poll on the naming topic. Please add your votes/comments below (but pls keep them brief).

Howabout if we just retain the article as how it was, Finland-Swedes, a member of this minority has expressed his views already two years ago, "Don't expect the article to be changed. It has been kidnapped by Finnish nationalist who use it to present their nationalist double standard views, regardless of what the Finland Swedes think themselves". I think this is the worst aspect of every Finland-Swedish related article, the extremely low-self confidenced finns who pop into every thread with notions of the Swedish minority in order to boost their fennno propaganda derivived of low self-confidence, the historical burden and the Finland-Swedish status as the sterotyped aristocracy of the country. It ain´t cool when the bold and beautiful of the country are representing different ethnicity than the finnic majority, however that´s the way it is.128.214.30.77 (talk) 18:37, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Swedish-speaking Finns

• Oppose: this implies that Swedish speakers are really ethnic Finns (who just happen to speak Swedish). Since this is controversial and very much a judgement call we should avoid it. Although it is used, I wouldn't say it is "widely" used.Osli73 (talk) 12:25, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support: As this is the name used by the most representative finlandssvenska organizations, Folktinget and SFP. Wikipedia convention requires us to give each POV a visibility which is representative of its notability. The form Swedish-speaking Finn is the most notable (and most widely used) form. --MPorciusCato (talk) 16:27, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support: On the same grounds as MPorciusCato states above. Swedish Assembly of Finland - definition and The Swedish People´s Party - Who are the Swedish speaking Finns?. See also my answer to Podomi earlier. --WorldsBestCarlsson (talk) 22:54, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose As member voice from the minority itself, I am against the term as it is against the conventional naming principles of Northern European minorities, Sweden-Finns, Volga-Germans, politically motivated term most used by political intrest groups affiliated with Finland´s goverment. The lack of usage of the word in academia and Finland-Swedish NGO´s is symptom of unbiased term which is unable to even express itself properly, unless "swedish-speaking finnishness" sound plausible to somones ear.Podomi (talk) 19:37, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose An ethnic Finn who has learned Swedish is a Swedish-speaking Finn, but that is not the topic of this article.JdeJ (talk) 14:50, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

We expect only contribution from registered users with history in wiki, otherwise, I could log into every online cafeteria in the city and contribute and we´d have the original title of Finland-Swedes retained. As said we cannot just let any random, non-registered low self-confidenced finns to push their fenno chauvinistic views. Nice try. LOL. Anyway, the new Non-govermental Finland-Swedish think thank magma, (Finlands svenska tankesmedjan, Finland’s Swedish Think Tank, http://www.magma.fi/) uses the term Finland-Swedish. The organization is financed by the almost every non-govermental Finland´s Swedish foundation (Svenska Kulturfonden, Svenska folkskolans vänner, Föreningen Konstsamfundet, Stiftelsen Åbo Akademi and Sparbanksstiftelsen i Helsingfors) and is currently the only Finland-Swedish think thank, a non-govermentally affiliated interest group of Finland-Swedes. Should we just ignore this newly founded big Finland-Swedish actor?Podomi (talk) 19:21, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Well now I'm registered, and got the right to an opinion on this issue as much as you do. In fact, I don't like the way you debate this subject, your tone is aggressive and inpolite and you're very much behaving like a fanatic. I'm not a "random low self-confidenced finn" who push my "fenno chauvinistic views". Stop throwing junk at anyone who happens to have another opinion on this than you. You should also know there's a reason to why Osli73 said the comments in this poll was to be kept brief, this is because discussion was to be kept out of it. However, i must comment on the Magma Think-thank you mension. I can't find one article or phrase on their website that tell us their opinion on how we should name the swedish-speaking minority, finlandssvenskar, in english. In fact, the only thing I find regarding the issue at all is an article (in swedish) which even criticeses the use of the term finlandssvenskar (!) when talking about the minority. In article the term "svenskspråkiga", "swedish-speaking" is used. --WorldsBestCarlsson (talk) 22:54, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Finland Swedes

• Oppose: this implies that Swedish speakers are really ethnic Swedes (who just happen to live in Finland). Since this is controversial and very much a judgement call we should avoid it.Osli73 (talk) 12:25, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
• Conditionally support: This name is mostly a result of bad English, but it is still used. Those who use it intentionally, however, make up a very minor group. --MPorciusCato (talk) 16:29, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Do you have a source for the notion of minor group? Most Finland-Swedes reside in Ostrobotnia, Åboland archipelago and Åland islands, do you seriously think these would settle with "Swedish-speaking Finn" when already half of the members of the given geographical location refer themselves with a term equivalent to english tranlation of "East-Swedes".Podomi (talk) 17:18, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

• Support The common term, the shortest term. --193.167.3.63 (talk) 10:26, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Swedish speaking minority in Finland

• Support: this is a good compromise between the above that does not make a judgement on whether or not Swedish speakers are ethnic Finns or ethnic Swedes. This can be dealt with in greater detail in the article text.Osli73 (talk) 12:25, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support: Finland-Swedes, the most natural term and consistent with the naming principles of Northern European minorities such as Sweden-Finns. The term Finland-Swedes, imply ethnicity of Finland-Swedes, which is Swedish, it does not take a stance on whether the given person who belongs to the minority see him/her-self as Swedish in the nationalistic sense. However, I understand the taboo-laden character of Swedishness in Finland and thus I give my support for Osli´s compromise as well.Podomi (talk) 13:40, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose: As as compromise solution, this term might seem a good choice. However, it is against Wikipedia naming convention, as it is not a widely used English name for this group. --MPorciusCato (talk) 16:27, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support: Not ideal, but the best compromise this far.JdeJ (talk) 14:50, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia´s naming convention should convey neutrality. The only term which can express Swedishness as cultural phenomenon (finlandssvenskhet) is the term Finland-Swedish, or has someone heard about "swedish-speaking finnishness?", that´s why the term is rarely used in the academia. Also as said the term is consistent with general naming priciples of Northern European minorities, Sweden Finns, Volga-Germans..etc no use to accuse of bad english. We cannot give political parties monopoly over the issue of Finland-Swedish terminology, especially when not a single" finlandssvenska NGO" uses the term.Podomi (talk) 17:07, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

• Withhold: I wish more members of this particular group with proficiency in English would express an opinion. I am willing to go with any (English language) designation and article name chosen by the group itself. I realise that the problem in this approach too are the semantics. They don't go hand in hand in the four language usages involved here and will unavoidably result in asymmetries. Despite of this, I guess the only plausible approach is self-designation even in a foreign language. Clarifer (talk) 19:29, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

I have provided citats from several academic publications authored by Finland-Swedes who were using the term.

Carl O Nordling has elaborated on the issue, "Less well known internationally is the 6 percent minority of ethnic Swedes in Finland. While we never hear of "Sami speaking Norwegians", "Hebrew speaking Palestinians" etc., one often stumbles on the term "Swedish speaking Finns" to denote a certain group of ethnic Swedes. This is a way of denying the group their ethnic identity. Admittedly, something similar is practised in Turkey, where the Kurds are called "Mountain Turks" in official quarters".

I would like to point out that the numbers of the minority who are not comfortable with "Swedish-speaking finn" significantly outnumber those who are comfortable with "Finland-Swedes", Finland-Swede as a term is most neutral for the community and that´s why not single non-govermental interest group of Finland-Swedes uses "Swedish-speaking finn". Only the finnic members seem to be strongly in favour of "Swedish-speaking finn" as the Swedishness is considered sensitive issue for finns who´d like to see the minority eventually assimilated or atleast definitely not making fuss of their Swedishness. No one cares about the Roma or Sami minority and thus these folks are free to express their ethnicity how they wish, and no Finn is editing the Sami article as "Sami speaking Finns" or attempting to hijack the site in order to advance their Fenno-Ugrian self-esteem.

"McRae distinguishes a gap in Finland between the formal ´linguistic peace´ and the practical ´linguistic instability´ which put the Finland-Swedes in a ´sosiological, psychological and political´ minority position. Consistent with this, Allardt(2000:35) claims that the most serious contemporary problem for the Finland Swedes is the members of the group themselves: their ´submissiviness´and willingness to ´conceal their Finland-Swedishness´ in the face of the majority. Furthermore, the Finland-Swedes relations to Sweden are considered a sensitive isssue in Finland. Höckerstedt (2000:8-9) argues that an emphasis on the ´Swedish´part of the Finland-Swedish identity is ´taboo-laden´ and regarded as unpatriotic".Hedberg, C. 2004.The Finland-Swedissh wheel of migration.Podomi (talk) 20:18, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

problemacy of the straw poll

Problemacy of the poll. The straw is good idea as long as we remember the basic dynamics of the debate. The majority of the Finns (Finnish-speakers) oppose the term Finland-Swedes and are in favour of "Swedish-speaking Finns". The view of Swedish minority which comprises 5% of the Finland´s population is obviously marginalized in the debate. I order to work out this bias I think the the only compromise we can come up with is the "Swedish-speaking minority of Finland". Meanwhile the article title should be retained to the original term "Finland-Swedes", the original name of the article, that is.

As for the unconventional naming of "Swedish-speaking population of Finland", the article would take impartial view of the english terminology. We have to keep in mind the all the Finland-Swedish NGO´s use the Finland-Swedes along with its popularity in the academia. Right now the article has taken strong stance with the title and raised the "Swedish-speaking Finn" above the other alternative.Podomi (talk) 14:49, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Why do you assume that Finnish speakers want Finland-Swedes to be called "Swedish-speaking Finns", notably, in English? This is not majority vote conducted in Finland (WP:NOTDEMOCRACY). Secondly, this is not about Swedish or Finnish terms, but English terms (finne and Finn not being identical). --Vuo (talk) 15:01, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

This pattern has been consistent in this page. It´s been accused that the term Finland-Swedes is bad english. However, it might be the only accurate term to describe finlandssvenskhet/finland-Swedishness, and its consistent with the naming of Sweden Finns and Volga-Germans. If this was about only english we´d have Swedish Finns as opposed to Swedish-speaking finns. The aim to deprive Finland-Swedish etnicity and restrict only to language gives very biased picture of Finland-Swedish minority. It´s should be very clear the term "Swedish-speaking finn" is controversial and should not be raised as superior in wikipedia. Are we ok with "Swedish-speaking minority of Finland"? Incase there´s no debate about it I will request for the change.Podomi (talk) 16:00, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

No, we are not OK. Could you please stop acting as a child? This should be discussed before anyone moves anything. There's no need in the world to rush things. Your behavior in this discussion and in wikipedia in general is VERY irritating. 1. We've just had a poll about it, and since none of the solutions you favour has the majority of support, you are in no position to do anything. 2. You can't expect people to be online at wikipedia 24/7, we (clearly not you though) have other things to do than discussing this all day long. 3. Stop playing the "finnish-speakers want this and swedish-speakers want that"-card. There's been many swedish-speaking finns active in this discussion and the majority, as I can see, DO NOT share your view. The opinions of the major organisations representing the swedish-speaking minority have also been presented, and they don't share your view. So this is NOT a finne vs finlandsvensk issue.

You also claim that "all the Finland-Swedish NGO´s use the Finland-Swedes along with its popularity in the academia.". If this is the case, give me some proof. Earlier in the discussion you talked about the think-thank Magma. I'll post my reply to this again since you didn't care to answer it:

"However, i must comment on the Magma Think-thank you mention. I can't find one article or phrase on their website that tell us their opinion on how we should name the swedish-speaking minority, finlandssvenskar, in english. In fact, the only thing I find regarding the issue at all is an article (in swedish) which even criticeses the use of the term finlandssvenskar (!) when talking about the minority. In article the term "svenskspråkiga", "swedish-speaking" is used" --WorldsBestCarlsson (talk) 16:58, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

The name of the organization if Finland-Swedish think thank, not Swedish-speaking Finnish think-thank. the name of Finland-Swedish association if Finland-Swedish association, not Swedish-speaking Finnish association. The recent debate about terminology was started by poster called Östsvensk, overall it seems that finnish-speakers are dominating this debate, a notion given by poster by the name of Fjättrade ankan. As for the term Finland-Swedes in academia, I have posted several citats of Finland-Swedes academics who´ve used the term exclusively. If you would read Magma with more detailed touch you´d have noticed how Finland-Swedish sociolgist and scholar Thomas Rosenberg used bluntly and deliberately the term "svenskar" while addressing finlandssvenskar. As said concluded this debate has its various aspects and thus cannot give a monopoly over certain english translation. Hence I am going to request a change for the article very soon to its original title of Finland-Swedes until the debate is ended, unless ofcourse Swedish-speaking population in Finland receives more immeadiate support.Podomi (talk) 17:09, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

1. No, the name of the think-thank is simply Magma. In the website, it says (in english) that it is "Finland’s Swedish Think Tank", not a "Finland-Swedish think tank". There's a big difference. Again, there's not one article or phrase on their website that tell us their opinion on how we should name the swedish-speaking minority, finlandssvenskar, in english. As I said, there's only 1 article which adress the problem of naming the minority at all and that one is even criticising the use of the term finlandssvensk (!). In the article you mention, which isn't about this issue at all and is written by Thomas Rosenberg, he is using a lot of different terms when he talks about the minority, one of them is "the swedish-speakers" (de svensktalande) along with finlandsvensk and svensk. This brings nothing to our discussion. He also refer to the minority, which he himself belongs to, as a "linguistic community" (språkgrupp). It is quite dishonest of you to imply that he is supporting your view on this matter (naming the minority in english) when the article dont even adress the issue, and most people here probably cant read it because they don't understand swedish.

2. Earlier in the discussion you mentioned other NGOs of the minority, like Svenska Kulturfonden, Svenska folkskolans vänner, Föreningen Konstsamfundet, Stiftelsen Åbo Akademi and Sparbanksstiftelsen i Helsingfors. You also said that they don't use the term "Swedish-speaking finn" when refering to the minority in English. Show me proof, then. Cause when I looked for myself, the only thing I found was this. I quote "The purpose of the Swedish Cultural Foundation in Finland (Svenska kulturfonden) is to support the cultural and educational aspirations of the Swedish-speaking population in Finland as well as a wide range of other activities promoting Swedish as a minority language in Finland.". No Finland-Swedes or Finland-Swedish there. In the site there's also a pdf in which the minority is refered to as "Swedish-speaking finns". --WorldsBestCarlsson (talk) 18:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

By the way, are you sure you have considered the implications of your "two people - one country" -ideology thoroughly? Do you wish to see Finnish history rewritten? What will this mean to the "national awakening" and the legacy thereof in terms of "finlandssvenskhet"? Have they no part after all? How about Kalevala? Sauna? Are you robbing the finlandssvenskar of that too? Are you positive that there's a huge conspiracy against the finlandssvenskhet involving the Finnish governmental organisations, Finnish judicial and school systems? Finally, are you sure that you want to reduce the Swedish language from being the official language of the whole of Finland into the domicile language of a minority people in a similar fashion as the three Sami languages? It's ironical since last time I looked, it was the Folktinget that celebrated svenska dagen (Swedish day) in an out dated "Fennoman" (today: "an out dated Finnish") credo "one people - two languages" [23] which didn't take into accaount e.g. the Sami. Clarifer (talk) 17:25, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

World´s best Carlssson, you are becoming a border-troll. The difference of Finland´s Swedes or Finland-Swedes is not big. However, we can change to title to Finland´s Swede if you wish. About the institutions i named, I was merely just illustrating the significance of Magma in the Swedish community. The institutions behind them do not use much of english translations at all. However, interesting that you noticed the Kulturfondens "Swedish-speaking population of Finland" term. After all this is the biggest Finland-Swedish foundation in thecountry and thus there is now even more legitimity for the expression.

Well, now the Magma site don't speak of "Finland's Swedes" or "Finland-Swedes" at all, they just say they're "Finland’s Swedish Think Tank". This tells us NOTHING about which term they prefer to use when naming the minority in english or how they're defining the identity of the minority. As i said, the articles on their website are'nt really supporting your case; one even questioning the term finlandssvenskar (the only article which adress the issue of naming the minority) and a second one, by Thomas Rosenberg, in which he refers to the swedish-speaking finns as a "linguistic community" (språkgrupp). Far away from your "separate people"-theory. When it comes to Svenska Kulturfonden, they obviously has nothing against the term "swedish-speaking finn" since they, on their website, provide us with a pdf which uses that exact term!

You earlier claimed that "not a single finlandssvenska NGO uses the term" and that "all the Finland-Swedish NGO´s use the Finland-Swedes". Apparently, you didn't even check if this was true, cause we now see that it isn't. As for your accusations of "depriving the ethnicity of the minority", it is quite clear that if someone here is doing that, it is the swedish-speakers and the people representing them who are the ones to blaim, since the main organisations representing the swedish-speakers sees no conflict in being part of the linguistic minority (finlandsvenskar), with its own cultural expressions, and being a finn. This is also the most common view represented within the swedish-speakers themselves, according too the polls refered to in all the articles regarding the issue here on wikipedia. --WorldsBestCarlsson (talk) 00:52, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

I´ve given many citats of the term Finland-Swedes, however as said the english translations are diverse, we have Finland-Swedes, "Swedish-speaking Finns" or simply Swedes in Finland. "Swedish-speaking Finn" is mostly used by political organizations and cannot be given monopoly, it´s poor term and deprives the ethnicity of the minority.

Rystad, Göran. 1994. Redefining a Minority Role: The Case of the Swedes in Finland.Podomi (talk) 18:54, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

@Clarifier. The "one people" approach is chauvinistic concept from the 1800´s. It against the natural perception of ordinary Finns and Swedes. I am slightly surprised that Finns cannot see through the Folktingets and SFP´s little gimmics. Think twice what would be behind their reflections of "one people, two languages". Although these organizations have wealth, they are still dependent on finnic politicians in preserving the official status of Swedish language.

"Samhälsklimatet efter krigen inbegriper en fösterländsk idé om ett folk med två språk. Detta folk borde ju då ha ett folklynne. Och om ett folk uppfattas som likamed en nationalitet så borde det finnas bara en `nationalkaraktär´. Detta åter strider mot historien och den tidigare uppfattningen och inte minst folks vardagserfarenheter." Leif Höckerstedt, 2000.

Kalevala & Sisu is not my culture. Kalevala and Sisu are not the culture of Finland-Swedes. This should be as obvious to you as it is to me. Sauna is another story, although I am not sure should we refer it as sauna or by its Russian equivalent, banyana.

Anyway, should also rename Sami´s as Sami speaking Finns, and change the title for Sweden Finns? Podomi (talk) 19:05, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Very well, at least it is becomming increasingly clear that some finlandssvenskar aren't that far from the aims of e.g. Suomalaisuuden Liitto (Finnish Alliance): there seems to be a common goal to marginalise and alienate the Swedish-speaking elements from Finnish main stream culture into a separate and foreign aspect of the society. If this is what is wanted then so be it. After this discussion, I wouldn't be surprised if in two decades Finland had only a single official language and Swedish and Sami as domicile languages. In fact, my surprise is that such a development may be driven by the minority group itself. Who knows, perhaps this represents the national awakening of the Finland-Swedes for better or worse. Clarifer (talk) 15:26, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Interesting thoughts. However, what I´ve self experienced is that Finns generally know very little of history and culture of Finland-Swedish. There seem to be generally some kind of thought among finns that emphasizing the ethnicty and Swedishhness is considered as an anti-finnish, something which is marginal and something which the mainstream Finland-Swedish consider shamefull remnant from the past. I don´t know where this logic originates, most likely from the fact that the Finland-Swedish identity debate in the most mainstream level has been traditionally hijacked by leftist urban elite. I guess that´s they way it is in most of western media´s. We basically have urban leftist Finland-Swedes who tell the finns what they want to hear. Partly this can be understood as sympathy for the unpriviledged majority, however the way I see it, it has been gone too far. The Helsingfors dominated debate is very alien to majority of Finland Swedes who still perceive Sweden as their ethnic homeland. These live in Osterbotten, Åbolands archipelago and western, rural Nyland. These folk comprise the majority of Finland-Swedes, nevertheless their voice is rarely hear. This is not anti-finniscism, although I don´t deny its existance among some Finland-Swedish circuits, however this is mostly about Swedish culture of the Baltic sea, culture sphere that has never been divided by artifical state-borders, culture that characterized by sea and Swedishness.For these people, the majority of Finland-Swedes, finnish-speaking inland Finland is simply an alien culture. Sometimes I really wonder how effectively the Folktinget and SFP are able to smoke finns from the waist down. These organizations are extremely good in getting their will, and don´t mind coming up whatever crazy ideas their pr-people invent. For the sake and future of Swedishness in Finland and the official status of Swedish in Finland it´s probably better to tell Finns what they want to hear, but the problem arises when we are trying to give neutral view of Finland-Swedes for international audience, in the form of wikipedia article for example. It´s then we should be able to see the forest from the trees. For those interested in Finland-Swedes I warmly welcome to read Håkan Eklunds brilliant article "På tal om den finlandssvenska identitetsdebatten".

http://web.abo.fi/meddelanden/veckans_skribent/2005_04_eklund.shtPodomi (talk) 16:01, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

"Men notera: det är varken ofosterländskt eller antifinskt, varken mot språket eller mot den finska kulturen att försvara och värna om en gammal gränsöverskridande kustsvensk kultur som via havet förenat våra svenska kust- och skärgårdsbygder med hela den svenska östkusten från Kvarken till Roslagen!"

FÖR ÅBOLÄNNINGAR, österbottningar och ålänningar är det fortfarande en del av vardagen att leva som ett gränsfolk med starka band till kusten och kulturen i Sverige, och många känner sig mera hemma i Umeå och Stockholm än i Helsingfors.

Dear Podomi, are you actually serious? If you were an agent provocateur of the Suomalaisuuden liitto or Suomen sisu, you could not write a text which would be more disparaguing of the Swedish-speaking minority. They often try to point out that such conspiracy of Swedish-speaking double-think exists, but that is considered a lunatic fringe opinion by the mainstream Finnish-speaking community. Now you are claiming the existence of such double-talk in order to have an English-speaking Wikipedia article turned into supporting your POV. I really start to wonder what you are aiming at. --MPorciusCato (talk) 16:34, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

First of all, I am not comfortable that my Swedish ethnicity is restricted to language. Did you actually read anything I wrote above? Finland-Swedish scholar Leif Höckerstedt raised a critisism for the Swedish political organizations which nevertheless still refers to their organizations as Swedish People´s party or Swedish assembly.

"Diskussionen tycks gå ut på att se oss genom finska ögon och få oss att agera så att majoriteten blir nöjd. Från början var det självklart att man kunde vara svensk i Finland. Då Finland blev självständigt var det politiskt befogat att använda finlandssvensk för att markera statstillhörigheten. Begreppet riksvensk användes för att hänvisa till svenskar i Sverige. Nu har det blivit opportunt att använda svensktalande eller svenskspråkig finländare eller finne (på engelska swedish-speaking finns, ej Finland-Swedes) och samtidigt antyda att det bara är frågan om språk, ett kommunikationmedel, som skiljer svensk och finne i Finland".Höckerstedt, 2009

Like I said I cannot but wonder how good well SFP and Folktinget has got their message through the majority. Anyway, for those who don´t support the tvångsvenskan nor the official status of Swedish language in Finland, which has never worked in practise, there´s no need to to tell what finns want to hear. And all I can tell that the Swedish People party and Folktinget have done a tremendeously good job for advancing their cause for finns. Ouh, and this debate has no relevance to my naming proposal, this is private discourse. I hope people can seperate substance from emotions. Anyway, between me and you, what comes to double-thinking, I´ve never had that, It´s been clear to since the day I was born, which country is my ethnic homeland, and in which country my family has been visitors, Finland that is. However, even I take a piss every once in a while when a Finn tells to go back to Sweden, after all, finns have never had any monopoly over Finland and fairly little to say where Swedes should go from Svenskfinland. Although the direction seem to increasingly back to motherland:

"It is concluded that Finland-Swedes are over-represented in the total migrationprocess from Finland to Sweden. As such, the process is culturally embedded in the group´s ethnic identity, which causes migration both through the pratical minority situation in Finland and through ethnic affinity with Sweden".Hedberg, C. 2004.The Finland-Swedish wheel of migration. Podomi (talk) 17:27, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

I found an additional citat from Finland-Swedish sociologist Thomas Rosenberg

"Det här gäller såväl österbottningar (för att inte tala om ålänningar) som helt tvåspråkiga finlandssvenskar. De förra upplever sig ofta vara svenskar som råkar bo i Finland medan de senare upplever sig vara finnar som råkar tala svenska".

The title of article must also reflect this issue. It´s intellectually dishonoust to have have bluntly the name "Swedish-speaking Finns" when we have group of Finland-Swedes, Ostrobotnians make over 50% of Finland-Swedes) who do not consider themselves as Finnish.Podomi (talk) 21:12, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Podomi´s compromise

Is there possibility to rename the article as "Swedish-speaking finns/Finland-Swedes" or the other way around? This would also pay tribute to the original title of the article, Finland-Swedes and to the current version. The double naming could be explained in the article under a seperate sub-chapter.Podomi (talk) 00:57, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

I found an interesting article of Finland-Swedish by native english-speaker, Phd. Edward Dutton, in his scholarly aticle he uses exclusively expression Finland-Swede,

http://www.antrocom.net/upload/sub/antrocom/040208/14-Antrocom.pdf

While in magazine article he uses both term, http://www.ovimagazine.com/art/948. Pay attention!

"Miss Asplund is a Finland-Swede and a student at Umeå University in Sweden. The Finnish culture minister (himself a Swedish-speaker) called her the worst 'enemy' of Swedish-speaking Finns because she sees them as a race rather than a language group and thinks that Finland-Swedishness is a matter of genetics.

Miss Asplund has been accused of racism for her view that Finland-Swedes are more cultured than Finnish-speaking Finns. However, she thinks that Finland-Swedes are discriminated against and prejudged because of their ethnicity. She thinks their rights are trampled on, if they speak out they'll be threatened and that immigrants to Finland that chose to learn Swedish will be doubly discriminated against. Miss Asplund's group is determined, as they see it, to fight back".

So basically native english speakers feel expression "swedish-speaking Finnishness" unusefull, and hence it has been replaced by Finland-Swedishness (finlandssvenskhet). So, how about if we move the title as "Swedish-speaking finns/Finland-Swedes"? Podomi (talk) 16:14, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

There's no any other Wikipedia articles with "/" in the title. It might be against guidelines.--130.234.5.138 (talk) 17:39, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

We´ll then we must make the first one. Is there articles with "-" We could have "Swedish-speaking Finns - Finland-Swedes. This would be neutral and would show that wikipedia do not take part in the terminology issue which has not been fully settled.Podomi (talk) 18:44, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

I´ve found this following citat from the page.

"the Finnish Government Research Institute for the Languages of Finland, which has consulted other English experts, recommends ([7]), the following use: "Finland Swede should be used about persons, Finland-Swedish as the adjective, and Finland Swedish for the version of Swedish that is spoken in Finland"." I am going to make a telephone call to the organization on monday to ask their view, as I´ve saw that they use "Swedish-speaking finn" as well.

A Citat from now defunct article from the Finnish research center for the languages

"Laurén använder i sin artikel Finland Swede om person, Finland-Swedish som adjektiv och Finland Swedish om språkvarianten. Efter att för säkerhets skull ha konsulterat engelsk expertis kan jag rekommendera de termerna för allmänt bruk i texter på engelska om finlandssvenska förhållanden."land Swede should be used about persons, Finland-Swedish as the adjective, and Finland Swedish for the version of Swedish that is spoken in Finland".

I let you guys debate about this for couple days, anyway, it should be clear by now to everyone that we won´t the article title at this form very long.

One compromise is that we use bluntly "Finlandssvenskar" and explain the different english-speaking versions in neutral manner without giving any version a monopololy.Podomi (talk) 11:55, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Is "citat" really English or another Podomi's sweticicism? I think its "quote".--212.146.44.208 (talk) 15:24, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

I am going gather here material which will be eventually presented to Wiki administrators when this page is renamed. MPontios has expressed his concern over unconventional naming customs. We have articles of Estonian Swedes, Netherland Swedes...etc We don´t have an article of Finland Swedes in wikipedia? Isn´t that little unconventional given the large Swedish minority in the country? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Podomi (talk • contribs) 15:28, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Podomi, the correct way to move pages is to make a request for move. If you wish to do so, go ahead. I doubt you'll get a consensus for a move. --MPorciusCato (talk) 15:55, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Why wouldn´t I receive consensus for a move, given that I presented adequote material in favour of more neutral expression? Why would a consensus oppose Wikipedia´s quest for neutrality. The thing is that the Swedish form "finlandssvensk" has an ethnic connotation, it is not just entirely language based. The term "Swedish-speaking Finn" is fully language based, without an ethnic connotation, hence it cannot be perceived as neutral expression of Finland-Swedishness or "Swedish-speaking Finnishness". Do you have some suggestion how we correct this bias in the title of the article?Podomi (talk) 19:26, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Hey, I just consulted the bureau of Finnish languages and research, where I was informed from the Swedish-speaking sector that they will not take stance on the debated issue and adviced me to use either Swedish Finns, Swedish-speaking Finns or Finland-Swedes.

Here´s what Dr.Tore Moden, an specialist in international law and minority issues, has to say about the Swedish nationality in Finland

"In Finland this question has been subjected to much discussion. The Finnish majority tries to deny the existence of a Swedish nationality. An example of this is the fact that the statutes always use the concept "Swedish-speaking" instead of Swedish".

"The concept of nation has a different significance as meaning of a population group or an ethnic community, irrespectively of its organization. ( I prefer to use the concept of nationality in this connection). For instance, the Swedes of Finland, with their distinctive lnaguage and culture form a nationality which under the Finnish constitution shall enjoy equal rights with the Finnish nationality".

"It is not correct to call a nationality a linguistic group or minority, if it has developed culture of its own. If there is not only a community of language, but also of other characteristics such as folklore, poetry and literature, folk music, theater, behavior.etc".

"An ethnic group with "a mother country" can certainly profit from the linguistic and technical development there. Without Sweden, the Swedes of Finland would have small chances to survive. Not because Sweden actually helps the Swedes of Finlan; there are no subsidiaries of any importance. But the very existance of flourishing Swedish culture and economy keeps the spirit of Finnish Swedes alive".

The cultural rights of the Swedish ethnic group in Finland(Europa Ethnica, 3-4 1999 (jg.56)

By naming the article as "Swedish-speaking Finns" wikipedia has not only taken strong stance on the debate of Swedish identity in Finland, but also taken a partial view on the whole existance of the Finland-Swedish ethnicity. (which is now restricted only as linguistic phenomenon, this may be an violation against existential right to exist. I have a moral responsibility to preserve the neutrality of wikipedia, thus by an unilateral act I will change the article as Swedish-speaking population in Finland, before we have reach a new verdict of the title.

Best regards, Podomi.Podomi (talk) 14:12, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

What is it that you're trying to do? Find a couple of studies where the author has used the term Finland-Swede and then post it here as "proof"? If that is the case, I could bombard you with references to academic liturature where the term "Swedish-Speaking finn" is used. This is because most english-language liturature on the subject use that term. I'm also questioning the sources of some of the information you've put in article or posted here. What, exactly, has the opinions of 1 person, for example Carl O. Nordling, to do with anything? He's not a authority on the subject, he's an architect, he just expresses his own opinion as you and me. And for the record, he's also a Holocaust-denier which has published himself in antisemitic papers. One other thing is when you repeatingly is quoting Höckerstedt and his book "Fuskfinnar eller östsvenskar?". This book is not a academic work, it is his own views in the debate and his own views only, and if refered to that should be made clear. I also think you should take a look at this:

"Swedish-Speaking Finns as a Minority: Sociological Perspectives

Swedish-Speaking Finns as a Minority: Sociological Perspectives, Autumn 2008

Place: Department of Sociology, Gezeliusgatan 2 (Åhuset), large seminar room Credits: 5 ECTS, Form of assessment: written exam'"

This is a course taught in english for exchange students at Åbo Akademi. The only course which is targeting the subject. And which term do they use? Swedish-speaking finns, which they describe as a linguistic/cultural minority, not a ethnic one. And this from the University which describes itself as "Finland's Swedish University" (it's a swedish-language-university) --WorldsBestCarlsson (talk) 17:22, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, all terms, Swedish-Finns, Swedes in Finland, Finland-Swedes, Swedish-speaking Finns are used in the academia. That´s why cannot give any term a monopoly. This was also addressed by the Research institute for national languages in Finland, to which I made a phone call today. Carl Nordling is a member of Finland-Swedish minority and has even wikipedia article denoted for him. He has been publishing in several peer-reviewed academic journals such as Linguistica Uralica. The fact that he, among many others, raises concern for the "Swedish-speaking Finn" just implies that there members of the minority who are not comfortable with the term. A Voice of a common man and academic simultaneously. Your assesment of him being holocaust denier is ad hominem, something which hasn´t nothing to do with the issue. It just show how biased your Fenno-Chauvinistic views are. You are willing to do anything to illegitimate valid sources.

From wikipedia, "His statistical analysis on the Holocaust, How Many Jews Died in the German Concentration Camps?, has been used by historical revisionists and Holocaust deniers".

Leif Höckerstedt´s book is being used as the coursebook in the fundamental course of Finland-Swedishness in the university of Helsingfors, https://oodi-www.it.helsinki.fi/hy/opintjakstied.jsp?MD5avain=&Kieli=1&OpinKohd=52742430&OnkoIlmKelp=0&ooo_SortJarj=2&vl_tila=4&takaisin=vl_kehys.jsp&Opas=797&Org=30545178&haettuOpas=797&haeOpintJaks=haeopintojaksotPodomi (talk) 17:40, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

World´s best carlsson. The NGO´s Finland-Swedish association is Finland-Swedish association, not Swedish-speaking Finnish association. The Finland-Swedish Think Thank Magma, is Finland-Swedish Think Thank Magma, not Swedish-speaking Finnish think thank Magma. These are the only Swedish-pseaking Finnish NGO´s which have their named translated in English as well.Podomi (talk) 18:31, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Carlsson has added an article by Donner. If we go by individual manifestations we could introduce citats from every single Swedish-speaking author, Gösta Åhgren, Ida Asplund, Thomas Rosenberg. No offense to Donner, but when the text is referring to academic debate from branch of internation minority law, it would look rather naive to have Donner´s citats as well. Donner´s idea´s can be introduced in the "identity of Swedish-speaking finns" section if one feels that they are adequately covered already in the text. In the sub-section there´s unreferenced wording "However, not all Swedish-speaking Finns are willing to self-identify as representatives of a distinct ethnicity". Carlsson could introduce a reference with his Donner article. Given that Swedish citats are allowed. Donner has resigned from the finlandssvensk community, and does not identify as such(finlandssvensk), thus the internatiol minority law interpreation does not cover him, given that self-identification of ethnicity is the primary form of ethnicity. But Carlsson make sure you go and add to the "Finns"-article that not all Finns want to be identified as "Finns". Some of them prefer ethnic identities such as "European" or "cosmopolitan" for example.

In this article we must be careful that we don´t mix those who speak Swedish but not identify themselves as finlandssvensk, such as Donner, those Finns are Swedish language instructors in high-schools, or second generation Finn who reside in Sweden and identify themselves as Finn who speak Swedish. And I would also point that by going Worlds best Carlsson ad hominem standards, we could point out how Donners has been performing adult entertainment with under-aged girls. That kind of a respected movie director and culture person we havePodomi (talk) 19:17, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

I didn't add the Donner quote. MPorciusCato did... --WorldsBestCarlsson (talk) 11:12, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Podomi, if someone does not think that finlandssvenskhet is exactly what you think it to be, it does not mean they don't identify as finlandssvenskar. Jörn Donner is widely considered to be one of the most important living finlandssvensk intellectuals and he is widely more notable than Ida Asplund, Höckerstedt and Rosenberg taken together. In Wikipedia, all POVs must be represented, not just yours. --MPorciusCato (talk) 16:34, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Donner does not identify as a finlandssvensk, he has addressed this already in the 70´s. He emphasizes his German roots and brings on the table in about every identity discussion he has been participating. We probably have Swedes in Sweden who perceives them as "Walloons" as well. Do you have a source would legitimize his status as important intellectual? As far as I am aware he hasn´t contributed to academic journals nor participated or international minority rights movement such as Asplund, Höckerstedt and Rosenberg. In Finland-Swedish community Donner regarded as a hooligan, gifted writer yes, but a hooligan, he does not even have the authority of an academian. He has tried to illegitimize the term Finland-Swedish for the fact that according to him Finland-Swedes do not originate from Sweden. This is complete piece of bullshit. In his writing every 22 post were against him and some accused him violation basic existential human rights, to have the right to exist in the identified ethnicity. Now, you want to raise him as some sort serious authority. This is not proper behavior. I would understand if you citats from authors such as Bo Carpeland, Merete Mazzarella, Claes Andersson, Tove Jahnsson. These are respected in Finland-Swedish community. Besides you forgot to add "Porn star" in his list of merits. Why? He is also respected pornographic actor notorious for having been performing uninhibitet intercourse with under-aged girls. Please, cover Donner in the identity section, he really does not have an authority to define Finland-Swedes under the chapter "definition problem".128.214.30.23 (talk) 17:14, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Donner is widely identified as finlandssvensk and is considered widely to be one of the leading Finnish intellectual personalities ([24][25][26]). You are correct, he has also starred in a porn movie during the 1960s. However, that is not his main contribution to the film. In total, he has directed over 20 movies, and he was one of the most important producers of Ingmar Bergman. In the literary field, he is at par with Bo Carpelan or Claes Andersson. I have not seen him denounce his finlandssvenskhet. On the contrary, he has been a member of parliament for the SFP. However, he has denounced the importance of the concept of finlandssvenskhet, as referenced in the "definition problem". --MPorciusCato (talk) 17:45, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I don´t deny Donners merits. However, this article is about finlandssvenskar, or is this about finns who speak Swedish, like the finnish immigrants or Swedish high-school teachers? Donner is not an authority to have anything the definition of finlandssvenskhet. He is not a finlandssvensk as he has himself addressed. We are discusion the various definition problem related to english translation of the term finlandssvensk/ar, we are not discussion whether the term finlandssvenskhet is legitimate or not, it´s valid term since we have minority in Finland who identifies with such a term. Donner is not one of those. There would not a single academic who would recite him. His arguments are a joke, the only thing he did was caused anger among those who identifies as finlandssvenskar, and this is what the article is about. Donner was accused for insult against against finlandssvenskar and violation of existential human right to exist. His article resulted in several angry writing in HBL. This article has a chapter "identity of Swedish-speaking finns", with following unreferenced sentence "However, not all Swedish-speaking Finns are willing to self-identify as representatives of a distinct ethnicity". Go ahead and add a source for that.

Anyway, you´ve just proved our english title "Swedish-speaking Finn" is not neutral, even you are not sure whether it is about people who defines them as a finlandssvensk or something else. Keep in mind that the chapter says "The Swedish term finlandssvensk, which is used by the group itself" keep in mind as well that we looking an english translation for a "finlandssvensk", not for Donner.....Podomi (talk) 18:01, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Move process

Podomi, once again, tried to move this page without any kind of consensus, in a blatant violation of WP:MOVE. I undid the move. I'd like to ask administrators to step in and apply appropriate measures. --MPorciusCato (talk) 15:46, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Tears....What´s the matter? Should we comptemplate which is a more "blatant violation", unilateral page move or a page title which is non-neutral to say the least. In fact our current term may just be an blatant violation against the existantial righ for Finland-Swedes to exist as a nationality and ethnicity.

"In Finland this question (Swedish nationality) has been subjected to much discussion. The Finnish majority tries to deny the existence of a Swedish nationality. An example of this is the fact that the statutes always use the concept "Swedish-speaking" instead of Swedish". Tore Moden (Europa Ethnica, 1999 vol.3-4).

Shouldn´t wikipedia´s neutrality be among your top priorities MPontiusCato? The Finnish bureau of national languages did not want to take a stance for the terminology of Swedish speakers in Finland. Why would wikipedia like to, or rather why the representants of the Finnish nationality want to? MCPorciusCato, you got a help from your little fenno moderator this time, next time may be differentPodomi (talk) 17:20, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Podomi, has it occured to you that you might not be right? In Wikipedia, we do not decide things by sprouting large amounts of text again and again. Instead, we discuss using rational arguments. If you can get a consensus for a move, I'm fine with it. However, you cannot decide such things alone. --MPorciusCato (talk) 17:00, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

You words could be taken with respect, if you would show some character in your behavior. Adding citats from adult-film stars performers, and leftist radicals, as an respected source and authority under the chapter "definition problem" is a grose example of your mission. You are getting beyond desperous. A complete lack of respect for national minority. Donner can be what he wants, however he publicly expressed that he is not a finlandssvensk already in the 70´s. How would feel if someone would add the comments of ex-porn actor, who had assessed that Finns are not Finns but Uralics, since Finns originate from proto-Uralic homeland and not Finland? That would be insulting.Podomi (talk) 17:26, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Donner is Donner, but you can't just claim his view doesn't exist, especially if it is the official policy of the state of Finland. It may not be scientifically correct but it is official, unfortunately. --Vuo (talk) 18:36, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Finnish state policy

Quoting:

Ideas that the Finnish-speaking majority is unwilling to accept separate Swedish nationality in Finland has been presented. (ref) "In Finland this question (Swedish nationality) has been subjected to much discussion. The Finnish majority tries to deny the existence of a Swedish nationality. An example of this is the fact that the statutes always use the concept "Swedish-speaking" instead of Swedish", "The wording of the Finnish Constitution (Art. 14.1): "Finnish and Swedish shall be the national languages of the republic" has been interpreted by linguist and constitution-writing politician E.N. Setälä and others as meaning that these languages are the State languages of Finland in stead of the languages of the both nationalities of Finland","It is not correct to call a nationality a linguistic group or minority, if it has developed culture of its own. If there is not only a community of language, but also of other characteristics such as folklore, poetry and literature, folk music, theater, behavior.etc". Tore Modeen,The cultural rights of the Swedish ethnic group in Finland(Europa Ethnica, 3-4 1999,jg.56) (/ref)

I find this overtly polemic and additionally it may be a fringe theory (I have no expertise to judge whether it is). As I understand it, the policy of the state of Finland is not necessarily how Finnish people ("Finnish-speaking" in nationalist terms) see this. It was a compromise to define in the constitution that the law will not take a stand in the issue itself. Instead, it will only address the actual decisions that have to be taken with regard to languages of the public services, etc. It clearly does not dictate what Finnish people actually think. --Vuo (talk) 18:55, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Podomi´s apology

I apologize for the remarks and clear ad hominens I made against Donner. This was clearly wrong. However, I think adding his citats under the "definition problem"-heading was very naive. It actually work only againt MPorciusCato´s own perception. He is probably young and do not really understand where is aiming at. The reason Donner wanted to resign from the term finlandssvensk is for the very fact that the term finlandssvensk has such a deep ethno-cultural meaning. For Donner the term finlandssvensk means "Swedish in Finland". Our article is about finlandssvenskar but we refer them as "Swedish-speaking Finn" a term which no ethnic connotation.

"Självfallet kan man diskutera vad som ingår i denna gruppidentifikation (finlandssvensk) förutom svenska språket och vissa historiska händelser: samhörighet med Sverige, kräftätning, snapvisesjungande,Luciatraditionen, skärgårdsliv, ankdammen, upplevelser i språkstrid, fonderna, SFP osv. I varje fall är det klart att den mera omfattande betydelsen fortfarande lever och att många inte upplever den som relevant eller accetabelt och därför undvikar hela ordet, t.e Jörn Donner, som i bok från 1980 meddelar sig "att vara finne som talar svenska" http://www.ling.helsinki.fi/~fkarlsso/edelfelt.pdf

1)My question is whether this article is about finlandssvenskar? The definition subject refers to problematic english translation of finlandssvenskar, not whether the term finlandssvenskar is accurate term, as Donner proposes in his article.

2) My second question is whether the term "Swedish-speaking Finn" is neutral expression of the term finlandssvensk, which after all has a deep ethno-cultural meaning, so deep that we even have swedish-speaking celebreties who want to resign themselves from the term.

I aknowledge the ethno-linguistic relationship are fucked up. The fact that Swedish has been the language of the upper class has poisoned the relationship of Finland-Swedes and Finns for good. However, I would like to point out that only few of Finland-Swedes were members of upper-class, although, the upper-class was Swedish. Swedish language in Finland continues to have higher prestige and that´s why we wittness the phenomenon that the Swedish aspect of Finland-Swedes is aimed to illegitimize by behalf of Finnish posters. That´s why we have Finnish posters who come and add "dubious speculation" tags under the text by Dr in international minority rights in academic, European journal of international law and ethnicity. Every emphasis on the ethnic Swedish part of Finland-Swedes is denoted as "racist and radical" from the behalf of Finnish posters. I understand this, but the majority of Finland-Swedes who have never done anything wrong against Finns have a right for an ethnic Finland-Swedish identity. And even the right be called a nationality. This existential right and it cannot be taken away from Finland-Swedes eventhough there´s has been members of the minority who have fucked up in the past. I will remove the speculation part which does not have rational reason to be there. What comes to Donner I suggest it will be discussed in the "identity of Swedish-speaking finns"-section. The definition problem refers to english definition of the term finlandssvensk, not whether a finlandssvensk is a correct term or not. Besides Donner says very little to internation audience who cannot access to his academic publications and further analyze his wordingsPodomi (talk) 19:34, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I would like to point to MporciusCato that you´ve missed something from Donnner´s writing, probably because Swedish is not your first language. Donner does not argue that finlandssvenskhet is a linguistic phenomenon, he argues that not good expression because according to him finladssvenskar do not originate from Sweden, "but from other countries and from finns". The whole reason for him resigning from the term finlandssvensk is because it has so much bigger meaning than just linguistical. You misinterpreted his wordings. That together with the fact the "definition problem" refers to english definition of finlandssvensk. Not whether finlandssvenskhet is appropriate term. We don´t have definition problem on the term finlandssvensk. Could you move your citat to identity part and correct your phrasing.Podomi (talk) 19:50, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I removed Mporcius Catos wrong interpretations from Donner article. Plus it wasn´t translated. However, I came to conclusion. I will remove this

"The strong will to address the Swedish-speaking de facto minority entirely from linguistic perspective has been noted in the academic debate in regards to internatinal law and minority rights. Ideas that the Finnish-speaking majority is unwilling to accept separate Swedish nationality in Finland has been presented."

I will transfer it to "identity section" and change the wording. We can just write that there´s been ideas that Finland-Swedes are also nationality. However, i don´t remove the source wording, but I believe we should portray Finland-Swedes in positive light, not in way which is harmful against finns. And, I will leave the citats which address the concern that some Finland-Swedes have expressed about the "Swedish-speaking" expression. This is not a crime against Finns. An ethnic group has the right be ethnic group despite they´ve also constituted the upper class and bears historical guilt.

You guys are lucky that I willing compromise. I got pissed from the naming-discussion. You should have also known that you cannot fuck with Podomi, I always get what I want, thus I propose a bettter attitude from the MPorcius and the rest.Podomi (talk) 20:44, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Anyway, I leave you guys think about the current title. What´s the wikipedia´s policy on this. "The Swedish-speaking finn" certainly has biggest exposure, not significantly but still the biggest. However, as shown this is not entirely a neutral term and is now raised on pedestal above all the others. Is this ok? Podomi (talk) 21:01, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Dear Podomi, your actions grant You some goodwill. However, I cannot refrain myself from commenting some of your (personal) interpretations of the whole debate concerning minority issues and Finland.

1. You seem to think that You possess the special capability of objectively defining an ethnic group, in particular, the ethnic group You address as 'finlandssvenskar'. It seems that other editors participating in this conversation do not think that they are capable of such a thing with regard to any ethnic group. This discrepancy seems to be a major source of misconception.

2. That the language of Finnish upper class used to be Swedish has not poisoned anything for good. The mere thought of something like that appears to be an example of a rigid, old-fashioned and hostile way of thinking that somehow seems plagued with psychological projection.

3. In Finland, the Swedish language has not enjoyed "a higher prestige" for a century now as Finnish law lifted the status of Finnish to correspond that of Swedish in the early 20th century. I probably need not remind You, that in the 19th century it was the ideal and cause of many of the members of the "Swedish-speaking upper class" to grant the next generation - and their own children - the right for the Finnish mother tongue they themselves lacked! Have you heard of a Finnish citizen who had his/her surname changed into a Swedish one? The opposite is true: thousands and thousands of Finnish people with a Swedish surname changed them into Finnish ones during the early 20th century. And today, the Finland Swedish language absorbs Fennicisms from the surrounding language more and more while Finnish has already for long replaced earlier Swedicisms with Anglicisms.

4. It is clear that an ethnic group has the right to that identity. However, and this indeed is the debate, Your definition (that finlandssvenskar represent an ethnically Swedish population) does not seem to be universally accepted by those, who You define as members of this group NOR does it seem to be universally accepted by the "parental" population you propose, namely the Swedes. It is understandable that You are alarmed by e.g. the Donner case as it is another clear example of the concept of self-identifying: While some of the people designating themselves 'finlandssvenskar' seem to want to see themselves being members of the ethnic group 'Swedes' others reject the concept of 'finlandssveskar' as being anything separate from 'Finns', many probably place themselves somewhere in between. You contradict Yourself in multiple ways by placing Donner outside of finlandssvenskar because of his self-definition.

Best regards, Clarifer (talk) 17:25, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the goodwill.

1) What I meant Swedish having higher prestige in Finland is that it has higher social prestige. Do not pretend otherwise. I even have an academic study about the way finnish-speakers perceives Swedish and finlandssvenskar in Finland. Swedish has a higher social prestige since Finns collectively perceives it that way. Due to this higher prestige we have Finnish posters coming to page related to Finland-Swedes in attempt to illegitize their Swedishness. Due to this prestige Finns get mad when Finland-Swedish want to emphasize their Swedishness, they rarely get mad if Sami express their Saminess. We Finland-Swedes do not go to Finn-pages and try to depict how close you are to us, or do we? This is rather one-sided phenomenon.

2) You´ve understood Donner completely wrong. Probably because you don´t know the details nor cannot read Swedish. Donner is against the particular term "finlandssvensk" because he thinks its a colonial relic and misinforming. The word finlandssvensk is so loaded with ethno-cultural connotation and the Donner feels repulsive about it. He is a rebel. However, in this page we do not discuss whether the term finlandssvensk is appropriate or not, we discuss about a group who perceives themselves as finlandssvenskar. Donner has resigned from this group and do not want referred with this name. He does not see finlandssvenskar as entirely linguistic phenomenon, however we wants to get rid of the whole term "finlandssvensk".

3) What comes to Finland-Swedishness, ofcourse Finland-Swedish are ethnic Swedes. The populations of Ålanders and Swedes in Finland are part of the Swedish culture and products of Swedish civilization. Tore Modeen defines that "Swedish ethnic group" is comprised of Mainland Swedes, Ålanders and Swedes in Finland.

"They (Åland islanders) belong to the Swedish ethnic community, together with the Swedes of Sweden, and the Swedes of Finland of which Åland islanders are a part". (Europa Ethnica, 1999,3-4)

Finland-Swedes make-up their own distinct nationality but they are still part of the broader Swedish ethnic group.

Finland-Swedes could never be cannot be observed outside of Sweden, not even in the modern times (Kari Tarkiainen, "Sveriges Österland" 2008). Every population, nationality has its rebels, today, thanks to bi-ethnic intermarriages many Finnish citizens are developing dual identities, or usually in many cases plain Finnish identities. Due to these intermarriages the whole Finland-Swedish community is being crippled and ultimately vanished away. Then you guys can lift your toests. However, we are not fully there yet.

Thomas Rosenberg: "Det här gäller såväl österbottningar (för att inte tala om ålänningar) som helt tvåspråkiga finlandssvenskar. De förra upplever sig ofta vara svenskar som råkar bo i Finland medan de senare upplever sig vara finnar som råkar tala svenska".Podomi (talk) 18:41, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

I think we can all agree that a Swedish-speaking Finn who consider her/himself as an ethnic Swede is an ethnic Swede (most proper Swedes would presumably agree). None of my Swedish-speaking friends in Helsinki is doing so, but apparently some individuals do. Unfortunately, no one has presented any sources regarding the statistics of self-identification among the Swedish-speakers. As many Swedish-speaking Finns do not consider themselves as ethnic Swedes, any sweeping claim of the ethnicity of the Swedish-speaking group is an intolerable and insensitive generalisation.--91.153.159.82 (talk) 19:20, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

It seems that the finnish-speakers contacts to Finland-Swedes are restricted to members from Helsinki. I have given many sources which indicates that Finland-Swedes feel that their ethnic homeland is Sweden. The fact Ostrobotnians and Åbo Skärgård, not to even mention Åland-islanders, -dwellers refers themselves as "Swedes" should already tell you something, these two folk make already about 65% of Finland-Swedes. Out from the Western Nylanders have traditionally held the idea that Swedes are not divided ny state borders. You can think whatever you wish. The language shift among Finland-Swedes, from Swedish to Finnish is very obvious in Helsinki, and ofcourse it the language which also shifts but the ethnic identity as well. Swedes in Sweden do not have any monopoly for Swedishness but why would they not perceive Finland-Swedes as what they are?

"Svenskarna på andra sidan Bottenhavet", http://www.svd.se/kulturnoje/understrecket/artikel_1892511.svd

What are the Finland-Swedes if not ethnic Swedes? Finland-Swedish are Germanics of Scandinavian/European civilization, how someone could confuse them with Northern Asiatic Uralic folk, such as Finns? It does not make sense to me, these two folk heir from completely different cultural (and racial?) origins.87.95.10.5 (talk) 21:32, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

"What are the Finland-Swedes if not ethnic Swedes?" I find the whole the question rather unimportant. I do not care much about ethnicity, I do not respect people who are fanatical because of it, and I do not think that the Swedish-speakers in Finland need to be ethnic anything. Why should all people have clear and definite ethnicity? Or perhaps some of the Swedish-speakers are an ethnic group by themselves, distinct to both Swedes and Finns. On the other hand, they are absolutely free to identify themselves as Swedes if they wish. No one can deny that.

Regarding the rest of your comment: Please, stop mouthing all that ridiculously stupid nonsense. It makes you look like a village idiot. Your opinions get a loony aura. Whatever the ancient "racial" origins of Uralic languages are (not all researchers locate them in North Asia), there's not much discernable "racial" difference between the Finnish-speakers and Swedish-speakers in current Finland. DNA tests may suggest partly different biological origins of the two linguistic groups, but there is no much sense to discuss this as a "racial difference". "Race" is an old-fashioned and offensive term. Labelling Finns as a North Asian people is nothing but a petty racist fantasy, a desperate (and somewhat sick) attempt to create an impression of a huge gulf between the two linguistic groups in Finland to get support for an extremist view-point. Of course, there is nothing wrong with North Asian origins, but in this case the suggestion is completely absurd and politically motivated.

The cultural origins of Finnish-speakers are mostly the same as the ones of Swedes: Kingdom of Sweden, Lutheran faith, North European culture, Swedish education etc. Even Kalevala has much similarities with Old Norse epic poetry. In other words: am I actually a Finnish-speaking Swede? Well, no, because I do not consider myself so; but my cultural origins lie largely in Sweden and absolutely not in North Asia. We must go to the Neolithic Stone Age to find Finland with predominantly eastern cultural orientation...

But in any case, Podomi's bizarre suggestion of completely different cultural origins has absolutely no basis. Please, read some basics of history.

--128.214.17.121 (talk) 10:14, 5 February 2009 (UTC) (Edited own message)

Chill down, as you said there´s nothing wrong with being North-Asian. However, I must say I disagree with you. I think that Finns cannot be perceived outside of Northern Asian culture. After all linguistics are foundation for the whole culture. Even for a plain eye one recognized lot of similarities between Finns and Siberians, the solemness, shyness and, sorry if this is offensive, the shame-based culture of finns. Some may perceive them as a grose stereotyping, but let say that these characteristics are more typical to Finns than for Scandinavians f.e. Ofcourse Finns have been integrated to the Scandinavian civilization, but the origins of the culture are not from there and this is stil very evident by simple just observing finns. I think even Topelius characterized the character and culture of Finland-Swedes as being very different to those of Finns, eventhough he saw them as part of the same "folk".Podomi (talk) 13:59, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, there's nothing wrong being from South-Asia either as, in analogy, Swedes represent an Indic population currently residing in northern Europe.... But we all know that there's nothing wrong in having an Indo-European language as a mother tongue, its spread is just an unfortunate event for the western Fennoscandians. These northern Indians, as we all know, are notorious for their burlesque nature as well as superficiality and a pseudo-social character. Some may perceive this as a gross stereotyping but let's say these characteristics are more typical to Scandinavians than to Finns. Of course Swedes have been integrated into the Fennoscandian civilization, but the origins of the culture are not from there and this is still very evident by simple observation of the Swedes.

This is how much your comment above makes sense. Clarifer (talk) 15:24, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Hey, Finnish (speaking), sociologist, a legendaric JP Roos has replied to Donner

http://www.magma.fi/lankar/jag-joern-donner-och-finlandssvenskheten

"Där talade han om begreppet finlandssvensk som "ett irrelevant begrepp". I själva verket representerar Donner på många sätt för mig en sådan hurri som vi tyckte illa om i Munksnäs: högljudd, självsäker, fräck och framför allt någon som absolut inte insåg själv att han var en "typisk" överklassfinlandssvensk (samma gäller i mindre utsträckning min nuvarande hustru som trodde att hon inte hade någon finlandsvensk identitet alls). Så det känns extra komiskt när Jörn Donner kommer och påstår att han inte är någon finlandssvensk. Faktiskt behöver han inte den typ av finlandsvenskhet som han representerar (ingen behöver den), men han kan ingenting göra åt det. Det är hans habitus".

"Ett annat typiskt drag hos Donner och de flesta utbildade finlandssvenskar är - det här gällde inte på 30-talet - att de tror att de inte finns någon genetisk och etnisk skillnad mellan finnar och finlandssvenskar. Men det finns numera alldeles säkra forskningsresultat som visar att finnarna skiljer sig markant (i väst- och östfinnar) och att finlandssvenskarna skiljer sig tydligt från västfinnarna. Vad sen dessa genetiska skillnader betyder, är svårt att säga.

Det är dessutom dumt att försöka eliminera en fungerande och reell gruppbeteckning. Det finns över 250 000 finlandssvenskar som upplever sig som sådana. Här utgör den motsträvige Donner bara en liten droppe i havet. Det behövs en beteckning för människor som talar svenska som modersmål i Finland.Podomi (talk) 14:14, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Now, I would like to express my concern again, as Finnic JP Roos asses, there´s a need to have a name for those Finnish citizens who has Swedish as mother-tongue. "Swedish-speaking Finn" is not a good translation for such a name. I agree it has the biggest exposure but should we really lift on pedestal, shouldn´t we think about a bit more neutral expression. Discuss.Podomi (talk) 14:43, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

I must say I disagree with you. I think that Finns cannot be perceived outside of Northern Asian culture. After all linguistics are foundation for the whole culture. Even for a plain eye one recognized lot of similarities between Finns and Siberians, the solemness, shyness and, sorry if this is offensive, the shame-based culture of finns. Some may perceive them as a grose stereotyping, but let say that these characteristics are more typical to Finns than for Scandinavians f.e. Ofcourse Finns have been integrated to the Scandinavian civilization, but the origins of the culture are not from there and this is stil very evident by simple just observing finns.

What Podomi wrote above is a load of staggeringly idiotic nonsense with a slightly insane air on it. Of course, language is not the "foundation of a culture" - the ideas that are expressed with a language are the foundation.

The alleged shyness, solemness and shame-based culture are, as Podomi fairly admits, gross stereotypes. It might be that the stereotypes apply to a degree to Western Finland - i.e. the part of Finland with close historical and cultural relation to Sweden. East Finns have been traditionally considered as extroverted, talkative and pro-social. In Western Finland, it is safe to assume to that the solemn ethos (whose intensity should not be exaggerated anyway) is of recent historical origin, post-Reformation (please read some cultural history). Most certainly it is not a part of imaginary North Asian heritage. And, of course, it is dubious whether there is anything North Asian even in the linguistic origins of Finns. I must say thatt if Podomi's racist and xenophobic fervour were not so readily apparent, I would be very amused by his goofy ideas. But it is really a shame that Podomi's understanding of history is so completely nonsensical. Of course, the bare historical facts would not support his hate-tinged attempts to posit a huge mental, cultural and even racial gulf between the two major linguistic groups in Finland. Unfortunately, Podomi's extremistic agenda strongly suggests that he represents some minor fringe element among the Swedish-speakers and not any widely held opinion.--88.112.130.46 (talk) 10:26, 6 February 2009 (UTC) PS I actually have read some North Asian ethnography; and while I am fascinated by the topic, I just don't think that animistic world-view, shamanism and deer-hunting are parts of my cultural origins.

Actually lot of the ideas I expressed was from the British cultural antropologist. He is soon about to come up with a book called 'The Finnuit: Finnish Culture and the Religion of Uniqueness' in which he compared the Finnish shame-based culture with Japanese and Eskimo cultures. The idea the linguistics are the foundation to culture are ofcourse generally held consencus view among linguisticans and sociologists. North-Asians has been traditionally labelled as inferior and thus Finns want to escape from this "stigma", however, atleast I could never perceive Fenno-Ugrian speaking Finns outside the framework of Siberian Fenno-Ugrians. I think the solemness is mostly associated with Häme-Finns whom the Topelius characterized as "true Finns".

Anyway, about title of this page, I just browsed the english-speaking section of the biggest cultural NGO in Finland (Svenska litteratursällskapet i Finland) they use the term "Finland-Swedish literature, not Swedish-speaking Finnish literature.

"The Society of Swedish Literature in Finland is a scientific organisation that preserves, develops and mediates the Swedish cultural heritage in Finland".

"The Society is a versatile and future-oriented cultural institution of Finland-Swedish literature, culture and research".

My question once more, is it appropriate that we have the current title? I agree it has the biggest exposure, but the term is not neutral and should not be raised on pedestal. The Finland-Swedish political NGO´s uses the term "Finland-Swede" and even the biggest political NGO uses the expression "Finland-Swede". These issue should also reflect in the title name.Podomi (talk) 11:00, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Do we have consensus for "Swedish-speaking population in Finland" as the new title?Podomi (talk) 11:05, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, you cannot perceive me tapping a keyboard, visiting Stockholm, listening to reggae, teaching in the university and reading Strindberg outside a Siberian framework, do you? Don't you realize how insane that sounds? Well, I became curious of that British antropologist. I believe that there is a fair chance that his book can be jugded as crap, but we will see: perhaps he has an argument after all. So far, I tend to accept that the present-day stereotypes with some slight basis in reality are products of early modern history with no ancient roots. Curiously, I haven't read a sociologists' study that would posit the language as the foundation of a culture. I don't believe it is so generally accepted view in sociology as you claim. Culture is mostly non-verbal, non-discursive practice, so I think it is extremely silly to collapse a culture into a language. I withdraw myself from this nutcase debate.

The "Swedish-speaking population in Finland" in a bit problematic in the sense that Finland has some Swedish-speakers who are not traditionally considered as finlandssvenskar (immigrants from Sweden etc.). As the finlanddsvenskar is the endonyme of the minority in question and foreign ethnonymes are sometimes used in English, I ask if this article could be titled as Finlandssvenskar.--88.112.130.46 (talk) 12:31, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Well we shouldn´t be too anxious about other Swedish-speakers, as I have come to understand, this is a site about those who identify themseves with the term "finlandssvensk". The Swedish-speaking population is actually used quite much, by Svenska kulturfonden as well. But ofcourse "finlandssvenskar" would be the most neutral. I support that too. How about others?

I think you have little non-updated view of North-Asians. Why would a North-Asian could not sitt on Strindberg and fiddle his laptop. BTW the British antropologist asses then everything which is to be discussed about the character of Finns which doesn´t fit in the national myth, is likely to be perceived as vulgar generalization by behalf of Finns, http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2008/sep/23/finland.school.shooting.commentPodomi (talk) 13:36, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, you just don't get it. What does North Asian really mean? I do not believe in "grand traditions". I really do think that whole idea of millennia-long North Asian strain in the Finnish culture is ridiculous. Maybe the Uralic-speakers 3000 years ago shared a thing or two with rest of the Eurasian hunter-gatherers, but nowadays the Finnish culture has been defined and constituted by the Lutheran heritage, early modern North European culture, nationalism, secularization, industrialization, post-industrialization etc. The idea of some native North Asian cultural heritage lasting through the millennia through all socio-cultural upheavals is starry-eyed mystical romanticism. In other words, I think that you understand next to nothing of the present-day Finnish culture if you perceive it in some half-baked North Asian framework. But we should not discuss this here. All this nonsense about Asiatic Finns has nothing to do with the title of this article or with the definitions of the finlandssvenskar; the whole topic should not have come up here in the first place. Shall we end it here? Ppost your final comment if you must and let's stop this babble for good.--88.112.130.46 (talk) 14:07, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Heh. "Nowadays", as if there ever was a special connection between Finns and these "North-Asians". I wonder why Podomi doesn't emphasize quite as much the connection between the Swedish language (Gosh I cannot even force myself to say "the Swedes") and Indic languages (otherwise known as "South-Asians"?). ;) Clarifer (talk) 18:06, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

No final words. Let´s discuss the name! As presented "Swedish-speaking Finn" has arguably the biggest exposure, but it´s not fully neutral. Thus, the question should we really have it on pedastal above all the other suggestions. I partly concerned the lack of usage of the term among Finland-Swedish NGO´s (Finland-Swedish Think-Thank Magma, Finland-Swedish association, Swedish literature club in Finland..etc)Podomi (talk) 16:07, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Podomi dear, this discussion has gone on for over a month. You should have seen by now that you do not have a consensus for a page move. Why on earth should we continue this pointless discussion? You have not brought in any new arguments for weeks. Go ahead and make a move request. It won't succeed, but after it, you should not have any point in continuing this discussion. --MPorciusCato (talk) 17:33, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

What an earth are you babblling? We just have two posters, in addition to me, who has proposed "Swedish-speaking population in Finland" or "finlandssvenskar" as the title. Did you read anything I just wrote, I was being nice and made some changes to the page, you on the other hand continue to be the stubborn jackass you´ve been thoroughout the discussion. Tell me, is wikipedia´s quest to be a neutral encyclopedia? The term "Swedish-speaking Finn" is not a neutral, and no finlandssvenska NGO uses it, nor does it have a monopoly even though it arguedly has the biggest exposure. People here start to realize that eventhough they may not like me.Podomi (talk) 18:59, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

"No finlandssvenska NGO uses it", says Podomi. However, one needs to go no further than the English-language version of the website of the Swedish Assembly of Finland, which can be found at [27] to realise that Podomi's allegation is simply not true. The SAF, which is by far the most representative organisation of the Swedish-speaking population in Finland, uses systematically the term "Swedish-speaking Finns". Besides, if Podomi's English were just a little better, he'd certainly realise that "Finland-Swedes", quite simply, sounds like bad English. And that's what it is: a more or less clumsy attempt to force the syntax of another language (in this case, Swedish) on English. One doesn't need to be a native speaker of English in order to contribute, but at the very least one should respect the syntax of the English language. Another thing: Podomi's use of invective, such as "stubborn jackass". That kind of behaviour is definitely not accepted here and amounts essentially to testing (especially combined with the far more aggravating fact that he keeps spreading disinformation, as in the case of the SAF), just how far he can stretch the patience of the Wikipedia community. Podomi's disruptive behaviour cannot be tolerated forever. Some kind of sanctions are most obviously called for in his case.Monegasque (talk) 15:09, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for fact-finding, Monegasque. However, I think Podomi does not consider Folktinget to be an NGO, but an arm of the Finnish government. In fact, he has some basis for this: there is a separate Act of Parliament chartering Folktinget and giving it complete autonomy and a fixed support from the state budget, without any strings attached. Thus, Folktinget has state support. In Podomi's world, this means that Folktinget is a puppet of the Finnish (Finnish-speaking) state. --MPorciusCato (talk) 17:13, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

To my knowledge, he's never said as much, but in view of his other statements (which are definitely not mainstream among Swedish-speaking Finns, who tend to be quite liberal), it's quite possible that he thinks that way. However, the Folktinget is the democratic, representative organ elected by the Swedish-speaking population of Finland in connection with the municipal elections. The last time I checked, Finland was a democracy, not a dictatorship. Moreover, as you say, the state funding comes with no strings attached. If Podomi really does regard the Folktinget as some kind of a "puppet" organ, he's ever more of an extremist than I thought. By the way, I checked out the English version of the website of the Swedish People's Party [28] (which gets about 75% of the votes of the Swedish-speaking population in Finland) and, sure enough, as in the case of the SAF (Folktinget), the term it uses is "Swedish-speaking Finns". Most obviously, the use of the term "Finland-Swedes" (in English) is only a fringe phenomenon among the linguistic group itself, mostly restricted to those for whom the Swedish People's Party is far too moderate, too patriotic (in the Finnish/Finländsk sense of the word) and generally too loyal to the Finnish state. There's no way Podomi can possibly ignore all this. This means that he has quite consciously been distorting facts well known to him. I do not need to add that this is a gross violation of the most elementary rules of Wikipedia. Moreover, if one has some knowledge of German and Scandinavian history, it's very easy to recognise, based on many of Podomi's remarks above, the particular POV he's been trying to push: it is, quite simply, the traditional (although, after 1945, officially more or less banned in Germany and rejected by modern Scandinavian public opinion) pangermanic ethnic nationalism of the völkisch, Blut und Boden type. The fact that Podomi uses Carl O. Nordling, a well-known holocaust denier, as a supposedly "authoritative" source fits the picture perfectly. It's painfully obvious which source Podomi's ideological bias comes from. Wikipedia, however, is not supposed to be a forum for völkisch propaganda for Podomi and his "Gesinnungsgenossen". The activities of people of that kind need to be closely monitored. And, when the need arises, the Wikipedia community will need to take action. Even people of Podomi's (to put it very politely) highly "unorthodox" persuasion are entitled to their views, but they should definitely not be given the right to push their POV as a supposedly objective truth. Monegasque (talk) 19:02, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

1) Folktinghet is not an NGO. Folktinget is not non-affiliated of the (Finnish) goverment. Finlandssvenska political NGO´s are Finland-Swedish Association, Finland-Swedish Think-Thank. The we have cultural NGO´s as Swedish literature club in Finland (litteratursällskapet). No of these organizations uses "Swedish-speaking Finns".

"The Swedish Assembly, set up in order to keep surveillance of the Finland-Swedes’ rights, is often regarded as an official representative of Finland-Swedish society.However, as a not directly elected fully state-financed organ, it cannot be considered to represent the real interests of the minority or to constitute an NGO. In fact, by way of introduction, the Swedish Assembly did not even wish the Finland-Swedes to be considered as a national minority of Finland and still today there is no information on international law concerning Finland-Swedes available on the Assembly’s web page (www.folktinget.fi). According the last report by the Advisory Committee, para. 16, the Swedish assembly of Finland considered the Finland-Swedes not to constitute a national minority. This point of view was not shared by the majority of the Finland-Swedes. On the contrary, many Finland-Swedes support the idea of international minority protection and find it important, despite and because of the national linguistic legislation. The reason for this is that national legislation from a Finland-Swedish perspective has become a paper dragon, not operating in real life. An example of this is the Language Act anno 2004, which does not render economic sanctions possible upon neglect, nor constitutes a possibility to report potential incongruities to a Linguistic Ombudsman. Many Finland-Swedes believe that an international minority perspective may contribute to international surveillance and protection, to further emphasize national linguistic legislation and develop successful minority strategies, adapted to the real life situation of the Finland-Swedes. It is also important to keep in mind" (Finland-Swedish association, shadow report)

2)We all know what the Finns have to say on the topic, "Swedish-speaking Finns is used by Folktinget and SFP", but the fact is that this wording is not used by finlandssvenska non-goverment affiliated organizations. We cannnot give state affiliated political organs any monopoly over the term. Whether "Finland-Swedes" is bad english or not is irrevalant, it may be the only term which can use to express Finland-Swedish culture or Finland-Swedishness (an english expression the biggest Finland-Swedish cultural NGO uses) Or does someone thinks that expression such as "Swedish-speaking Finnishness" is appropriate? Moreover, the term Finland-Swede is being used by native english-speaking academics.

3) I wonder how many times do I have to heard ridiculous arguments such as ("podomis view is not supported by mainstream Finland-Swedes) Has anyone ever bothered to dig in what Finland-Swedes think about in non-govermental sponsored publications?

"Den finlandssvenska självbilden" (2008, University of Lund)

"Artiklarna som studerats ger vid handen att finlandssvenskarna som grupp upplever sig som hotad, och att detta accentuerats under senare tid. Gruppen som sådan minskar ständigt i antal, nu är finlandssvenskarna för första gången på etthundra år, färre än 300 000 invånare. Under normala förhållanden borde antalet svenskspråkiga under de senaste etthundra åren ha varit betydligt större.

Emigration och förfinskning får siffran att konstant dala. Kanske är denna ständigt dalande siffra ett uttryck för att finlandssvenskarna i landet inte trivs i Finland och upplever sig som en i vissa avseenden förtryckt minoritet. Om finlandssvenskarna upplevde, att man fritt och obehindrat kunde tala svenska i landet, och agera utifrån sådana förutsättningar, skulle antalet finlandssvenskar inte ständigt minska. I en av texterna som är från 90-talet talas det om att svenskan mer och mer intar numera en mer ceremoniell funktion i huvudstaden. Finlandssvenskar talar finska i allt större utsträckning i Helsingfors, och det som en gång i tiden var en helt svenskspråkig stad, är snart en helt finskspråkig stad.

Den dominerande finska inställningen till det svenska och överhuvudtaget allt icke finskt, kan uppfattas som stundtals närmast militant intolerant. Landet för en allmänt restriktiv invandrarpolitik. Att den så kallade äktfinska rörelsen upplever detta som positivt må vara hänt, men detta kan ha haft viss betydelse rent samhällsekonomiskt".

Den finlandssvenska gruppen upplever sig som en klart hotad grupp i landet. Det verkar som om vissa finskspråkigas inställning är, att språkkonflikten i Finland, är löst först då den svenskspråkiga gruppen i landet försvunnit helt och hållet, eller åtminstone får bli kvar som en sorts antikvarisk relik i utkanten av det finländska samhället".

4)"It's painfully obvious which source Podomi's ideological bias comes from. Wikipedia, however, is not supposed to be a forum for völkisch propaganda for Podomi and his "Gesinnungsgenossen".

So basically you are arguing that emphasizing the ethnic peculiarity of Finland-Swedes, a 5% minority, is violation against Finns and racist per se? Your absurd statements tells more about the level of your self-confidence than me I am afraid. It is never a crime or offense to speak in favor of Swedish nationality in Finland, its cultural peculiarity which exceeds the language. It is never racist for ethnic minorities to express their distinct ethnicity, this applies to Samis, Swedes, and Romas in Finland.

5)No matter how we twist this, or no matter how unappealing my views are to you, the thing that the title of the page "Swedish-speaking Finns" is against the neutrality principle of Wikipedia. Who are "Swedish-speaking Finns"? Are the Finns who migrated to Sweden in 60´s? Are the cultural group who practise "Swedish-speaking Finnishness?". Why don´t we have "Swedish Finns". Do we need to restrict finlandssvenskhet entirely as a linguistic phenomenon and forget all the ethno-cultural connotations the original expression finlandssvenskhet has for Finns and for Finland-Swedes. Please discuss.Podomi (talk) 13:40, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Could you write a little bit more concisely? Your ranting is difficult to follow. The only new thng you've taken up is: The reason for this is that national legislation from a Finland-Swedish perspective has become a paper dragon, not operating in real life. An example of this is the Language Act anno 2004, which does not render economic sanctions possible upon neglect, nor constitutes a possibility to report potential incongruities to a Linguistic Ombudsman. Many Finland-Swedes believe -- This has no relation to the name of this article, although for you, it seems a major point. (In fact, you can report any incongruities to the Parliamentary Ombudsman or to the Chancellor of Justice, who may start criminal proceedings against the erring authority if they deem fit.) It seems that you have a very solid idea of using this article to further the agenda of Finlandssvensk samling, which strives for the agenda of making finlandssvenskar a minority ethnic group, while at the moment, their language enjoys equal protections with Finnish. The organizations you try to paint as puppets are completely independent and do not have any state controls. They do receive money from the government, but it comes by law, with no strings attached. For the views opposing the clear mainstream of finlandssvensk thought, you do not give any numbers, only random quotes. "Many Finland-Swedes": How many? What organizations? What membership numbers? --MPorciusCato (talk) 15:33, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

That was report from Finland-Swedish Association, an NGO, not my personal view.

Anyway, I cannnot but wonder how senstitive article this. It even turns wikipedists held in prestige as complete child.

It should be clear we cannot have unreferenced self-manifestation in a neutral encyclopedia. The one who wrote this makes lot of naive and a bit offensive implicit statements. As if anyone who who questions the chauvinistic 19th century "one folk, one fuhrer" ideology belongs to some extreme ethnocnationalistic fringe group. This is not the view held by mainstream Finns or let alone Finland-Swedes. It should be clear we cannot go on this level in wikipedia. Lets not worsen our neutral article with individual rants. Referring Finland-Swedes as Swedes is not derogatary by mainstream Finns, its everyday life in most of Svenskfinland ( Osterbotten, Åbo archipelago, Åland islands, Western Nyland)

Among the Finnish-speaking majority, it is usually considered less polite and somewhat derogatory to refer to Swedish-speakers as "Swedes", as this expression is mostly by people belonging to ethnonationalistic fringe groups who would like to abolish the co-official status of the Swedish language and who want to emphasise the "foreign" origins of the language group. Thus, ethnicity tends to be emphasised by radical ethnonationalists among both language groups, while language as such is emphasised by the liberal mainstream among both Finnish- and Swedish-speakers and, for quite natural reasons, by the relatively large and rapidly growing group having a bilingual identity.Podomi (talk) 15:41, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Marcus Pontus where on earth have you received such a biased view of Finland-Swedes?

The ethnic territory priciple is supported by the bulk of Finland-Swedes, if non-goverment affiliated Finland-Swedish Think-Thank is to believed.http://www.magma.fi/ideer/ But I guess Magma.fi is extreme to you since after all the chief of the Think-Thank, Professor Forsgård, himself just addressed on saturdays HBL that Finland-Swedes should not just talk about the language but emphasize the Finland-Swedish culture heritage (finlandssvenska kulturarv).

Moreover, you trying to portray Finland-Swedish association as some kind of fringe group is funny, considering that the debuty "CEO" of the Swedish Poeples party himself sits on high seat on the particular NGO.

"Territorialprincipen! Det finns idag bland många finlandssvenskar en stark oro över hur svenskan ska kunna överleva i landet – en oro som även president Tarja Halonen nyligen sagt sig dela.Professorn i offentlig rätt, Markku Suksi, bekräftade häromdagen i en kolumn i Vbl, att grundlagsreformen för tio år sedan – som förändrade den föregående regeringsformens 50 paragraf – resulterade i en försämring av språkskyddet mot svenskan i Finland därför att den så kallade territorialprincipen inte blev inskriven i den nya grundlagens 122 paragraf (om den administrativa indelningen).Magma borde (tillsammans med andra parter) utreda vilka möjligheter det finns, att i den grundlagsreform som nu är på gång, igen skriva in territorialprincipen i grundlagens 122 paragraf – en förändring som onekligen kunde bidra till att stärka svenskans ställning och överlevnad i Finland." Podomi (talk) 15:54, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Is it impolite to say ruotsalainen instead of ruotsinkielinen?

It seems that Podomi disagrees with Monecasque and I about the Finnish-language usage of ruotsalainen, suomenruotsalainen and ruotsinkielinen. He considers it a joke to say that it is not standard Finnish usage to use ruotsalainen for things pertaining to finlandssvenskhet. Indeed, it is difficult to find a quote for this. The reason is that the usage of ruotsalainen is very clear to Finnish-speakers. In the meaning of finlandssvensk it is used almost solely by exteme right-wing of the Finnish-speaking population, which can be seen by a simple google search. All official and careful private writing uses ruotsinkielinen (Swedish-speaking) instead of ruotsalainen. Form ruotsalainen is used in careful writing only when discussing the early 20th century svekomani which considered Swedish-speakers to be ethnic Swedes. (As in [29].) I would like to ask Podomi how we could write this rather simple and well-known fact into the article without devolving into an edit war. --MPorciusCato (talk) 16:27, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Podomis response. The Ostrobotnian Swedes by far refers themselves as bluntly "svenskar", the Finnish Ostrobotnians refer Ostrobotnian Swedes as "ruotsalaiset", the southern Finland-Swedes prefer the expression finlandssvensk an I guess this is reciprocative. And finlandssvensk is far from being neutral expression depicting simply linguistics. And yes, I have a reference of this from Finland-Swedish sociologist Rosenberg, I also have Höckerstedts study in regards the way finns perceive finlandssvenskar and what things they associate with "Swedish-speaking Finns". Let say that not a single respondent replied "Swedish language". Moreover, I hold the view of the late professor Tore Modeen.

"The concept of nation has a different significance as meaning of a population group or an ethnic community, irrespectively of its organization. ( I prefer to use the concept of nationality in this connection).For instance, the Swedes of Finland, with their distinctive language and culture form a nationality which under the Finnish constitution shall enjoy equal rights with the Finnish nationality".

"In Finland this question (Swedish nationality) has been subjected to much discussion.The Finnish majority tries to deny the existence of a Swedish nationality. An example of this is the fact that the statutes always use the concept "Swedish-speaking" instead of Swedish".

Tore Modeen,The cultural rights of the Swedish ethnic group in Finland (Europa Ethnica, 3-4 1999, pp. 56)

MPontus your assesment on the usage of "Ethnic Swedes" is bit misleading, we still have plenty of academic studies about "Swedes in Finland" or "Swedish ethnic group in Finland". What exactly are the Finland-Swedes if not Ethnic Swedes? Ethnic Finns? Have you ever seen Finland-Swedish delegacy participating in the congress of Fenno-Ugrian people?

"They (Åland islanders) belong to the Swedish ethnic community, together with the Swedes of Sweden, and the Swedes of Finland of which Åland islanders are a part". (Europa Ethnica 1999, 3-4)

Referring Swedes in Finland as simple swedish-speaking is controversial if anything. Anyway, I am bit puzzled the way you we pay emphasis on these issue, the should focus outselves in finding more neutral title for the article, I am afraid the english expression "Swedish-speaking Finn" does pretty bad job in describing finlandssvenskhet or finlandssvenskar.

Det här gäller såväl österbottningar. De förra upplever sig ofta vara svenskar som råkar bo i Finland". (Rosenberg)

”Idén att svenskarna inte delas av statsgränsen var vanligt förr och det är fortfarande i svenskbygden med nära kontakt till Sverige.” (Höckerstedt)Podomi (talk) 17:09, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Dear Podomi, do not respond so angrily. I did not comment on the name of this article, but on a separate issue, where you have been also edit-warring: the usage in Finnish language. It is an undeniable fact that official, academic and standard Finnish always uses ruotsinkielinen (Swedish-speaking), suomenruotsalainen (finlandssvensk), never ruotsalainen. The Swedish usage (svensk) is totally irrelevant to the Finnish one, as the word svensk has two meanings in Swedish language: Swedish-speaking and Swedish by nationality. On the contrary, modern standard Finnish never uses ruotsalainen when referring to finlandssvensk, as the word almost always convays the meaning "Swedish by nationality". This has nothing to do with the name of this article, but I think it might merit mentioning in the article.

Finnish has borrowed quite a lot of lexical features from Swedish. For example, archaic and dialectal speech may use word ruotsalainen as used in Swedish. However, this is not a feature of standard Finnish language. When you make a Google search using "ruotsalainen ruotsinkielinen", the first hits are all discussion boards with extremist content. On the other hand, ruotsinkielinen is used by all main stream writing. You and Tore Modeen may think this is a feature of Finnish chauvinism, but even if it were Finnish chauvinism, it would merit mention in the article. Deleting content which does not suit you is inappropriate. --MPorciusCato (talk) 18:01, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

You should be interested in the english meaning of the word Swedish? This is not Finnish wiki.

Anyway, these citats are very clear. "De förra upplever sig ofta vara svenskar som råkar bo i Finland" "Idén att svenskarna inte delas av statsgränsen var vanligt förr och det är fortfarande i svenskbygden med nära kontakt till Sverige". The word "svenskar" in this context has obviously connotation which ecxeeds the language? This is an undeniable fact.

The Finnish linguistics and the hidden meaning of the Finnish words obviously has nothing to with Finland-Swedish article because Finland-Swedes are not Finnish-speaking and this page is not Finnish-speaking. So please skip the trollingPodomi (talk) 20:16, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

As said, the debate about semantic construction of Finnish words should not be used in the identity of Finland-Swedes section, especially when they come in a form of unreferenced self-manifesation. Anyway, we could have seperate sub-chapter of the way Finns perceive Finland-Swedes. I have academic sources which address how sensitive the Swedishness of Finland-Swedes is to Finns, and how Finns ranked Finland-Swedes at the top bottom of all European ethnicities (McRae). Ofcourse the denial of Swedish nationality also relates to Finnish perception (Europa Ethnica, 1999)Podomi (talk) 10:19, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Montesque you did a nice job, and you had references. However, I pinpointed that the view was from Tarkiainen. Based on church records we know from the fact that Swedish-speaking population has been overwhelmingly endogamous. What has happened before the church records is speculation~s. The modern DNA analysis will eventually show how close Tarkiainen was with his estimations. Moreover, Tarkiainen has based his estimations on one Finnish study from the 70´s. a Blood group study which is no longer used in population genetics due to their inherenet inaccuracy. In case Tarkiainen would have bothered to look further for internation studies, which has implied "significant and considerable" differences between the two ethnicities in Finland, his verdict might have been slightly different.Podomi (talk) 11:23, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

And Montesque what comes to your speculation of genes of West-Finns. We dont´t know, yet. We know the Swedes from Ostrobotnia cluster with Mainland Swedes. The West-Finns do not cluster with mainland Swedes but form the own cluster as do the Eastern Finns.Podomi (talk) 11:37, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Moreover, your text excude elitism, why would we need to address peasant and other estates. We talk about a folk, Swedish folk in Finland, and that folk is comprised of 90-95% of peasants. Peasants are the populationPodomi (talk) 11:42, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

That statement has no logical validity. I certainly don't dispute the fact that the vast majority of the Swedish-speaking population consisted of peasants. This is indeed so evident that even stating it is a truism. But even so, it is simply not acceptable to state peasantry = population, because this means forgetting the nobility, the clergy and the burghers. All of these other estates, as we know, included very large proportions of families of non-Swedish descent and it would be absurd to imply, even implicitly (that is, talking about the prevalent endogamy of the peasantry as supposedly a characteristic of the whole population) that peasant endogamy applied to them as well. This has nothing to do with elitism. On the contrary, it has very much to do with historical accuracy. On Wikipedia, we should at least make an effort to express ourselves as accurately as possible. Monegasque (talk) 21:07, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Concern for unreferenced material

1) I express my concern for the increasing amount of unreferenced material on this site. It looks like this site has been subjected to hijack by inviduals with no interest in preserving Wikipedia´s neutrality.

2) I cannnot take the sole responsibility of the correcting this site from nationalistic propaganda. So far I´ve been very nice and removed lot of academic material not so pleasant for Finns. Incase this kind of ethic nihilism continues in this and we starting to witness more of claims without any reference or whatsoever, I am forced to open a new sub-section in the site "The way Finns perceive Finland-Swedes" in which we will direct all the junk material including my real references of the Finnish perpection and the high sensitiveness and taboo-laden topic of Finland-Swedes in Finnish society. The reader of this site must understand the difference between neutreal content and the content which Finns would hope to put Finland-Swedes.

3) There seems to some kind of perverse ideology prevailing among Fenno-nationalist to whom the emphasis on the ethnic identity of Finland-Swedes would be "racist", "politically incorrect" and something the mainstream won´t tolerate. As if the identity of 5% minority would be offensive to Finns.

"Den finlandssvenska självbilden" (2008, university of Lund)

"Den dominerande finska inställningen till det svenska och överhuvudtaget allt icke finskt, kan uppfattas som stundtals närmast militant intolerant. Landet för en allmänt restriktiv invandrarpolitik. Att den så kallade äktfinska rörelsen upplever detta som positivt må vara hänt, men detta kan ha haft viss betydelse rent samhällsekonomiskt".

"Finlandssvenskarna är ingen klass utan ett folk. Att vara den man är, är en existentiell rättighet".- Gösta Ågren

4) @Monegasque, no the intermarriages between the two ethnicities are far from outnumbering the unilingual marriages, which in most of Svenkfinland (Österbotten, Åland, Åbolands archepelago) are rare.

The principle of wikipedia is that everything must be verifiable to the reader. Finland-Swedishness is senstitive issue in Finland, we cannot tolarate any unreferenced speculation in this site anymore.

"McRae distinguishes a gap in Finland between the formal ´linguistic peace´ and the practical ´linguistic instability´ which put the Finland-Swedes in a ´sosiological, psychological and political´ minority position. Consistent with this, Allardt(2000:35) claims that the most serious contemporary problem for the Finland Swedes is the members of the group themselves: their ´submissiviness´and willingness to ´conceal their Finland-Swedishness´ in the face of the majority. Furthermore, the Finland-Swedes relations to Sweden are considered a sensitive issue in Finland. Höckerstedt (2000:8-9) argues that an emphasis on the ´Swedish´part of the Finland-Swedish identity is ´taboo-laden´ and regarded as unpatriotic".

Hedberg, C. 2004.The Finland-Swedissh wheel of migration.

Hopefully everyone is willing to play by the rules.Podomi (talk) 13:45, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

As if the identity of 5% minority would be offensive to Finns. Please stop writing that kind of garbage. Your hostile stereotypes and generalisations of Finnish-speakers are the offensive thing here. "Culturally inferior Finns are doing this and Finns are doing that."--130.234.5.138 (talk) 10:17, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Quite a number of IP edits

An "interesting" phenomenon on this page is the increasing number of anonymous IP edits lately... Monegasque (talk) 16:02, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

I have filed a sockpuppet investigation on Podomi. Feel free to add comments. --MPorciusCato (talk) 17:06, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Ahem. A 'mass migration' is something different from "a massive migration"... might this be the problem in one of the paragraphs? Clarifer (talk) 16:36, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

If you want to replace "massive" by some other qualifier which you find more objective (or no qualifier at all), I won't object. Monegasque (talk) 17:02, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

No mention of the absolute numbers of the people in the quote (as no-one knows). Therefore, I removed any mention of quantities. The quote only suggests that there may have been more men than women among the early settlers. Clarifer (talk) 19:03, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

That's fine with me. Monegasque (talk) 19:53, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

It happens often that forget to log in. Not because of purpose attempt to hide myself. I have always strong academic sources to back my claims, so there´s no need for external support. No need for investigation, most of the stuff which does not fit the fennonationalist view and which are attempts to increase the neutrality of the article is most likely from me. BTW I made the history introduction more neutral. As there were interest to introduce any Swedish studies supporting the continuation theory, there´s very little reason to stick to the old version. Wikipedia should not be used presenting romantic Fennonationalistic views as the sole truth. The reader must be aware of the broader context and the ideological motives of the researcher. And for fennos I recommend recent studies on the spread of Uralic languages to North Europe. You can start f.e from a study by Finnish Juha Janhunen, ( När kom Finnarna till Finland, 2005) and yes there are loads place names with pre-historical germanic etymology.Podomi (talk) 17:23, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Early Germanic place names in Finland have absolutely nothing to do with today's Finland-Swedes. In fact, the only ones that can even remotely claim a continuum of heritage to those place names are the current Finnish-speakers in the areas of Satakunta and Kalanti. Clarifer (talk) 19:05, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

If anyone should wonder: Clarifer is making a reference to the many waves of Germanic immigrants who were gradually assimilated by the West Finnish tribes over a long period before Finland became a part of Sweden. Monegasque (talk) 19:43, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

All of your assesments are valid, nevertheless in the old version the reader got an impression that the non-existance of the continuity theory a fact. I have been taught that a fact is only a fact when it is unamiously perceived as such in a scientific community. This is still by far an issue in which we don´t have facts. There are very recent Swedish studies which indicates Germanic continuity in Österbotten. Obviously all Finnish-speaking scholars turned the view down. However, less and less scholars are holding the view that Finns have been in Finland for 9000 years, as the reknown study, financed by the Finnish minister of internal affairs suggested in the 70´s. Moreoever, I have source or I had source on contemporary Finnish historian, a professor in university of Turku, who supports partial continuity theory, he addresses that there were Swedish-spealers in SW Finland as late as 700AD before the bulk of them finnicized. The only fact seems to be that the overwhelming majority of contemporary Finland-Swedes are result of the recent, middle aged population movement, however my own personal view is that some of Northern Germanic dialects spoken in Finland are so archaich (Närpes, f.e) that they have turned to somewhat comprehensible Swedish only after they´ve been exposed to modern Swedish colonialistsPodomi (talk) 20:25, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

There are very recent Swedish studies which indicates Germanic continuity in Österbotten. Curiously, these "recent" studies (bulk of them dates back to the early 90's) have been criticized by several Swedish-speaking historians, linguists and archaeologists in Finland...Why? Well, simply because it involved a lot of substandard argumentation and generally crappy research with nationalistic overtones.--130.234.5.138 (talk) 09:53, 13 February 2009 (UTC)Edit However, less and less scholars are holding the view that Finns have been in Finland for 9000 years. Actually, this is quite right. Personally I think that it is nonsense to even speak of ethnic Finns or ethnic Finland-Swedes before the late 19th century. They were not ethnic anything until they developed group identities inspired by nationalism.--130.234.5.138 (talk) 10:12, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I quite agree. Moreover, I'd like to add that Podomi's brand of militant racial nationalism is rejected by the vast majority of Swedish-speakers, for whom people like Podomi are nothing but an embarrassment. It is strictly a lunatic fringe phenomenon. Such extremistic POV-pushing should not be permitted on Wikipedia. Podomi has repeatedly broken against quite a number of Wikipedia rules. Apparently he thinks that the patience of the Wikipedia community will last forever. Monegasque (talk) 10:40, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Tears, boys, my heart is broken. It wasn´t long time ago when MPontusCato, followed by an edit war, let me know that it is not irrelevant whether I am right or wrong, he continued to emphasize that wikipedia is not for the sake of truth. An argument I´ve constantly hear from Finns while bringing academic sources to the debate. Now that I have brought an impartial, third party Canadian source regarding the continuity theory, I am being accused of bias. Howcome?

Speaking of militant racial nationalism, I think I have heard about it.

Den finlandssvenska självbilden (2008, university of lund)

"Den dominerande finska inställningen till det svenska och överhuvudtaget allt icke finskt, kan uppfattas som stundtals närmast militant intolerant. Landet för en allmänt restriktiv invandrarpolitik. Att den så kallade äktfinska rörelsen upplever detta som positivt må vara hänt, men detta kan ha haft viss betydelse rent samhällsekonomiskt".

Curiously, these "recent" studies (bulk of them dates back to the early 90's) have been criticized by several Swedish-speaking historians, linguists and archaeologists in Finland...Why? Well, simply because it involved a lot of substandard argumentation and generally crappy research with nationalistic overtones.

British cultural anthropologist, Phd and a lecturer at a Finnish university, Edward Dutton (2008) has addressed the collective sentiments of Finnish scientific communnity, ironically his analysis fits to you very accurately.

"Battling to be 'European': myth and the finnish race debate"

"Finns (Correct) v Foreigners (Incorrect)

This distinction is related to the above point. In general, Finnish scholars are drawn upon as ‘authorities’ while foreign scholars – whose racial ideas are disagreeable – are heavily critiqued. There thus appears to be a very basic Finnish patriotism here. Anttonen (2005, 125) remarks that Finland is a strongly consensus-based society which sees itself as being very united. He argues that Finns generally dislike outsiders to a greater extent than other European nations. It is thus, he argues, a highly patriotic society and this aspect of the myth may reflect that".

My views are more liberal as opposed to what is mainstream for a Finland-Swedes, thus I never have any problems in validating my claims. Anyway, after seeing so much of Finnish culture chauvinism and arrogance applied towards small national minorities, I am starting to consider hiring bigger guns.Podomi (talk) 11:22, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

"Liberal"? Yes, and the earth is flat. Podomi's thoughts can only be called "liberal" if we can include such thinkers as Arthur de Gobineau and Houston Stewart Chamberlain in his own particular brand of so-called "liberalism". Compared to Podomi's thinking, a party like for instance Sverigedemokraterna appears actually quite liberal. Moreover, I'm a Swedish-speaking Finn myself, so it's no wonder I greatly resent the way he's trying to portray this population group. Objectively speaking, he's working as an agent provocateur for the extremists of Suomalaisuuden Liitto. As a matter of fact, by now I'm actually convinced that he's doing that quite conciously. His thoughts and language correspond exactly to the negative stereotype about Swedish-speaking Finns that the extremist fringe among Finnish-speakers is trying to spread. And in the way he uses the English language there are some very interesting mistakes. For example, in a passage above he speaks of Swedish "colonialists" when what he means is "colonists" (that is, the several waves of Swedish people who settled in Western Finland during the Middle Ages). It so happens that these two words in Swedish are almost identical with the corresponding English words: "kolonist" and "kolonialist". What's really interesting about Podomi's choice of words is this: no person whose first language is Swedish and who has at least a secondary-school education would mix the words "kolonist" and "kolonialist". However, a person whose first language is, for instance, Finnish could well mix these two, as the Finnish language translates "colonist" by "siirtokuntalainen" and "colonialist" either by "kolonialisti" or indirectly as "siirtomaavallan kannattaja". As the Finnish-language term for "colonist" doesn't resemble at all the corresponding English term, a Finnish-speaker writing in English could easily make precisely this kind of mistake. And, of course, this is what I very strongly suspect this so-called "Podomi" of being in reality: a Finnish-speaking extreme nationalist who is trying to make the Swedish-speaking Finns look bad. Moreover, calling the Swedish settlers "colonialists" instead of "colonists" is very revealing, as it is exactly the language of the extremist fringe among the Finnish-speakers. No Swedish-speaking Finn would use that word is this context. Moreover: the kind of mistakes Podomi keeps making when he writes in English are typical for Finnish-speakers, not Swedish-speakers. As an example, I quote Podomi: "should focus ourselves in finding more neutral title for the article. I am afraid the English expression "Swedish-speaking Finn" does pretty bad job in describing finlandssvenskhet or finlandssvenskarna". It should, of course, be "finding a more neutral title" and "does a pretty bad job". Omitting the article is an error very commonly encountered in the use of English by people whose first language lacks articles, such as Slavic languages and Finnish. Swedish, on the other hand, is relatively closely related to English and has articles. This is why this kind of mistake is rarely made by a Swedish-speaker. There are other very clear traces of an unmistakably Finnish syntax in Podomi's prose as well. Need I go on?

Our "friend" Podomi is definitely not what he pretends to be. Monegasque (talk) 14:03, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Anyway, I beg for an apology if I haven´t thought about the limits of Finnish self-esteem enough. Howeever, as Finland-Swedish scholar Leif Höckerstedt addressed, who exactly wins with the political talk emphasizing the closeness of the two ethnicities in Finland (the chauvinistic "one folk, one fuhrer" -talk ). How can Swedish culture in Finland sustain itself if we are constantly told that there´s nothing to preserve as we are already allegedly all the same. Ethnic minorities do not survive under such policy. The Turkish officials refer the Kurds as "Mountain Turks", that´s even worse than the "Swedish-speaking Finn". I wonder what is the official Chinese policy towards Tibetians, I wonder if they referred as "Bad behaving Chinese"? I am really apalled by the intolerance several Finnish posters have expressed against Swedes in Finland. The constant attempt to deny and hide their ethnicity or camouflage Swedishness as some sort of political incorrectness and extreme. I have even accused of being racist. Howcome the identity or Swedishness of a five percent minority can be racist? We are two people and two languages (två folk, två språk, germansk och ugrisk), hopefully even intolerant Fenno chauvinists accept this in the future, we are living in a period of multiculturalism and liberalism, there´s no room anymore for preserving some mythical unity of one folk.Podomi (talk) 14:11, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Montesques little speculations are cute. Yes, english is not my first language. Everything else can be perceived as ad hominems. What I am has zero relevance, they do not make my argument worse or the better. Anyway, in my defense I can add that I do lot of typos and "forget" words in sentences while my typing does not match with my though process.

I address that my choice of words may convey meanings which can be viewed as harsh by the mainstream. I referred Swedes as colonialists since that´s the word Kari Tarkiainen used (2008). To me it is not negative expression, I don´t associate it to some violent conquest. Some others parhaps do. Well, anyway we can use expressions such as "population movement". And yes, my views have been very embraced by the posters who have identified as Finland-Swedes, if thats legitimates my cause or not. It really doesn´t matter. I have a view and it happens that my particular view receives lot of support in academia and in non-state financed research. I think we are in a very wrong paths if we are to focus on what Finns think about Finland-Swedes. Finland-Swedes are people, they don´t need to validate or market themselves to legitimate existance to the majority. No offense Montesque, I find your reasoning quite dangerous.

"Diskussionen tycks gå ut på att se oss genom finska ögon och få oss att agera så att majoriteten blir nöjd" -Höckerstedt, 2009

Moreover, the more I have communicated with Finns, the more I have become certain on the accuracy of the message of Finland-Swedish study. The dominating attitude in Finnish society appears to be hostile towards Swedish culture. That´s an harsh comment, but you guys don´t leave me much of a choice.

"Den finlandssvenska självbilden" (2008, university of Lund)

"Den dominerande finska inställningen till det svenska och överhuvudtaget allt icke finskt, kan uppfattas som stundtals närmast militant intolerant. Landet för en allmänt restriktiv invandrarpolitik. Att den så kallade äktfinska rörelsen upplever detta som positivt må vara hänt, men detta kan ha haft viss betydelse rent samhällsekonomiskt".Podomi (talk) 14:38, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

It seems that Podomi hasn't read the latest survey commissioned by Magma... About Tarkiainen: on which page exactly and in which context does he refer to the Swedish settlers as "colonialists"? I'd like to read that with my own eyes without having to go through the whole book to find the relevant quote. Monegasque (talk) 15:11, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

It seems that any compromise regarding the title will not be reached. Perhaps it would a be good idea to stop this endless debate and proceed. Let Podomi request for a move. Regarding Podomi's true motives: I have suspected myself that he is actually a anti-finlandssvensk provocateur, because his racially based ethnonationalism and grotesque ethnic stereotypes concerning Finnish-speakers are rather caricature-like. His opinions and the language he uses go far beyond what would be necessary if his only intention was the affirmation and empowerment of the finlandssvensk identity - a legimate goal that I will support as long as it does not stray into cultural chauvinism, racial thinking and hostile demonizing of us Finnish-speakers.

However, Podomi's acting in Swedish Wikipedia proves that he has good command of the Swedish language, a rare skill among supporters of the Suomalaisuuden liitto. So perhaps he is just a very original and stubborn Swedish-speaking individual writing clumsy English and residing in the rotten trenches of the language strife and racist ultra-nationalism from the 1920's.--130.234.5.138 (talk) 15:34, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

That doesn't explain why he can't make the distinction between a "colonist" and a "colonialist" which, as I pointed out, are virtually the same words in Swedish: "kolonist" and "kolonialist". No Swedish-speaking person with some degree of education would make that mistake. And then his characteristically Finnish syntax and all those omissions of articles which are typical for Slavs and Finnish-speakers, not Swedish-speakers... Monegasque (talk) 16:13, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Finnish ethnonationalism

Tarkiainen uses the expression, den svenska kolonisationen. Anyway, just few words about the process which is aimed to cast me as some sort of radical, for dearing the brake the Fennonationalist myths.

Montesque and MPorciusCato have initiated some sort of speculation of me being an agent provocateur for not portraying Finland-Swedes according to accepted norms of Finns.

This is ridiculous.

1) Given that I was an agent provocateur for Suomalaisuuden liitto I would be dat more efficient, to put it in modest way. I´d run the wiki circus through several IP´s and I´d use foreign proxies. I´d either buy or acquire moderating rights for wikipedia. And after that I´d elicit the whole army of academic sources which dig into the most senstitive and taboo-laden aspects of Finnish society regarding its ethnic minorities. I´d introduce studies which cast Finland as third-world Eastern European state which is not willing embrace fixed territory principle for the endangered Swedish minority. Basically all the studies would excude Finnish culture chauvinism in regards of Swedes. Finns ofcourse feel them as victims for having had to fight for their language and culture to be accepted in Finland, but I wouldn´t bother too much about it. I´d show studies in where Finns rank Finland-Swedes as the most non-desired ethnicities in Europe and push and agenda which generally depict Finland as intolerant and racist towards Swedish minority.

So in nutshell, I am not an agent provocateur, all I want is this site to be neutral. This site should not be used to boost the non- existing Finnish self-confidence (sorry for a stereotype) or to put Finland-Swedes into some accepted norms. Finland-Swedes do not need to market themselves for being accepted. They can be as much of Swedes and representants of the "fifth colonn" as they wish. Wikipedia should never be some kind of a proxy or a caveat to prompt Finnish nationalism. We are here to give neutral view of Finland-Swedes to an international audience. I am afraid we are far from being neutral if our sole purpose is to saddle "Swedish-speaking finns" as some sort of Finns who just express Finnishnness in Swedish language.

If anything I am biased. I believe Finland-Swedes should presented in a neutral way but in a positive light. That is the reason why I removed Tore Modeens analysis on the Finnish unwillingnes to accept Swedish nationality in Finland. I believed it would have portrayed Finns as intolerant. Something we don´t need to have in the article of Swedish-speaking FinnsPodomi (talk) 15:44, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

If Podomi's command of Swedish were just a little better, he'd realise that the proper word to associate with the expression "den svenska kolonisationen" is "kolonist" and not "kolonialist". A "kolonialist" in Swedish is a supporter of a political ideology (colonialism), and this is not what Tarkiainen is referring to here. A "kolonist" in Swedish is essentially the same thing as a settler. That word has nothing to do with any political ideology. In the Swedish language, the word "kolonialist", on the contrary, is always associated with supporting the political ideology of colonialism and is virtually always used in a negative sense. If Podomi doesn't understand this difference, it can only mean two things. Either Swedish is not his first language (as I strongly suspect) or his educational level is not very high (which seems like a plausible alternative as well). Generally speaking, Podomi, by his language, by the level of his "arguments" and by his rabble-rousing style gives indeed a thoroughly halvbildad (to use a good Swedish word) impression of himself. Monegasque (talk) 16:39, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

What is the purpose of your crazy rants? As if I am here to give an educated or uneducated view of myself. I am here to make to article more neutral and better. It doesn´t matter what is going on in discussion forum. It doesn´t matter wether I am an agent provocateur, a Finn or a Swede. What should you do wwith information of my background. How would things turn different if I turned out be an agent provocateur, a Finn or a chinese. You are wasting your energy on non-sense. Let just say as hint that I am not frantically worried what third party is thinking about me. This already outrules one ethnicity in question. Anyway, the site looks good. I just removed some unverifiable speculation with strong tinge of manifestation. The stuff cannot be verified from any sources. Other than that we are doing fine. Hopefully no one starts to act like a baby again. Otherwise I am forced to add some new (referenced) material and studies to the article, which I wouldn´t have energy for otherwise. So be nice;)Podomi (talk) 20:16, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Monecasque, what are you after with your "one school of though"? Do you deny that Finns and Finland-Swedes would not collectively perceive the term finlandssvenskar to have an ethno cultural connotation?What kind of a Swedish-speaking Finn you really are? LOL. Perhaps a finnish 70´s immigrant to Sweden who speaks Swedish, this would explain your lack of common knowledge of Finland. According to Höckerstedts(2000)gallup-style study on Finnish perception regarding on Finland-Swedes, several cultural themes popped in. In fact the answers were similar to that of Finland-Swedish self-perception.

"Självfallet kan man diskutera vad som ingår i denna gruppidentifikation (finlandssvensk) förutom svenska språket och vissa historiska händelser: samhörighet med Sverige, kräftätning, snapvisesjungande,Luciatraditionen, skärgårdsliv, ankdammen, upplevelser i språkstrid, fonderna, SFP osv. I varje fall är det klart att den mera omfattande betydelsen fortfarande lever och att många inte upplever den som relevant eller accetabelt och därför undvikar hela ordet, t.e Jörn Donner, som i bok från 1980 meddelar sig "att vara finne som talar svenska" http://www.ling.helsinki.fi/~fkarlsso/edelfelt.pdf"

Moreover, these findings were supported by Edward Duttons (2008) study which assessed that Finns do not perceive class differences between their own ethno-cultural group but perceive as having ethno-linguistic form, in the sense that Finland-Swedes are perceived to members of upper-class. It should be clear by everyone that finlandssvenskar, carry more in dept features than simple language.

Anyway, if you keep pushing your aggressive POV I am forced to starting to use direct citats by the late professor in international law and minority rights, Tore Modeen. Then the reader would know for certain what kind of school of though we are dealing with.Podomi (talk) 11:16, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

BTW, Monacasque, is professor and the leader of Finland-Swedish think-thank, one of the major political NGOs representing Finland-Swedes, Mr Forsgård extreme and non-mainstream?

"Vi ska komma ihåg vårt historiska arv och inte bara tala om språk utan om kulturarv. Alla Europeiska minoriteter är medvetna om sitt historiska arv men vi finlandssvenskar tenderar att glömma det vi är stolta över. (HBL, interview, Volt 7.2 2009) We have to more precise of what kind of school of thought we are dealing with. The school of minority rights and international law and the school of biggest Finland-Swedish political NGO. Remember these the next time when your try to illegitimize the ethnic identity of Finland-Swedes—Preceding unsigned comment added by Podomi (talk • contribs) 11:51, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Forsgård is talking about "kulturarv", that is, cultural heritage, and that is not controversial at all. As a matter of fact, it's quite mainstream. But "cultural heritage" and "ethnicity" are two very different concepts indeed. To talk about "ethnicity" (a problematic concept since it's very difficult to define in a scientifically valid way devoid of bias) and to stress it as strongly as the people grouped around Finlandssvensk Samling, a fringe group of perhaps 500 people (in 2005 according to themselves) keep doing (such as Höckerstedt, whose pamphlets and opinion pieces Podomi keeps quoting as if he were some impartial and unbiased expert) is controversial indeed among the Swedish-speaking community. The views presented by Podomi are essentially a radicalized and caricature-like version of FSS's approach and in no way reflect the line of the Swedish Assembly of Finland, the Swedish People's Party, Hufvudstadsbladet, Vasabladet etc. Podomi seems to living in some strange parallel reality where everything we know is upside down. He would perhaps be well advised to cut down somewhat on his consumption of black coffee, which, to judge by the quality and general tone of his rants, is probably very high. Monegasque (talk) 12:44, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Ethnicity is the culture. What else would it be? I suggest you introduce you to the basic concepts of ethnicity in wikipedias ethnicity-article. Ethnicity is not diffucult to define.

From wikipedia. (Ethnic group). This apllies 100% to Finland-Swedes

"An ethnic group is a group of human beings whose members identify with each other, usually on a presumed or real common heritage.[1][2] Ethnic identity is further marked by the recognition from others of a group's distinctiveness[3] and the recognition of common cultural, linguistic, religious, behavioral or biological traits,[1][4] real or presumed, as indicators of contrast to other groups.

Moreover, the view of Finland-Swedes as an distinct ethnicity was supported in study on the collective self-perception of Finland-Swedes (den finlandssvenska självbilden, 2008) and ironically the study collected the material from the above mentioned Swedish-speaking newspapers you just mentioned. Even Finns perceive distinct characteristics on Finland-Swedes than they do not hold on themselves, and these characteristics exceed the language. So the Finland-Swedish ethnicity is reciprocative. Both Finns and Swedes agree on it. I´d like to see even one non-state sponsored study which would imply that Finland-Swedes are not an ethnicity. The reason SFP imply against this common notion is because ethnicity equals the same as race to them. They are populists. Finland-Swedes are not seperate race in contrast to Finns, although we are 100% sure about that either, but they are a distinct ethnicity. That´s a fact per se. And by fact I am mean this information is agreed unamiously among the academics ie. scientific community.

What is controversial is the notion of Finland-Swedes as distinct nationality. This is not supported by Finns, as they try to deny it (Modeen 1999) and not supported unamiously by the members of Finland-Swedes themselves either. However, the concept of Finland-Swedes as nationality holds still support in certain circuits, such as FISS f.e. Anyway, what is so radical in FISS? Even the debuty CEO of Swedish peoples party belongs to the organization.Podomi (talk) 12:57, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Ethnicity is the culture. What else would it be? I suggest you introduce you to the basic concepts of ethnicity in wikipedias ethnicity-article. Ethnicity is not diffucult to define. You are talking nonsense again. Ask any social scientist, and he will tell you that 1) ethnicity is often hard to define, especially when it is a question of minority identities and 2) ethnicity refers above all to conscious identity and is only indirectly related to cultural heritage. These simple facts have been explained to you over and over again in two different languages. Unfortunately you seem to refuse to acknowledge it. In fact, it seems that anything that does not fit with your black-and-white ethnochauvinism is water off goose´s back. You simply do not reflect anything that is said to you, making it a very hard and frustrating (and boring) job to discuss with you.--88.112.130.46 (talk) 18:24, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I guess we have to agree that we disagree. Ethnicity to scientific community is rather one-sided thing. Not a theme which sparks any radical debate. In a nutshell, ethnicity is "we" and the "others". Finland-Swedes refer themselves as finlandssvenskar as opposed to finnar. Hence, a group distinguishes between itself and the "others". This as black and white as it sounds. Linguistic group is already by default an ethnic group. I am slightly concerned that are trying to make some kind of a puzzle of this. Remember your beloved sources by SFP does not have a base on any scientific study, nor can it be rationally defended. It´s a voice that some poor "politrukki" has put on their website in order to not give any prompt for Finnish stereotypes which often depicts Finland-Swedes as some sort of state-traitors, ie "Fifth colonn". And as we know sociologists view is already presented in the study, and we all know what´s the verdict in regards to Finland-Swedes. Anyway, on monday I call to SFP and ask them to remove that propaganda on their website, after that the issue is solved for good.Podomi (talk) 19:01, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

The only thing I agree is that you are completely misinformed of ethnicity reserch in social sciences and history. I am concerned that you suffer from a delusion that your simplistic and naive views represent the "academic" or "scientific" view-point of ethnicity. Any self-identified group is "we" (having Wir-Gefühl) as opposed to others, but not every group with a distinct identity is an ethnic group. Ethnicity is not a neutral, descriptive term.--88.112.130.46 (talk) 19:31, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that´s why I mentioned "in a nuttshell", ethnicity is usually expressed as "we" and "others", in regards to language, religion or biological origin. And ofcourse Finland-Swedes are an ethnic group because Finns perceive them as "others". This is not just about how Finland-Swedes see themselves. Good article which came to day in Daily Telegraph. Interestingly, I remember I assessed that Finns cannot be perceived outside from other Uralics, the author of the article suggest Greenlanders as a good equivalent for Finns.

"Expat life in Finland: Arctic exploration sheds light on Finland"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/expat/4205519/Expat-life-in-Finland-Arctic-exploration-sheds-light-on-Finland.html

"Greenland, a Danish colony, shows comparable symptoms because its history has been oddly similar. And in both countries there is a myth that there is no social class even though there conspicuously is. It is "we Finns" and the Swedish-speakers or "we Inuit" and the Danes".Podomi (talk) 22:31, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

The Inuit language belongs, of course, to the Eskimo-Aleut languages, not to the Uralic language group. And the Swedish-speaking Finns certainly do not constitute a "social class". That Podomi could make such elementary mistakes shows, once again, the low level of his general education. An then: "perceived as others"? Is that supposed to be an argument? So are the people of Savo, for instance, as they speak a different dialect of the Finnish language. That "perceived as others" argument can used about any group of people that differs from their neighbours in at least one way, be it language, dialect, religion or whatever. That is indeed a truism. Podomi is very obviously totally clueless about what constitutes a scientifically valid argument, and so he keeps on presenting pamphlets, opinion pieces and the like (and, moreover, his personal conclusions and original theories) as if they had some scientific value. I have understood for a time ago that the likelihood of Podomi having a university-level education is zero, but why keeps on demonstrating his ignorance of scientific methodology, as if it were a source of pride to him, is a mystery to me. Monegasque (talk) 09:28, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Moneqasque, you are not being very intellectual here. Edward Duttons article was journalism, however, what the Phd. Dutton suggest with the "we" and "the others, Swedish-speakers" is that class research in Finland has revealed that Finns do not perceive to have social class among themselves, but they perceive it to have an ethno-linguistic feature. That is, they perceive Swedish-speakers to be the upper-class, and the "others". That´s why we have wikipedia article in Finnish with a sub-title "käsitys suomenruotsalaisesta eliitistä". Moreover, Finns do not attribute just the class aspect on Finland-Swedes, they attribute behavioral patterns, life-style, mental moods, symbols..etc. These are aspects which contribute to the fact that Finland-Swedes are an ethnicity. Whether this is correcet or not may be debated, but it shows the patterns of believe; the ethnicity is marked with either real or presumed recognition of "we" and "them". I admit I am not being very original, almost all of this has already been mentioned in the academic study of Finland-Swedish self-perception, (Den finlandssvenska självbilden, 2008), which reaches the same conclusion on the topic as I do. Anyway, tt is generally believed that Savo, Carelians and Häme folk have been different ethnicities, but they speak the same language these days, dialect or some local traditions alone is not held as a valid feature for distinct ethnicity. Moreover, the above mentioned tribes lack the seperate nationality aspect, which still is a living concept among Finland-Swedes, less so than previously, though.

Yes, I know eskimo languages do not belong to Uralics, that why I was surprised at first for the comparison. Anyway, the similarities in the pre-historic beliefs, behavior patterns of Eskimos and Finns sounds interesting. Maybe it is about some kind of a broader Nomadic, hunter gatherer Nort-Asian connection.Podomi (talk) 10:37, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

So now it us Finnish-speakers who define the Swedish-speakers ethnicity, as some us see the Swedish-speakers as "others" in some sense? This is still a bizarre argument, but at least it is a huge improvement compared to Podomi's earlier race-based definition of ethnicity. Compliments. However, the fact remains that all regional, social, linguistic, dialectal etc. identities are not ethnic identities, as ethnicity is a strongly marked identity-political concept with no neutral or objective existence. All Swedish-speakers in Finland do not share same subjective identity projects, although some of them exert their personal right to consider their individual selves as representatives of a distinct ethnicity.--212.146.44.208 (talk) 16:47, 15 February 2009 (UTC)Edit And being a historian myself, I retain my right to be very sceptical of Dr. Dutton's ideas of Finno-Inuit connection. I am aware, of course, of the shamanic and animistic heritage in the most archaic layers of the Finnish folklore (even the Scandinavians are believed to have practised Eurasian/North Asian shamanism during the Viking Age). However, in Finland the hunter-gatherer existence belongs to a past so distant that it is simply inconceivable that it could have an influence on the present-day cultural patterns. I find the idea far too romantic to be taken seriously. And to be quite exact, the traditional hunter-gatherer patterns in Fennoscandia have been semi-nomadic. Of course, all this has nothing to do with the Swedish-speaking identity in Finland.--212.146.44.208 (talk) 17:01, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

As much as I have introduced myself on the ethnic discourse, I have never seen any political aspect applied to the concept of ethnicity. Never. Are you suggesting that political affinity and artificial state-borders has some significance in determing ethnicity?

The only reason why we have such a fuss about this is something that is obvious to everyone. Finland-Swedish ethnicity has a higher social prestige as opposed to Finns. You guys are denying the ethnicity of Sami or Roma minorities, but Finland-Swedes seem to be the exception. Anyway, Edward Duttons upcoming book on Finland will deal with issue.

Suggestion that Northern Asiatic shamanic tradition do not have a merit for todays Finland is rather interesting remark, did you actually even the read the article?http://www.telegraph.co.uk/expat/4205519/Expat-life-in-Finland-Arctic-exploration-sheds-light-on-Finland.htmlPodomi (talk) 19:11, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Are you suggesting that political affinity and artificial state-borders has some significance in determing ethnicity? Of course not. I am talking about identity politics of different self-identified groups, not about national states. If a group presents itself as an ethnic group, the presentation is usually more prestige-laden and demanding and has more political importance than a claim of being a non-ethnic minority. Obviously we have been reading different books. I believe I have read better ones. I do not waste my time by commenting this staggeringly stupid shamanic bullshit anymore. --212.146.44.208 (talk) 19:23, 15 February 2009 (UTC)Edit Unsurprisingly, Dutton's brief (and quite silly) paper does not even mention the word "shamanism". All this trolling makes me wonder...are you a provocateur after all? It is very hard to believe that a genuine Svecoman ethnonationalist would be a pathetic caricature. If your real agenda is the strenghening of anti-Swedish opinions in Finland, you have failed in my respect. Having said that, I will withdraw myself from any communicative contact with you. If you are serious, which I very much doubt now, it is a complete waste of time to discuss with you. If you are a provocateur, as I tend to believe now, you are quilty of a crime. You have revealed yout true intention by overdoing your role. Goodbye.--212.146.44.208 (talk) 19:33, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

The anonymous poster above writes that he tends to believe that Podomi is an agent provocateur. I certainly believe so too. His language and behaviour fits exactly the negative stereotype about Swedish-speakers often presented by the extremist fringe among Finnish-speakers. I'd even say that he's acting like a caricature of that stereotype. As I'm a Swedish-speaker myself, I, for reasons easy to understand, do not like this at all. Moreover, I have important news: I wrote earlier that the mistakes Podomi makes when he writes English are typical of people whose first language lacks articles, such as Slavic languages and Finnish, which makes it very unlikely that his first language could be Swedish. The next step was, of course, to do a little research on the Swedish-language Wikipedia. And, sure enough, Podomi was very easy to find there (his identity there is Jeffertvå;he's already been banned a couple of times but he keeps coming back), as he's always his very own self:the same arguments, the same quotes, the same conclusions, the same vulgar , halvbildad style. But the most interesting fact about Podomi/Jeffertvå is this: the Swedish he writes is full of grammatical errors. And I don't mean "just" spelling mistakes, it's far worse than that. There's absolutely no possibility that Podomi/Jeffertvå's first language could be Swedish. I checked out the Finnish-language Wikipedia as well and, unsurprisingly, Podomi has been trolling there as well. I scanned his Finnish-language prose for errors, but couldn't find any. Of course, this doesn't prove that Podomi's first language is necessarily Finnish, it just proves that his Finnish is much better than his Swedish. All right: by now we know without the shadow of a doubt that Podomi's first language is not Swedish. What interest is he serving, who is he really working for? We don't know that for certain, and may never know. Maybe he really is as unbalanced as he seems to be. But one thing is certain:He is not acting in good faith. He must be stopped. He has no right to keep on sabotaging Wikipedia forever. Monegasque (talk) 22:10, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

I wrote about the alleged provocateur hints in the post which started this chapter. I won´t go there again, but I am just apalled by this fennochauvinism; there seem to be some kind of perverse though reighning that Finland-Swedes should be legitimize their status with the norms Finns are giving. This is a dangerous thought. I don´t care about whether Finns start to like Finland-Swedes more or less after the article, I care about the standards of an encyclopedia. The self-confidence of Finns should never be priority in any isssue, and certainly not in regards of Finland-Swedes.

Montesque, are suggesting that people whose mother-tongue is not Swedish shall not be contribute to wikipedia, especially not if the person writes something which the ethnocnationalist Finns do not like, lol! You are indulging some scary thoughts there. This page must be set in international surveillance.Podomi (talk) 09:07, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Anyway, I am very happy with the article in its present form, I think the content is neutral, apart from the title. Is there something which disturbs you or something you find non-neutral in the text, Montesque? I understand that Fenno nationalist who´ve used to the one-sided view of Finland-Swedes may not find everything in the text as suitable for their view but it doesn´t equal that the text would less neutral.Podomi (talk) 11:59, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

It is interesting to see you implicitly acknowledge that your mother-tongue is not Swedish. Thus, it is rather impossible for you to be a finlandssvensk, although you have given a very strong reason for us to assume that. If you are not a finlandssvensk, but you are promoting a very strong "race"-based agenda on finlandssvensk identity politics, there remains a question whether you are a Finnish-speaker or a speaker of a Slavic language. Thus, the question is whether you are trying to sow discord on the basis of a Fennoman agenda or whether you have even more sinister motives. --MPorciusCato (talk) 15:12, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Indeed. Some relevant Wikipedia articles which might help to shed some light on Podomi's case: False flag, Black propaganda, Cyber warfare. Monegasque (talk) 15:50, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I have an interesting update. I took a closer look at Podomi's prose in the Finnish-language Wiki (first as "JFK", and then, as gets in trouble as JFK, under different IP addresses that can be traced to the Helsinki School of Economics). Podomi writes Finnish clearly better than Swedish, but his spelling tends to be quite "experimental" and he makes several grammatical errors that a person whose first language is Finnish would not make. Some conclusions: 1) He lives in the Helsinki region. 2) He habitually logs in at the Helsinki School of Economics. 3) His first language is neither Swedish nor Finnish, although he at first pretended to be Swedish-speaking. Need I go on about Podomi's likely motives and the framework he's probably acting in? By the way, there are some articles that might interest some people reading this: Disinformation. Active measures. Web brigades. Очень интересно... Monegasque (talk) 23:45, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

This exceeds the wikipedia netiquette. I have never conducted anything illeagal online. On the contrary your behavior of adding unreferenced, non-verifiable self-manifestations on the the text is borderline vandalism. Are you suggesting that I am not welcome to contribute to the article and thus increase the understanding of Finland-Swedes for international audience? Speculations of my motivates is rather parody-esque, as if it would mattter. Howabout if I disclose that I am a Lithuanian-descent with one parent being either Finn, Mainland-Swedish or a Finland-Swede, and work simply to give higher standards for the article? You guys arent´t very creative with your reasoning. However, you should not give personal information about me, whether correct o of not, to public. I understand that the issuef Finland-Swedes is senstive for Finns but this goes way above the limits. Moreover, the attempt to illegitimize me and deny my acces to page based on some wild speculation of my political motives is very reminiscent to Soviet tactics.Podomi (talk) 07:09, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Podomi seems to be changing his linguistic, national etc identity like a chameleon. Now that his bluff about being supposedly a Swedish-speaker has been called, he's saying that he's half "Lithuanian" and half something mysterious that he's not prepared to disclose. I wonder what he'll be next week... Until recently he's pretended to be Swedish-speaking, no doubt calculating that if he presents himself as a member of the population group this article discusses who just happens to feel strongly about the issue, he'll be treated more leniently by the other redactors and his many violations of Wikipedia rules, his recurrent use of invective, his POV-pushing etc, will be pardoned. At first, he was to a certain degree successful with his bluffing. He has systematically accused real Swedish-speakers, including several Wikipedia editors, (as well as the Swedish-speaking mainstream in Finland, such as the Folktinget, the Swedish People's Party and the Swedish-speaking media) of being either mere puppets of the Finnish state or basically dishonest, unpatriotic, rootless and scheming people who "pretend to be Finnish" in order to get advantages from the state. The possibility that Podomi's prose may well qualify as hate speech and have legal consequences for the real person behind the chameleon-like "Podomi" has already been hinted to by other people than myself, both on this page and elsewhere (his activities here seem to be only the tip of an iceberg;he's active elsewhere as well and he has been discussed elsewhere). As the section of the Finnish legislation which deals with hate speech is subject to interpretation by the relevant authorities, it isn't possible to predict whether he will or not face charges; that is for the Public Prosecutor to decide. It's important to note that no private citizen can press charges for hate speech according to Finnish legislation. He has systematically accused Finnish-speakers, including several Wikipedia editors, of chauvinism, nationalism etc and repeatedly used ethnic slurs about them (at the same time pretending to be a Swedish-speaker), obviously in order to provoke and increase anti-Swedish feeling among Finnish-speakers. This may qualify as hate speech as well. He has repeatedly used straw man arguments, referred to mere opinion pieces and pamphlets as if they were objective research and, moreover, quoted utterly selectively and in several cases referred to different sources as supposedly proving a point which they actually don't prove. He has routinely distorted the truth in other ways as well. To sum up: he has the whole time been acting in bad faith. To list every single case where he has broken against Wikipedia rules would be a a very tedious task, as the list would be very long and most of us have other things to do besides counting every single factual untruth, ethnic slur, piece of invective, reverting of valid, referenced information etc that Podomi has made himself guilty of, but it may well come to that. The other editors, including myself, have until now been far too lenient with him. The best course of action for him would be to withdraw voluntarily. Wikipedia is not a playground for people of his kind. Monegasque (talk) 11:02, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

You are loosing it up. I am dead serious. What is it in the article that you find offending? To imply that I would face criminal charges for introducing studies such as (Den finlandssvenska självbilden, 2008; The cultural rights of the ethnic Swedish group in Finland, 1999; Fusk finnar eller östvenskar, 2000; The Finland-Swedish Wheel of migration, 2005; Conflict and compromise in multilingual society, case Finland 1993; Språkgränser och samhällsstruktur 1981 et cetara) is ridiculous, in fact its even beyond riduculous. In what kind of Soviet era are you living? Basically what you are suggesting is that this article should subject to self-critisism because everything else would mean that Finns start to hate Swedes. What kind of a picture you are yourself giving of Finns? Are saying that Finns are collectively racist, so racist that will start to hate Swedes, a 5% minority group, incase we are having something inappropriate in the article, from a fennonationalist point of view, that is. The way I see it is that you´ve just given a bigger insult to Finns that not even the most blatant Swedo-chauvinist could have conjured. What is your purpose here? It does not have anything to do with sincere interest of editing an encyclopedia, that is for sure. You seem to have your own goals to advance. Congratulations. You are scaring person. And what´s with your critisism of my reactions to SFP and Folktinget, their view is very well covered in the text. Also your view of "Swedish-speaking" editors seem to be very one-sided to put in moderate terms. Moreover, your hate-speech against me is even more insane when applied to a real context. If I was here to make Swedes look bad, then why would I deliberately move an explicit citat by Tore Modeen who suggesting that Finns deny the Swedish nationality in Finland? Why did I do it? Because I want to portay Finland-Swedish in a positive light, in a positive but neutral light. Not in a light which makes Finns look intolerent. This was an act which I received goodwill from posters identified as Finns. Ofcourse you don´t know anything about this because you appeared to the scene two weeks ago and immeadiately started to hount me. Do you have other suggestions why I restrain from posting other studies from academic journals, a studies which would make nationalistic finns vomit? Because I don´t want portray Swedes in away which would make Finns look bad. And yes, I am a Swedish-speaker, although it has zero relevance to the topic. Many of the finnic posters editing the Finland-Swedish articles have not cared about Finland-Swedish mainstream views before, so why should be interested in them now? And by mainstream I don´t mean Snellman. Cheers from the Helsinki School of Economics. LOL. I won´t have any doubts about your deep knowledge of extreme fringe-groups, I wonder where that knowledge has originated from.Podomi (talk) 12:57, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Swedish settlers and the Finnish-speaking population

It appears our that our text is now being partly misrecited. The text says that the "Finnish substrate toponyms (place names) within today's Swedish speaking areas have been interpreted as indicative of earlier permanent Finnish settlements in the area"

However, Mikael Reuter is receiting the exact study (Pitkänen) and reciting her study: "När de första svenskarna bosatte sig här, troligen under senare hälften av 1100-talet, kom de i kontakt med en äldre finsk befolkning. Finnarna nyttjade uppenbarligen skär-gården huvud-sakligen bara säsongvis, men de hade naturligtvis gett orterna namn, som sedan de svenska inflyttarna tog över och anpassade till sitt eget språk". http://www.kotus.fi/index.phtml?l=sv&s=1649

I change to current term of "permanent" to seasonal. We have no certainty of permanent Finnish settlements in the coast before the arrival of Swedes.Podomi (talk) 20:08, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

I'd like to point out that we cannot have any certainty about anything that happened 1000 years ago. We cannot even be totally sure that Charlemagne existed. Yet, we can say with good certainty that the Ainiala, Saarelma and Sjöblom express in their book Nimistöntutkimuksen perusteet (Finnish literature society, 2008) the opinion that the Finnish settlement was permanent. So, I suggest we agree that there exists two well-founded scholarly opinions on the matter. (In my opinion, the Finnish settlement may have been partially permanent, partially seasonal.) --MPorciusCato (talk) 15:01, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Is it co-incidence or not that you "forgot" professor Paula Wilsons bok "röster från framtiden", although uralicist Juha Janhunen (2008) already heavily critized her work:

"Framför allt kan hon vara över att hon vågar vara svensk i ett land vars svenska befolkningen annars sedan årtionden har accepterat rollen av frivilliga främlingar i sitt eget land. Kronologiskt är svenskan inte mera främmande än finskan. Men sanningen är, att båda språken har `kommit` hit mycket senare än Wilson tror. För att motverka den enspråkiga finska nationalstatens förenhetliga tryck behöver man inte uppdikta fiktiva rötter till svenskan. Det räcker att man inser hur korta det finska Finlands rötter är.-Juha Janhunen, 2008

Anyway, I am happy that you admit the two sided view on this, but why do let the text stay unaltered in its original form and do not seek to change it to more neutral form? This is something I don´t understand in you MPontus. The study by Pitkänen as recited in the text does not imply of permanent settling prior to Swedes.(BTW you should also check Derek Fewster study "Vision of past glory" it´s about the scientific honousty and quality of Finnish history studies and archeology.Podomi (talk) 07:20, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Fewster has written in an equally nasty tone about Svecomaniac views of prehistory...and the Vision of Past Glory deals mostly pre-War research. So please stop distorting facts.--130.234.68.221 (talk) 08:47, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Wrong Podomi. 1. Read the direct quotation from Pitkänen's work in the lower part of the article. It states: "Another indication of older Finnish settlement is evidenced by the fact that native speakers of Finnish named so many different types of places in the area that the substrate nomenclature seems to consist of names referring to village settlement rather than to names of natural features." Once again you have been caught at distorting the picture. 2. You seem to be the one here who accepts only a one-sided story. Please do not accuse others of something you yourself are conducting. Clarifer (talk) 14:52, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Swedish-speaking Finns of Finnish origin?

This sub-thread needs more elaboration. Most of the families in the section originate from Svenskfinland (Boije af Gennäs, Pojo. Creutz, Pernå, etc) and their founders have been Finland-Swedes. It should be emphasized that the "Finnish origin" implies family records in the country prior the establishment of church recors. Or we can just erase every notion of origin altogether. For the time being I added a slight notion to the text which refers to origins in Finland, as opposed to "Finnish"-origins.Podomi (talk) 08:40, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Germanic is not synonymous with Swedish. We do neet discuss the Proto-Germanic population components in this article. And please, try to write better ("grose" "anacronicism"). You mispell in three different languages.--130.234.68.213 (talk) 10:43, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I am bad typer, perhaps a dyslexia. Anyway, I have one problem regarding the text about the possible continuity theory. The article refers to "present day concensus" of Finnish archeologist who are against the Germanic continuity from antique to present. Then we have loads of references from Meinander. What I find problematic is the credibility of Finnish archeologist, which, to put it bluntly, is not sound.

During the big archelogic symposium in 1980, under the lead of Meinander it was presented that there was a continuous settlements by Finns for more than 10 000 years in Finland. The leading Finnish linguisticans already raised lot of scepticism over the idea, but it never bothered these scholars. Today when we have the proto-Uralic language as an reconstruction, the linguisticans have been enabled to present new suggestions on the arrival period of Finns. Janhunen ("När kom Finnarna till Finland", 2005) presents that Finns showed up in "Finland" in 400AD and Sami's around 0. Ante Aikio, a leading Sami scholar suggest that Sami languages appeared in modern day Finland 650-0BC. The present day concensus of linguisticans is strongly against of Finnish presence in Finland from antique, (see f,e. Finnish wikipedia http://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uralilaiset_kielet, the chapter "tutkimusparadigmat"). So we should stress in the text that the view of Finnish scholarly arcehologic concensus has been subjected to fierce critisism and that their track record is particularly poor.

There´s now the risk that the reader actually takes Meinander and "The Finnish archeologic consensus" as a reliable source. We should address that even the Finnish presence in Österland/Finland after the early middle-age has been questioned by the Linguistic concensus in Finland. (Derek Fewster, “The Invention of the Finnish Stone Age : Polithics, Ethnicity and Archaeology”, Dig it all : Papers dedicated to Ari Siiriäinen (Helsinki, 1999).Podomi (talk) 16:35, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I apologize, it was unnecessary and rude to comment your typing. Regarding the rest of your comment, it is perhaps not insignificant that Meinander was a Swedish-speaker. Otherwise the chronology of Uralic languages is not very relevant here, because the new (and so far controversial, although I tend to accept them) dates presented by Aikio and Janhunen are still earlier than the MIA (Middle Iron Age) settlement in Southern Ostrobothnia. It is not important for the status or identity for the Swedish-speakers whether the Uralic languages have been spoken in Finland for 10 0000 or 3000 years. These chronological differences simply do not have any effect on the interpretations concerning the Germanic continuity in Finland. It is relatively widely accpeted that there was a Proto-Germanic presence in Finland Proper around 2000 years ago - in an area which not have a significant Swedish presence during the historically documented times, and, consequently, not Germanic continuity. The new chronology of Uralic languages has not influenced the theories on the origin of Swedish-speaking population in Finland, and there is no logical reason why it should have such an influence. --212.146.44.208 (talk) 15:03, 29 April 2009 (UTC)