Talk:Occupation of the Baltic states

Point of the article

The very idea of having a common article for these occupations is very dubious. They were quite distinct in a huge number of ways and pursued very different policies. There were repressions in both cases, but the parts of the population targeted by the repressions and the methods of the repressions were very different (not to mention that there were also great differences within the Soviet period). The status of the Baltic states themselves was extremely different in the two cases, since the Soviet Union kept distinct republics as official national homelands for the respective nations, with the states maintaining their national cultures and using their national languages as official ones, whereas Germany just incorporated them all indiscriminately into Reichskomissariat Ostland, a single colony openly and officially intended for settlement and rule by Germans, without any titular status for the local nationalities. The only point of lumping these periods together into a single period of 'occupation' seems to be to imply that the Soviets were basically the same as the Nazis (or worse, as the current mainstream Baltic view seems to be). You may consider both equally evil, but that does not make them the same phenomenon. 62.73.72.3 (talk) 21:09, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Extraction of resources

Sveiki! My edit clarifying that Soviet investments were intended to utilize the Baltics for resources extraction was undone saying change is not consistent with the source. Here are quotes from the page which show my edit is correct.

"The very large capital investments made by the Soviet Union in the postwar era were an indication of the importance attached by the economic planners to the Baltic region as a source of energy resources and a wide range of industrial and agricultural products."

"It must always be kept in mind, however, that the Baltic peoples had to pay a high price for the forms of modernisation favoured by their Soviet masters. The initial priorities of Soviet economic policy in Estonia were the reactivation of manufacturing industry and the expansion of the oil shale industry. The latter had been one of the most successful industrial enterprises of independent Estonia. After the war it was 'developed forcefully and wastefully' by the Soviets, mainly as a source of energy for Leningrad." TamsaVakaras (talk) 15:47, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Phrasing and periods

@DA HK: If you want to question the phrasing or periods, please discuss it in the talk page here. Please familiarize with the past discussions (sometimes heated) before doing that. There is a long standing consensus (including RFCs) on the naming of this article. -- Mindaur (talk) 13:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

@Mindaur, Thank you, I will go through past discussions. In the mean time I'd like to point out, can the intro line be more specific than being vauge MOS:WEASEL.

The occupation of the Baltic states was a period of annexation of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania by the Soviet Union from 1940 until its dissolution in 1991. For a brief period, Nazi Germany occupied the Baltic states after it invaded the Soviet Union in 1941. looks a little vague.

How about something like: The occupation of the Baltic states reffers to the period of annexation of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania into the Soviet Union from 1940 until its dissolution in 1991, during which they were also briefly occupied by Nazi Germany between 1941 and 1944.

What do you think? DA HK (talk) 14:07, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

DA HK: Possibly. Both phrasings are very similar, so I am not sure how exactly is it better or why the current variant is vague. Can you explain? Also, why change from "by the Soviet Union" to "into the Soviet Union"? -- Mindaur (talk) 14:18, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

@Mindaur it's not about into or by, they're just British/American english styles, it's about "reffers to the period" and "during which they were also briefly occupied by Nazi Germany between 1941 and 1944", clarifing that there was a breif occupation 1941-44 within the whole of annexation, making the intro phrase clearer. DA HK (talk) 14:38, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

In such case, please keep "by the"; otherwise, no objection to your amendment. Just keep in mind it's spelled "refers to" (not "reffers to"). -- Mindaur (talk) 14:46, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Tsarist Russian rule of Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia

The fact that the Russians took control of Estonia and part of Latvia from Sweden under Tsar Peter, and of Lithuania and the other part of Latvia from the Polish-Lithuanian Dynastic Union during the partitions of Poland in the late 18th century should be mentioned as a prelude to the temporary independence of the Baltic States made possible by the German victory over Russia in World War I, and the Russian Civil War, and the reannexation of the Baltic States by the Russian dominated U.S.S.R., the successor state of Tsarist Russia. 2603:8001:EF0:9A20:CAAF:A136:43F:C0B0 (talk) 09:35, 30 March 2025 (UTC)