Talk:Kven (historical)

Should give a reason for the original research tag. The reason is to be found on talk:Kven wherefrom this text originally came. / Fred-Chess 20:47, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

not very historical

"historical" seems a slightly wrong attribute. Generally, historical means something which is documented in written sources. Its counterpart is pre-historical. Much about these early Kvens is actually pre-historical. I would suggest a more correct attribute, such as "ancient", (not so good) "medieval", "past". Suedois 11:57, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mostly nonsense

The whole article is mostly nonsense. It needs to be rewritten critically. Kvenland has only been mentioned a few times in a couple of Norwegian sagas, and nothing more. Rest is pure fantasy by nationalist Finnish historians.

I'm not crazy about it either, but my first priority was to get this topic away from the very real and mostly non-controversial topic about contemporary Kvens. If we redirect it back to Kven, we're starting the whole argument over again. I am all for changing the name of the article, or even merging it with Kvenland. --Leifern 13:01, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merged

The contents are now merged to the article presently at Kvens of the past. These talks should continue at its talkpage, Talk:Kvens of the past, since probably no one checks THIS talkpage any longer. Suedois 16:59, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]