Talk:Birkarls

Small disputes

1. I changed Samis to Sapmians, because I think this would be preferred instead of Samis or Laplander. Thus Sapmian is an inflection for inhabitant in Sapmi (Lapland). United Nations officially uses Sapmi for Lapland, and I argued initially we should have used the non-Scandinavian variant on Wikipedia for Lapland, i.e. Sapmi. What wrong is it to use Sapmian?
2. I changed Finnic to Finnish since it hasn't to do with Wikipedia's definition of Finnic, c.p. Gottfrid Holmlund "Kvänland och kvänernas gåta".
3. Changed Birkarls to Birkarlians since this is used in research literature.

Please comment before doing changes. // Rogper 15:20, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The idea of an ancient Finnish kingdom that far away from Finland Proper remains utter nonsense and if this Holmlund individual argues so, it's a clear sign of him being not particularly credible. --Johan Magnus 18:57, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Finland proper is not a definition of "Finnish". // Rogper 18:07, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

At ancient times, it's the only one. --Johan Magnus 18:43, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I don't know what you are meaning. That Finland proper have had more important position than rest of Finland is pure nonsense, too. // Rogper 15:49, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

That's a strawman argument! Nobody says so.

The issue is: What does "Finnish" mean in a pre-18th century context, or in this case actually rather much earlier? --Johan Magnus 18:20, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

"Pirkka men" is unhistorical

The "Pirkka men" or pirkkamiehet in Finnish is totally unhistorical and invented in the 19th century. The sources always talk about birkarlar. --Drieakko 15:07, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Some reorganizations

I did some changes to the article.

• Since the correct term is "birkarl" and "Pirkka men" is totally unhistorical, the proper place for the article is under "Birkarls".
• Reorganized the content and added more stuff. However, the skeleton should still get some more meat. --Drieakko 12:10, 13 September 2006 (UTC)