Talk:Primorsk, Leningrad Oblast

Swedish and Finnish names

Primorsk was in the 13th century on area inhabited by Finnic people who used "Koivisto" for the name of the place, roughly meaning "Place of Birches". Scandinavians had been around also for centuries, travelling by to eastern trade routes and clearly having a trade post also in Primorsk in early times. Swedish name "Björkö" means "Birch Island". Russians were there last, and their name "Beryozovskoe" very probably was not the original one. If such a claim is made, please make a reference to the source of that information. --Drieakko 08:40, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Any Swedish or Finnish source mentioning the settlement before 1268? If there is no such primary source, your assertion will be removed as a sample of original research with nationalist undertones. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 08:45, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Information I removed from the article was the note that the Swedish (and therefore also Finnish) names would have been translations of the Russian one due Russians mentioning the place first. The area was very briefly held by Russians before took over by Swedes and claiming that to have resulted an important place name be completely changed would need very strong arguments. So I removed very questionable original research, not added it. --Drieakko 08:51, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Also note here the relation of the Swedish name to the birk related trade terminology. --Drieakko 08:59, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Birken Island

Dear Ghirla how sounds German "Birken Insel" for Finnish "Koiviston saari" (Birch Island) from 1229 a name for ancient Karelian trading post? In Sweden "Björkö". Primorsk is the very late creation of Soviet Union. Even Imperial Russia honoured the old Finnish / Swedish names and did not try to Russificate them in new Russian form. Thus the Novgorodian text is copied from older German text.

JN

Population

The inhabitants of Koivisto (Primorsk) were Finns and Koivisto was one part of Finland from 1812 until the Winter War (1939-40), when Soviet Union occupied Koivisto and the Carelian ithmus. All the inhabitans were evacuated to western Finland.

The same applies to every town of the Karelian Isthmus. It's supremely redundant to repeat it time and again, when we have general articles dealing with the subject. --Ghirla^-трёп- 20:19, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

I reverted your revert, since the text became really odd after your edits. But basically, yes, you are correct. --Drieakko 21:51, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

The Finnish phase should be mentioned as a part of the history of the town. It is silly to to speak about "redundancy" in reference to other, separate articles.--217.112.249.156 11:54, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Ghirla, I noticed that you are again removing information about town's history because, according to you, it is "over and over again" repeated for other Karelian towns. Please list where and in which extent that takes place and propose a way to forward readers of this article to get the information from one location that extensively covers the issue. Otherwise removing the contents is just plain questionable. --Drieakko 06:19, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

You may start with Karelian Isthmus. When discussing the historical vicissitudes of Ukrainian and Belarusian settlements, it was determined that it is not appropriate for us to recount the entire history of the region in each of these articles. One article operates the terms like "liberation"; the article about the neigbouring village describes the same events as "aggression and occupation", etc. These differing accounts are highly distracting for editors and for readers. It's enough to edit war on the history articles, no need to escalate the conflict by spilling the naming issues into pages about every town and village. Please consult Wikipedia:Content forking. --Ghirla^-трёп- 06:31, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Attempt by Ghirla to Russificate the History of Karelian Isthmus

The place named Koivisto in mentioned (although mentioned under name Birken in German text in 1229 together with place named Nu) in an agreement of safe enterings. Koivisto was important trading post and a settlement of KARELIAN population and thus Baltic Finnish trade settlement, since about 600 AD and confirmed by the Finnish findings (dating c.1100) during the days the area belonged to Finland. Is it really worth of Ghirla to try to change the history of this region. The old Novgorodian chronicles are nothing else than exaggeration of Russian history and now made a new Bible for the Russians to try to prove for themselves that NOBODY ELSE THAN THESE HEROIC SLAVONIC PEOPLES FOUNDED EVERYTHING AND ALL WAS UNDER THE SLAVONIC RULE IN THE NORTH EASTERN EUROPE. I even doubt the claim that the Novgorodians managed to destroy the ancient fort at Hakoinen in 1311. Too much similarities with the one and only known Norsemen trek to Häme (even killing the brother of leader of the attackers) which seems to have happened before 862 and thus apperared later in Russian chronicles. I have not seen a single mention in Russian history of the 1270 inmarch of Karelians, Izhoras, Vatjas (Vods) to Novgorod which stopped the Novgorodian preparations (started in 1269) to attack to Karelian Isthmus. How this is known from other than Russian sources but not in Russian sources? If I now remember correct Hansa had not by that time any Kontor in Novgorod, only founded there in c. 1295. The nearest Hansa Kontor was at Tarbatu (Dorpat / Tartu ). Jurjev was not the original Tarbatu, but an Kyva (Kijev) wooden fort which existed near Tarbatu in 1030-1061. It was conquered and burned by the Ugandis (Aesthis) in 1061 and was never rebuilt again.

Also the Ghirla´s claim of Novgorodians contolling the trade in Gulf Of Finland is strange. Why the Orthodox Churches in Vuojonmaa / Gotland (of which I have never seen an old Slavonic name) appear only in Russian sources, not mentioned by any others who really traded in Baltic Sea during the period before the Mongol Invasion in 1237.

The main aim in these Russian chronicles is that THEY HAD TO HAVE HEROES AND GLORIOUS BATTLES WHICH THEY WON AGAINST THE FACT THAT THEIR COUNTRY WAS TOTALLY UNDER THE MONGOL TATAR RULE FROM 1237-1240 AND THEY WERE VASSALS OF THE MONGOLIAN GOLDEN ORDA RULERS.

JN

Only some notes... My own paternal ancestors lived in Koivisto most probably from 1747 to 1944 and the first members of the family came there from the swedish-talking south coast of Finland in 1747 or so. Anyone interested can search the data for the people living in Koivisto during 1740 - 1906 via the Finnish 'www.genealogia.fi' databases. Not many russians living there then but talking the russian language was considered important in trading, for instance my own grandfather was told to have spoken quite fluent russian. Generally the area was sometimes a part of Sweden, sometimes a part of Russia, but always a very important part of Finland and the people there always having been Finns, talking mainly finnish although now and then some new people arrived there, even from the northern Bothnia (some ship builders - once the Koivisto ships were 1/4 of all the Finnish ships), but usually from somewhere more near like from that swedish-talking south coast of Southern Finland and naturally talking then swedish first. Surprisingly not so many people seemed to come from Russia. Bringing new genes was in any case really welcomed and when many members of the Koivisto families have been very good in mathematics, this could be one evidence about some Russian genes being mixed too - one can hear this claim about the Russians being good just in this many times.

The book I have, "KOIVISTO, Sen vaiheista, asukkaista ja elinkeinoista", by K.W.Hoppu and Erkki Kansanaho, printed in 1953, ("Koivisto, About its phases, inhabitants and sources of livelihood") describes the facts about this area, starting from the stone age (8000 - 1200 B.C.). The whole Karelian Isthmus, the Baltian Estonia and the St Peterburg area were quite Finnish-talking area, for some reason those Russian leaders wanted to keep it being just that. Only after 1944 there were those movements of the Finnish talking people to other parts of Russia, mainly Siberia, and bringing russian talking inhabitants there to replace them... It usually needs someone from far away to take rude actions like these, Stalin from Georgia was seemingly quite suitable.

When I now looked via Google Earth the village, Patala, where my ancestors lived for generations, there seemed now to be no villages or houses any more, just bare forests and empty coasts. In 1747 there were at least those empty houses, new inhabitants were required to live in them then.

KR 88.193.134.7 (talk) 11:26, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

"Swedes annexed the region during the Third Swedish Crusade. The Russians retook the islands at the close of the Great Northern War in 1721."

So, since Novgorod was annexed by Moscow before the Great Northern War, you might as well say that after "Anschluss" Nazi-Germany merely "retook" Czechoslovakia as well. According to the absurd logic of Soviet-Russian history you might as well say that Britain belongs to Italy just because some Roman historian made the first written mention of the island. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.78.209.63 (talk) 16:29, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Primorsk, Leningrad Oblast. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150706192034/http://www.bild.bundesarchiv.de/archives/barchpic/search/_1435972146/ to http://www.bild.bundesarchiv.de/archives/barchpic/search/_1435972146/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:34, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

wp:burden

And editor reverted the deletion of uncited material. Including material tagged for that for eight years. Without supplying rs refs. But rs refs are required in that case - not simply the reintroduction with eight year old tags (or without them where that is the case). Per wp:burden. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Primorsk%2C_Leningrad_Oblast&type=revision&diff=1085574010&oldid=1085568418 --2603:7000:2143:8500:6030:709B:3761:F435 (talk) 07:36, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Would you please proceed to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Content deletion on Russian-themed articles where your behavior is discussed. In the meanwhile, I will likely revert your edits in other articles. Ymblanter (talk) 07:47, 1 May 2022 (UTC)