Talk:Swedish-speaking population of Finland/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

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 [1] , the official European Union bureau for lesser used languages (EBLUL) news agency document: [2]. (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 [3]
• "Swedish Finns" -Wikipedia: 571 hits [4]
• "Finland Swedes" -Wikipedia 580 hits [5]
  • Correction 10,400 hits [6] (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! [7]--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 [8] (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[9]. --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)

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 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" [10] 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 [11] 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)