From Conservapedia

Jump to: navigation, search

"have had strong connections with former Soviet Union"

The connections to USA has always bin much stronger than the connections to the Soviet Union. It is correct that some ultra left wing politician had connections to the Soviet Union, however these represented a minority.

Iceland and Finland

I'd like to avoid getting into a revert war. So, I'd like to point out that the Scandinavian Tourist Board consists of members of "Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden." [1] Scandinavian House, "The Nordic Center in America" also lists all five countries. [2] National Geographic's map of Scandinavia has all five countries in it. [3]. If you want more examples, I can find them. The only mention of Scandinavia that did not involve Iceland and Finland that I could find was the ownership of SAS. Given that it was founded in 1946, when Finland was controlled by Russia and Iceland was not in an economic position to support an airline, I do not find this a convincing case for only including three of the five countries of Scandinavia. If there is good reason for excluding Iceland and Finland, I'll hear it, but I'm not seeing one. ArnoldFriend 23:39, 2 November 2008 (EST)

Er, the USSR, not Russia. ArnoldFriend 23:42, 2 November 2008 (EST)
I reverted your most recent edit, because at least one part of it was factually incorrect. Finnish is not solely related to Hungarian. I am a Scandinavian Studies minor at UC Berkeley -- our working definition (and the working definition used in most of academia, including from my experience people out of the University of Lund) has Scandinavia referring to Norway/Sweden/Denmark or N/S/D+F, and "Nordic Countries" used to refer to all five, although Scandinavia certainly can (and is frequently used to) refer to all five. Obviously, if you restrict it to mean the actual Scandinavian peninsula (which I have seen a number of definitions do,) only Norway and Sweden are included. TGeary 23:52, 2 November 2008 (EST)
Ok, I can understand that. I think the difference might be a popular vs. an academic view here. I yield to your experience. ArnoldFriend 23:54, 2 November 2008 (EST)
It would probably be a good idea to make it clear on the page that the term Scandinavia [i]can[/i] be used to refer to up to all five of them. I think the current page does so, but sometimes my writing may seem clear to me but not to others. Feel free to edit it if you think it would be better phrased else-wise. In the coming days/weeks, I intend to expand the article a good bit. TGeary 23:57, 2 November 2008 (EST)
As a Scandinavian myself (Norwegian specifically) I would like to point out that Finland and Iceland are definitively considered Scandinavian by the rest of us. Does that count for anything?

toby 02:47, 13 November 2008 (EST)

I think it would be good to indicate in the article that it is not always used to refer to all five; I don't care if it says "Scandinavia is these five, but sometimes only refers to three" or "Scandinavia is these three, but sometimes refers to these five," but I do think it should be indicated. It's definitely frequently used to refer to only the three in academic discourse, including academic discourse coming out of Uppsala and Lund. I'll start working again on this pretty soon, I've just been in midterms. TGeary 21:04, 12 November 2008 (EST)
As a Finnish myself, Finland is never considered part of Scandinavia in Finland. We have close ties with the other Nordic Countries - but we call them (and us) like that, Nordic Countries, Pohjoismaat. --Suomalainen 12:45, 13 November 2008 (EST)
Personal tools