Jump to content

Talk:Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Mannerheim redirect/disambig

Please see Talk:Mannerheim. Scoo 14:00, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Mannerheim's height

The article now states that Mannerheim's height was 194 cm (6'4"). While many sources give this number -- Mannerheim certainly was tall -- I've seen many reliable sources stating his height was 'only' 187 cm (6'2"). -Mikko H. 10:13, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

not that it's a source but he looks more 194 to me. Gillis 19:03, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
At the time I read the article, it was written as 6' 4 1/2" (194 cm). This is pure American bigotry. Mannerheim was Finland-Swedish, and served in the Russian military in his youth. All of Finland, Sweden and Russia are metric-only countries. To completely ignore this and replace metric units with redneck units just because they look nicer should not be tolerated. JIP | Talk 08:25, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Mannerheim as army-leader

As a military commander Mannerheim was a mixed success.

I am very suprised. Finish army was in WWII. very good evaluated. Results of finish war effort was impressive. How is possible it, with mixed success commander?
I red no publication, that evaluates Mannerheim like this. Very good commander was the worst evaluate, that I met. Excelent commander was more frequent. What is source of evaluate in artikel?

Cinik 16:29, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

There has been numerous reports in Finland about his shortcomings as a leader. There has also been an academic study about it. (Could somebody give the correct reference?) Finnish army was highly succesfull in the WWII, despite Mannerheim's inflexibility and unwillingnes to delegate. That is not to say that he didn't have good qualities as a leader. He had a knack for politics, ability to unite the country and to avoid unnecessary loss of life among his soldiers. The first part of the article described him as "an outstanding strategist" while later in in the article his strategy is critized. I changed it into "an astute politician and a successful military commander". While it might be disputed wether he was a brilliant strategist or not, the outcome is not (to my knowledge) disputed, hence the word "succesfull". --Chino 04:19, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
The word "succesfull" is spelled "successful" BTW. Hehe.
Most of the strategic plans were formulate by Aksel Airo. Mannerheim argued with him but also accepted his views - Skysmith 09:07, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

new recording?

the edit of 21:09, 10 July 2006 68.166.138.247 claims there is a "new recording" found between Hitler and Mannerheim. Is this really a _new_ recording, or just the old one that mannerheim's adjutants conducted secretly during a train-ride where mannerheim and hitler discussed during Hitler's visit. That tape has been around for quite some time and is said to be pretty much the only tape of hitler speaking in his non-official way (which was quite different from the way he spoke in official speeches etc.), in fact the actor that played Hitler in the movie "der untergang" used that tape for training Hitler's way of speaking in private.

But that would not be a "new" tape as the edit claims. so sources would be great.

Gillis 21:47, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Probably someone who watched a TV documentary and wanted to share the "scoop" (i.e. All Quiet on the Western Front). Scoo 15:07, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
Yep, that was my guess too, well i removed the part about the tape being new. Thanks also to whomever digged up some sources for it~(which also corrected some things i remembered wrong here). Gillis 17:16, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
An extract from the tape is available here (didn't notice a link or reference to it in the text.) Might be worthy of inclusion in the article. Personally, I think the historical significance of this conversation and the recording thereof is such that it probably merits a dedicated article of its own, but I leave that for more experienced users to decide. DublinDilettante 02:14, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

But what should it be called?

I agree it deserves it's own article, but what should we call an article about the recording, it can't really be "secret recording of hitler during his visit to Finland as long named articles probably don't get the attention they deserve. Could it be called "The immola recording" (place) or "The damen recording"(man who made it) or maybe "Hitler's recording in Finland" or? get your suggestions out! Gillis 07:19, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I'd vote for Hitler-Mannerheim meeting (1942), and let a large section deal with the recording. Scoo 14:14, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

"Leading the army 1918-1945"

I have a problem with this sentence: "After the Russian Revolution of 1917 he successfully led the army of the newly independent Finnish nation through a troubled period between 1918 and 1945." Mannerheim wasn't really a military leader between the wars. See the article itself under heading "Between the wars" and also [1] -- between the wars Mannerheim's interests were mixed, often more charitable than political, and he even worked as a banker. So I feel the above sentence is not accurate and therefore I changed it to "He started his military career in the Imperial Russian army, becoming the leader of Finnish government forces in the civil war of 1918 and during the Second World War." Wempain 20:29, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

"Russophile president J.K. Paasikivi"

Calling Paasikivi a "Russophile" is inaccurate. Paasikivi, who was a member of the Conservative Party, represented what came later to be called "Realpolitik"; his goal was to ensure through a policy of appeasement that Finland retained its independence and as much political free rein as possible. A pragmatic politician if there ever was one, he understood that security could only be guaranteed through friendly relations with the Soviet Union, but this does not render him a "Russophile" - only an astute diplomat.--Death Bredon 14:39, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Old talk

User:Wempain seems to think he should always be referred to by his full name, Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim. In my experience, he is most commonly known as Carl Gustaf Mannerheim, and Britannica confirms this with the title of their article on him. But I suppose there may be a good argument for moving it still, I don't know. Everyking 18:08, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I already commented on the issue on Everyking's talk page. Just to repeat: While I appreciate the fact that the full name of this Finnish military leader is rather long, I'd like to point out that he is not known here in Finland under that shorter name (leaving out Emil) - that is not the name commonly used. In addition to his full name, the marshal is referred to as C.G.E. Mannerheim, marshal Mannerheim or simply just Mannerheim (that's how he also signed documents, by the way). However, I feel his complete name should be used. When it comes to links, there's of course the possibility for abbreviation. Wempain 23:19, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC
Well, I suppose you would know about Finland, but that raises the question of whether the English convention should take precedence in this case. It would be nice to see if someone else from Finland has the same take on it as you. I don't find it particularly objectionable to title it by the full name, if there's good reason to think it's a better title. Everyking 00:06, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Carl Gustav Mannerheim (1797–1854), grandfather of the marshall, was an entomologist and governor in Viborgs län. The second middle name is relevant a "natural disambiguator". Beside that, I would like to agree with both of you. :-) To refer to Mannerheim with the ugly acronym C. G. E. Mannerheim or the full name is no good usage, but the article is better moved back to the name that's considered his full and correct by (at least) Swedish speakers, which he was himself. --Johan Magnus 07:35, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Mannerheim himself used the second name Gustaf and left the other two out. He signed at times merely Mannerheim or G.Mannerheim. Signature style changes considerable through his life. In public he never used his full firstnames. In informal family occasions he was merely Gustaf.
Wempain is right, of course! /Tuomas 14:19, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I came ("incidentially", we can say) to produce a couple of C.G.E. Mannerheim at locations were I felt that looked better than the alternatives. Feel free to change that to whatever your taste tells you looks better. :-) /Tuomas 04:49, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

All right, I moved it back to Wempain's title. Everyking 14:44, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)

My grandfather received a commendation from Mannerheim for his participation in the Civil War (or the War of Independence, as it was called at the time). In the spirit of the times, the document is signed (albeit with a stamp) "Kustaa Mannerheim". Kustaa is the Finnish version of the name Gustav/Gustaf and is also used, e.g., of all Swedish kings of that name, including the present one, Kaarle XVI Kustaa (Carl XVI Gustaf). Mannerheim does not appear to have continued this practice very long after 1918. Incidentally, the official candidate of the Finnish royalists for the Finnish throne was not Mannerheim but Prince Friedrich Karl of Hesse, who was actually accepted by parliament and proposed to rule under the name "Väinö I", but this plan fell through when Germany lost WW1. --Death Bredon 14:39, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Not speculating into Mannerheim's possible mona~rchist aspirations, but mannerheim did use Gustaf as he did not like carl a lot. In fact on the Swedish wikipedia the article carl gustaf emil mannerheim was renamed Gustaf Mannerheim because of this. My guess is the translation has more to do with the language strife of the time, wanting to look like a finnish leader. But that's just a guess. Gillis 09:39, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
During his service for the Russian Tzar between 1887 and 1917, Mannerheim used the name Gustav and his Russian partners and friends called him Gustav Karlovich with respect.

Mannerheim & Airo

This article could probably benefit from going into slightly more depth on the relationship between Aksel Airo and the Field Marshal. -- Cimon Avaro; on a pogostick. 00:47, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Dutch or German family?

According to a quite recent study mannerheims family did not come from the netherlands, but from Germany. The finnish wikipedia has already changed this. And it seems someone has tried changing it here but become reverted. The link to the source (in finnish) [2] mtv3 also ran the same new [3]. Could someone find an English source for this? also this of course is just one stdy, but looks like pretty solid evidence though.

Just looks a bit stupid when en.wikipedia says dutch and fi.wikipedia says german.

Gillis 22:02, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Well i went ahead and changed it as nobody aired any objections... maybe the mannerheim family article needs the same change? Gillis 09:51, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Some summary of his status among the Finns

I'd like to add some sort of comparison that helps people realise that Mannerheim enjoys a status as a national hero par excellence and father of the nation. Would a comparison with George Washington or Kemal Atatürk be appropriate? These were also war heroes that also skillfully led the difficult birth of a nation and the troubled times that followed and they enjoy a similar "father of the nation" status. -Sensemaker

Hmm, i do think that anyone who reads the entire article has it somewhat clear for them. But a chapter on this view of him could be in order. I'm not certain about the comparison to other persons with similar brands though(?) Gillis 09:54, 17 August 2007 (UTC) and oh btw, when signing use four tildas.

Mannerheim in media

Shouldn't there be section about movies and shows where he has been character acted by some actor. I'm quite frankly asking this because there is going to be movie of him that will be published around the world. It is called simply Mannerheim. Its just odd that he has been used as character in many movies and in books and there is not a single mention about it. Shouldn't a section about this be added as many other historical people including Hitler has somekind of section dealing with movies, series or books where he has been a character. --80.221.239.213 (talk) 10:22, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

WP:MILHIST assessment

Hi, all. I've looked over this article per the request here. There are still a few issues with the article that I noticed. The main one, which is preventing it from being rated as B-class, is the serious lack of citations throughout the article. There is also the inconsistent style of citations; most of them use the <ref> </ref> format, but there are a few (which I have highlighted in the text with editors' comments) that are parenthetical references. These need to be converted into the former style. Another, more minor issue, is that there is some overlink. General dates shouldn't usually be linked, nor should thinks like car, for instance. I hope these suggestions help the writers of this article improve it, so it can eventually reach FA. Keep up the good work! Parsecboy (talk) 23:46, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

German regalia in photograph?

I'm no expert on uniforms or anything but the uniform he's wearing in the main photo looks remarkably similar to the German WW2 uniform and he also seems to be wearing German Iron Crosses on his uniform; does anybody know why this is? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.17.242.41 (talk) 20:08, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

In the picture he is wearing the Finnish Model 36 uniform, which was influenced by German field gray uniforms. The picture was taken on Mannerheim's 75th birthday 4 June 1942, when Hitler came for a visit. That's why Mannerheim displays prominently his German decorations: EK I & II awarded in 1918 with 1939 clasps awarded in 1941 as well as the Knight's Cross awarded in 1941. Normally Mannerheim carried only Finnish decorations, which can also be seen in the picture. 62.183.251.50 (talk) 11:47, 3 May 2010 (UTC)


Homosexuality claims

Although surprisingly little is known about his private life, should we include something about present claims suggesting that Mannerheim was a homo-/bisexual? The article mentions his unsuccessful marriage and kind of establishes him as a heterosexual because of that. Apart of the quite recent short film controversial in Finland that portrays him as a homosexual, there is much contemporary debate about his sexuality. Maybe the legacy section should somehow address these claims? With reliable sources of course. JJohannes (talk) 00:13, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

"Mannerheim meeting with Hitler"

From the history I see that there has been some altering back and forth between two versions. The one currently in use is full of derogatory remarks on Hitler without citations. Doesn't correspond to NPOV, and some of it hardly fit into a high class article at all. Instead of just altering it back to the previous smaller version, I prefer to bring it up here. There was a lot of politics about that meeting and Mannerheim was aware of the possible future implications from being to cordial with Hitler, as he was during WWI when Finland approached Germany. Norrefeldt 11:35, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Hitler - Mannerheim meetings had to be kept secret from the Russians. But eventually there were spies everywhere in WW2.130.166.34.165 (talk) 00:42, 20 February 2011 (UTC)


Hitler and Mannerheim had two meetings in 1942, one in Finland, and one in Germany.

Hitler with Field Marshal Wilhelm Keitel (the Chief of the Armed Forces High Command) and the Reich Press Chief Dietrich flew to Finland for meetings with the Finnish president Ryti and Mannerheim in June 1942, see video [4] Notice how Mannerheim greeted Hitler by saluting him several times.

Later Mannerheim paid a visit to Hitler's Headquarters in Germany. There Mannerheim had meeetings with Adolf Hitler, Chief of Staff Halder, Grand Admiral Rader, and Reichsfuhrer-SS Himmler and their staff. Then Mannerheim went to the Headquarters of the Reichsmarschall Hermann Goering, see video [5]

On both videos Mannerheim and his Finnish generals can be seen talking with Hitler and German generals, and also studying military maps together. Discussions were top secret, so a Finnish reporter taped only 20 minutes of conversation, then the taperecorder was stopped by a German security officer. Out of two days and many hours of Hitler - Mannerheim meetings, we have a few minutes of "edited" videos and 20 minutes of "interrupted" radio recording. But there were several more hours of high level discussions, there was much more talking that was not recorded!130.166.34.165 (talk) 05:01, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

What was your point in this post? Everybody knew that they talked about military tactics in both occasions and it seemed that Hitler was the one who talked about it more than Mannerheim. Also of course people talk to eachother it wouldn't be polite not to talk to the guests if they are visiting. Also what is so odd in the saluting that it needs to be mentioned. Of course Mannerheim had to salute Hitler if he made any gesture that could have been considered as greeting as if he would have not saluted it would have been taken as an insult. Mannerheim wasn't stupid as he was quite experienced diplomat. Also Mannerheim has to salute every one of the guest as its the military tradition to greet. Also your film material is only those recorded by Germans there is other films of Hitler's visit in Finland made by YLE (the company that also recorded the secret recording) and are open to anyone to see. So you claiming that there is just few minutes of film is not true. Heres part of a document done of Mannerheim and there you can clearly seperate the German film from the Finnish one as the Finnish one is more clearer than the German one. [6] Also you can see on the Finnish film when the German and Finnish reporters and cameraman move to shoot Mannerheim and Hitler getting in the train and Mannerheim politely letting Hitler go first. Also seen on the German material. Also your information that a German officer stopped the recording is wrong. The man who stopped the recording was the Finnish communication officer when he noticed that the recorder guys were still recording. If a German officer would have noticed that they even recorded that 20 minutes they would have confiscated and destroyed the recording as Hitler didn't want any recording to be in existence where he talked with his normal voice. Also once again the conversation with them was not really any way a secret and every historian of Finnish war history knows that. Even in the document it was stated that Mannerheim and Ryti was expecting Hitler to come with somekind of demands about the war so the negotiations were not really any secret. --80.221.235.130 (talk) 18:36, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Hitler - Mannerheim meetings had to be kept secret from the Russians. But eventually there were spies everywhere in WW2.

130.166.34.165 (talk) 00:46, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

small language thing...

Well... i like this article... but this little thing troubles me, it really is not a big deal but...

"Ironically, Mannerheim never learned to speak Finnish until he was in his fifties."

well, yes it could be seen as ironical to many, but in fact very few of the ruling class spoke finnish as their mother tongue, or even fluently at that time, most spoke swedish(as there is two official languages in finland, and at that time swedish was more common for the ruling class). In fact also russian was more common in mannerheims youth for someone like mannerheim. So in a sence this is really not as ironical/funny as it might be to someone who does not know about that fact. But i can't come up with a smooth way of incorporating that information into it...

any ideas or thoughts?

Gillis 19:11, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

It might not be ironical for Finns, but it certainly is from the international point of view, where Mannerheim is usually known as 'champion of Finnish freedom'. - Mikko H. 08:47, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
Well... then it might be notable that also Runeberg, Lönnroth and Snellman were not finnish speaking, and still are considered very much finnish heroes. In fact i'd want to hear one early 20th century or earlyer finnish cultural or otherwise hero that spoke good finnish? except leino and kivi... So it really would be more odd to find one that spoke fluent finnish than the other way around... I just thought it could be noted as a sidenote so that i twould not appear so ironic, as it isn't, maybe Finland's bilinguity might be appropriate to explain with a few words.... don't know? thoughts?...

Gillis 16:58, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Saying that most of the Finnish ruling class spoke only swedish is a bit exaggerated, since so called "Fennicization" happened mostly in the end of the 19th and in the beginning of 20th century and thus during WW2 most of the ruling class in Finland spoke also finnish, despite having originally Swedish names. Latre
You are right, many of the instead of most would probably be best here... But still, Mannerheim did speak finnish, but it was his weakest language (atleast according to the article). So still, i think it isn't all that ironic as the wording in the article says. Gillis 15:39, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
In fact, Mannerheim spoke more or less fluent Finnish in his childhood. At least that's what an elderly lady who knew him back then said in a radio interview in the 50s (the interview can be found in YLE's Internet archives). In Mikkeli's "Headquarters Museum" I listened to one of his radio speeches and he clearly doesn't pronounce Finnish the way somebody who learned the language as an adult does. Here's the same information from the "official Mannerheim site" [7] "Mannerheim learned the Finnish language in early childhood, although the many years spent abroad had their effect on the pronunciation." BTW, Elias Lönnrot's (not Lönnroth) mother tongue and the language he spoke with his relatives was Finnish. Tomppeli 08:35, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Swedish and German were the languages in his childhood, because the family was bilingual (Swedish and German ancestry was very strong in the Mannerheim family). Since the official language of the country was Russian, Mannerheim spoke fluent Russian and made an excellent career in the high classes of the Russian society, including his marriage to a rich Russian countess, his Russian Generals and commanders, and even several meetings with the Russian Tzar.
You should study more history. Official languages of Grand Duchy of Finland was Swedish and Finnish after 1902. Russian was only demanded from the people in official standings in the goverment of the Grand Duchy. Only in 1900 the official language of the senate of Finland was changed to Russian as part of the Russification efforts. There was only 6000 russian speaking people in Finland when that was done and those people were just 0.2% of the total population. Majority of the people living in the Grand Duchy of Finland spoke finnish as their first language even before it was made official. --80.221.242.109 (talk) 20:55, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

removed a picture

i removed the picture at the wery top of the page. i do wonder who changed the older picture to that horrific new one.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.112.210.208 (talk) 20:36, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

MLL

Shouldn't the legacy section also include a bit more info on Mannerheim League for Child Wellfare? --TheHande (talk) 14:07, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Military exploits and achievements missing

Arguably Mannerheim is chiefly known as a distinguished commander with a military career spanning four decades and five wars

Yet the article says very little about his military exploits and achievements during these wars. It is truely remarkable that the article fails to mention even the Mannerheim Line! In the first two wars, Mannerheim was a minor commander, and thus this article is the main place where his achievements (which elevated him to the status of Finland's most senior military figure and laid the foundation for his future leadership roles) can be summarised, if only briefly. In the last three wars, Mannerheim was the leading figure, and, naturally, the details of the operations under his command are discussed in the respective artciles about these wars. But a summary in the Mannerheim article is in order, like it is done in the Russian language article.BorisG (talk) 17:23, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Considering Finland's 20th Century history (e.g., civil war in 1917-1918, the Terijoki gov't in this time period) and the presumptive unfamiliarity of many readers of this article with the history, the way it was expressed prior to the change by the user identified by only his/her IP address appears preferable. If the esteemed contributor feels strongly about the change, when changing it back to "Finnish Defense Forces," would you please put the definite article in front of FDF so it's clear there weren't other FD forces. Thanks. (The definite article in front would be standard English usage, and might accomplish the same thing as the way it was done before.) Paavo273 (talk) 16:52, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Preferred spelling variety

Firstly, thanks to anonymous user using IP #95.150.233.48 for the great edits, especially ridding the article of dead Wikilinks. Rel spelling changes I've reverted, I can't find any authority for Britified spelling in this article under Wikipedia:Manual of style#National varieties of English. To my knowledge and IMO, USA had the much stronger connection to the Marshal, just, e.g., sold him some aeroplanes his pilots used w/ great skill, sold him other war materiel, sent some significant if totally inadequate humanitarian aid, etc. Paavo273 (talk) 01:17, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

On demobilizing and fighting at the same time. Also the use of pronouns and antecedents

@ User:Wanderer602

1. 'Don't think there's any real disagreement here about what happened. It's just a logical contradiction that you can fight and demobilize at the same time.

2. If the way I've fixed it now is not satisfactory to you, then I ask as per WP:Verifiability#Citing non-English sources, that you or s.o. quote from the original apparently Finnish source what it actually says, and I will add a tag to that effect.

3. That source citation is also defective (as used for the first time earlier under the Brief Presidency heading), lacks page number and also lacks sufficient publication info to be able to find it. Of course, even an incomplete source is better than no source, which this article suffers from. (Recently read an interesting biography of M and hope to add cites from it to support a lot of the uncited info in the article.)

4. Rel pronouns vs. antecedents, it's standard procedure to rename the antecedent, in this case the subject of the article, at the beginning of a new paragraph. This is not a controversial convention, and is done widely including in this article. As it is, this paragraph barely mentions M as it is. Paavo273 (talk) 17:20, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

1. It is not a logical contradiction. It only limits the amount of forces Finns were able to deploy. That contradiction was created by the Soviet demands which forced Finns to gradually reduce the amount of forces that could be deployed against the Germans. End result was that after the capture of Rovaniemi the 'pursuing' Finnish forces were greatly outnumbered by the 'retreating' Germans. Later in the Lapland War during the spring of 1945 there were just couple of hundred Finnish newly trained conscripts. Whole of the army was gradually demobilized - including the units deployed against the Germans.

2. It is not accurate currently(so it is not acceptable) as the units deployed against the Germans were not exempted from it. Also, your own 'corrections' lacked citations just as well - use of 'logic' like you did in such a case is actually violation of WP:NOR clause if you do not have sources to support your edit(s). Here is one source which supports what i stated (Google books link) which makes it abundantly clear that Finnish demobilization was concluded prior to the termination of hostilities.

- Wanderer602 (talk) 22:09, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

@ User:Wanderer602: I think I understand what you're saying. Thanks for providing the additional cite. I ADDED it to the article. I was in no way suggesting my logic should be substituted for a proper source. I was only trying to make sense of the text.
*A WP user always has the perogative to investigate and challenge a cited source. The prior source citation is inadequately made (unrealistic for me to find it) and also appears to be a foreign language, i.e., Finnish language, source. It's unclear whether it even pertained to that part of the paragraph. Regards, Paavo273 (talk) 23:49, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Note - demobilisation does not have to be total. A single soldier can be deomobilised! The Oxford English Dictionary[8] defines it as to "take (troops) out of active service, typically at the end of a war". So "typically at the end of a war" means that according to the OED at least, demobilisation can take place even as a war continues, and it can happen over time, for example demobilising certain units once they have won or lost the specific battle they are involved in while other units fight other battles. Whether or not in this case the war continued during a demobilisation is another matter. But it could have done. Harry the Dog WOOF 09:40, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
In this case Finland was required to demobilize its military to peacetime strength within 2 & 1/2 months after the signing of the Moscow Armistice (14 September 1944) - in other words by the end of November 1944. Lapland War however continued until late April 1945. - Wanderer602 (talk) 16:01, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Time to delete weaselly statement tagged for nearly five years?

Hi all. I'm proposing to delete the following statement:

"It has been suggested that one reason why the Soviet offensive in Karelian Isthmus in June 1944 took the Finns by surprise was that Mannerheim was unable to see the forest for the trees. There was no other authority save Mannerheim to collect the intelligence and turn it into operational orders.[citation needed]"

This would be extremely weaselly even were it sourced (e.g., "It has been suggested..."), and nobody has bothered to add a citation to it since it was tagged in August 2009. Now is the time to place the cite or argue for further keeping. Absent a proper cite or persuasive argument to keep, I will plan to delete it soon. Paavo273 (talk) 19:36, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

"Lahtari" / "The Executioner"

User:Ttalho added the following, which I removed:

As the head of the White (right-wing) troops, Mannerheim was highly distrusted among the Reds (left-wing supporters) during the war and after it. He earned himself the nickname "Lahtari" ("The Executioner"), a reference to the mass executions of Reds committed by the White troops at the end of the civil war.

I think this is both an inappropriate political interpretation as well as technically incorrect. "Lahtari" was a derogatory term used by the Reds (communists) of all Whites (non-communists), not just General Mannerheim. The term was used during the war as well, so its roots were not in the post-war executions. Also, it's natural for a party in a civil war to distrust the leader of the other party. This distrust of the Reds didn't disappear with the end of the brief civil war, but remarkably at the time of the Russian aggression of 1939 (The Winter War) the former Reds joined the Whites to fight the invaders, all under the command of General Mannerheim.

For more information about the distrust between the former Reds and Whites, see Civil War in Finland#Outcome and Lapua Movement. I think the political atmosphere in Finland in the 1920s and 1930s is an interesting subject and the label "lahtari" has to do with this topic, but this discussion shouldn't be in this biographical article.

-Wempain 01:28, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Politically and historically, there is no consensus whether Mannerheim was personally responsible for atrocities in the Civil war. However, as the expression "lahtari" (more like "butcher") was a political term used for those who were suspected to be involved in human rights violations during the war, it is best to be addressed in the Finnish civil war article as no one specifically accused Mannerheim for being a "lahtari". JJohannes (talk) 23:58, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Finnish Civil War was not communists against non-communists. It was the armed section of the Social Democratic Party/Labour movement against the right wing Civil Guards/Landowners. Communist Party of Finland was established after the war. Okay, the Civil War Reds may be the seed of Finnish communism, but you can't call them communists. Vast majority of them did not take part to the underground communist movement which was active in 1920s and 1930s. -85.76.52.99 (talk) 09:24, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Date of birth

Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim was born on 4-th of june but in Europe it was 16-th of june because in Russian Empire (Finland was its part at that moment) it was Julian calendar used up to year 1918. So his date of deth in this artcle is given in Gregorian calendar, but his date of birth is given in Julian calendar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Шивва Рудра (talk • contribs) 12:34, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

That simply isn't true. Gregorian Calendar was in use even when Finland was part of the Russian Empire. --Surfo (talk) 19:11, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Name in article title

Mannerheim's autograph

The first name which was used by Mannerheim was Gustaf, as can be seen at the homepage of the Mannerheim Museum[9] and at Kansallisbiografia page with biographies over famous Finns[10]. I don't think any of his friends said "Carl Gustaf Emil" to him. As long as all the names are not needed for disambiguation purposes, they are not needed in the article heading. See the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Proper names#Personal names: "However, if the person is conventionally known by only their first and last names and disambiguation is not required, any middle names should be omitted from the article title." Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 21:28, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, User:Snowsuit Wearer, for your explanation. I have carefully re-read the rule you cite, and I see nothing THERE that supports your position. AFAICT, NO ONE is alleging that Gustaf was the Marshal's FIRST name. In fact, the example given with the various Bushes tends IMHO to contradict your position, given the Marshal's grandpa's similar name--very analogous to the Bushes. I've been involved in this article long enough and read enough outside source material to know that it is well established that Mannerheim was called by different of his given names by different people, plus Marshal, and no doubt other names.
As to the authority of the two references you provide diffs to rel him being universally referred to as Gustaf when a first name was used at all, they are relevant BUT are by no means dispositive nor even worthy of the kind of weight more in-depth, exhaustive sources offer, of which there are plenty. In fact, there has been substantial discussion including over the several years I have been active on this article among many editors on this very point: What was the Marshal called and by whom. I have a couple scholarly sources I have been intending to use to fill in some missing cites in the article--one of J E O Screen's works and the most recent English-language bio of the Marshal (Clements's). I will re-read what it says in those sources on point and report back here.
In any event, this issue needs discussion and consensus on the talk page prior to making this kind of change to the stable version. Unilaterally continuing to force this sort of change to the stable version without input and consensus from what is for THIS article an active editing community is unacceptable. See WP:Bold. (Someone removed the Marshal's full name from the infobox, and that is clearly improper and IMHO a separate issue from article naming.)
Frankly, I don't see a downside to using his full name with the re-directs for Gustaf and Mannerheim. Paavo273 (talk) 02:26, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
The full name should ONLY be used, if he was actually called "Carl Gustaf Emil" by any of his friends and family. I just don't believe anyone called him that.
The Manual of Style says so: only use a fuller name than usually used if it is needed for disambiguation purposes. If the full name was the rule according to that, then George H.W. Bush's article would be "George Herbert Walker Bush" and his son the president would be "George Walker Bush". They are not. So the article heading goes against the Wikipedia Manual of Style as it is now. It should not.
The official homepage of the President of Finland lists Mannerheim with all of his first names, but it does the same with all the presidents.[11] Kekkonen is listed as Urho Kaleva Kekkonen, still, his Wikipedia article is Urho Kekkonen and Ahtisaari is listed as Martti Oiva Kalevi Ahtisaari but his article is Martti Ahtisaari, etc.
You could argue that this article should be called Carl Gustaf Mannerheim, since some sources give that name (including Encyclopedia Britannica). OTOH, it says already in the first sentence in this article that Mannerheim was most usually called Gustaf Mannerheim and that his name as an Imperial Russian officer was Gustaf Karlowich Mannerheim (Karlowich is a patronymic according to Russian practice = Carlson in Mannerheim's native Swedish as far as I understand). Having all the three first names in the first sentence is enough, they should not be in the article heading. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 09:29, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
Both rules cited actually support the current naming, NOT the proposed change. See discussion below. Paavo273 (talk) 20:32, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 24 October 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus, leaning not moved. No consensus that the proposed title is the common name. Jenks24 (talk) 08:09, 9 November 2015 (UTC)


Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim → Gustaf Mannerheim – Having the full name (with all his three first names) in the article heading goes against the Manual of Style. Mannerheim's most used first name was only Gustaf. Also see discussion above. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 09:37, 24 October 2015 (UTC) --Relisted. Georgie says "Happy Halloween!" (BOO!) 05:04, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

In fact, Mannerheim is never referred to in Finnish historical literature as just Gustaf Mannerheim. Since 1930's, he was always referred to only as "Mannerheim" (as his usual signature) or as C. G. E. Mannerheim. (Similarly, three of his predecessors and one of his successors are almost always remembered by their full names: J. K. Paasikivi, L. Kr. Relander, P. E. Svinhufvud and K.J. Ståhlberg.) That is the way he is remembered. It is not the way normal people are called, but Manerheim is, in Finnish history, sui generis. --MPorciusCato (talk) 19:35, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
I'd also like to point out that Mannerheim's family had a tradition of actually using long first names in their actual public life. There was a family tradition that all sons had "Carl" as their first name and the second forename was a perosnal one. Many Mannerheims of the 19th century went by their full name in their public life, e.g. Carl Erik and Carl Robert Mannerheim. --MPorciusCato (talk) 19:40, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
Ditto for English language historical literature. Both rules Snowsuit Wearer cites actually directly contradict the position to change the names. The Article Titles guidance specifies "[WP] generally prefers to use the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources." The guidance given in the Manual of style, i.e., the Library of Congress, shows that M's FULL four names are used about 100 or more times in the English-language literature, and "Gustaf Mannerheim" is used exactly ZERO times. Here is the link given in the rule: the U.S. Library of Congress Authorities database . (Once there, 'must type in the name.)
Even were this not so, the Bush naming analogy is exactly on point. Under THAT reasoning--the title to that article is George H. W. Bush--the title for M's article should be C. Gustaf E. Mannerheim. Awkward, DYT?
Finally SW refers to multiple FIRST names, an idea also not supported by either rule. Paavo273 (talk) 20:22, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
No, it would not be "C. Gustaf E. Mannerheim", since there is no other Gustaf Mannerheim to disambiguate from. Still, if there was, C. Gustaf E. still would be better. We should not discuss how Mannerheim's name is written in modern sources but how it was written by himself and his close ones when he still was alive. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 20:59, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
"[T]here is no other Gustaf Mannerheim to disambiguate from." What about Grandpa Carl Gustaf Mannerheim? Have we forgotten about him?
As to your second assertion, about what we should discuss, that idea does not AFAICT appear to be supported by the rules cited and specifically discussed above. IMHO, we should follow the rules offered as guidance, not make up our own rules, even if in GF. (If these were bad rules, they could be changed, on WP a lot more easily than most places. However, since one of the cornerstones of WP is that all WP content is derivative, i.e., taken from other source material, it would seem most reasonable, IMHO, that the NAMING BE CONSISTENT WITH THE LITERATURE the article content is based on.) Paavo273 (talk) 21:14, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
His grandfather was called Carl Gustaf, so no need to disambiguate from Gustaf. We should follow the Wikipedia Manual of Style and call Mannerheim by the first name most commonly used for him, not by all his three first names. I don't see how you can interprete the manual differently. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 02:16, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
User: Snowsuit Wearer: There's AFAICT not a lot of need for interpretation. The rules are quite clear. What is needed is A. for you to quit making up your own rules and claiming they are the rule, and B. to quote and apply any specific part of these rules that support your position, a probable impossibility. Your made up rules: 1. your own INVENTION of the idea of multiple first names (instead of a single first name and middle name(s), 2. calling for the name the person used during his life to be used (which is not at issue, especially for a non-BLP, and also BTW itself disputed) rather than what the historical literature uses--as the rule calls for, and 3. rejecting the similarity of names for disambiguation laid out in the rule.
QUERY: Can you quote and apply any actual text in either of these rules to support your position? If so, please do so. If not, please cease and desist. Your pervading m.o. here makes it increasingly difficult for other editors to AGF on your part. Paavo273 (talk) 18:55, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
I have already quoted the rules, in the discussion above. See my first posting there. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 21:52, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment the article title should be based on what he is most commonly referred to in English by the reliable sources, per WP:UCN. It has nothing to do with what his family or friends called called him. A useful yardstick is what other English encyclopedias call his entry. I see that Britannica calls him Carl Gustaf Mannerheim, yet the International Encyclopedia of the First World War uses his full name. I'll leave those that know the source material to determine what the common name is. I'll also point out that hatnotes and even a dab page would be necessary in this case (I haven't checked for them). Cheers, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 23:19, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Support the move. Marshal Mannerheim is by far the most important and well known person by this name, so if anyone's article title should include more than the most usually used first name, it shouldn't be his. Egon Igel (talk) 08:03, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment Users Skogsvandraren and and Egon Igel have AFAICT never edited this or the article page before, but they have a common edit history with the proposer of the move, Snowsuit Wearer. I get a strong whiff of the possibility of WP:Canvassing, which is not reduced by the fact that neither editor quotes or applies the rules on point. Paavo273 (talk) 18:55, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose both because of what the rules actually say (Please see three separate editors' remarks above including my own specific quote and application of the rules in blue) and because of proposing editor's m.o. of making up his own rules in support of his proposed move (See text above in red). Paavo273 (talk) 19:18, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
Righto. I stand corrected. You DID quote a bit of the rule at the top of the section above this section, as follows: "However, if the person is conventionally known by only their first and last names and disambiguation is not required, any middle names should be omitted from the article title."
The problems that make your single quote (among all your non-specific generalized appeals to the authority of the rules) NOT applicable HERE are as follows:
1. This is a person from history, not a recent person, not a BLP, so the third paragraph of the rule applies, not the second. (See analysis in blue above.)
2. Even if paragraph 2 of the manual of style personal naming rule were applied to this article, a first name is not a middle name and vice versa. Middle names are specifically distinguished from first names earlier in the paragraph 2 you quote from (as well as by convention and common sense in English and probably every other language). (See also your made up rule #1 I've spelled out in red above.) No one here is proposing, AFAICT, to rename this article "Carl Mannerheim."
3. The standard for naming in BOTH rules as pointed out to you by three different editors (including me--see my remarks in blue above) is what the historical literature uses. Again please see discussion in blue above including link to the Library of Congress site FROM the rule, which your or anyone's perusal will reveal is about 100 to 0 in favor of the full four names.
4. As such it would seem your made up rule #2 (in red above) is NOT applicable. (And in any event M WAS known by his full name and many other variants during his lifetime.) Paavo273 (talk) 23:07, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose. He is usually professionally referred to by his full name. I don't think anyone who was not on first-name basis with him called him simply "Gustaf". JIP | Talk 08:35, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose. There doesn't seem to be a compelling reason for the move. Usage is all over the place. Google Books ngrams show that "Gustaf Mannerheim" is the most common form but those results would include hits for "Carl Gustaf Mannerheim" (which seem to amount to about 1⁄3 of that total. Other forms such as "Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim", "C. G. E. Mannerheim" and "Carl Mannerheim" (which do largely refer to the son) add up to nearly as much (some sources even use "von Mannerheim"😕). With so many variants including ones that do not include "Gustaf", it seems ill advised to truncate the name. —  AjaxSmack  00:23, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Overly detailed article

I was going to add "Overly detailed" tag to the article, due to the amount on the intricate detail, but thought I'd post here first. Any feedback? K.e.coffman (talk) 18:08, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

I will place the tag. K.e.coffman (talk) 19:31, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Recent edits - regarding Sweden & 19th century Mannerheim

First it ought to be noted that Finland was nothing but an integral part of Sweden until 1809.

Second, i removed a section and a source claimed that CGE Mannerheim would have "became a strong proponent for the adoption of Finnish as a national language, to the dismay of the minority Finn-Swedes who wanted only Swedish as a single official language". The used source doesn't (i) handle the person being discussed in this wikipage, but instead a member of that family in 1840s, (ii) nor does it actually say what the editor claimed it would have. There is not a single word that would indicate that there would have been 'dismay' of any sorts or even to the issue of Finn-Swedes. - Wanderer602 (talk) 18:26, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:07, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:54, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Field Marshal not "Honorary" Rank

The article states that Mannerheim was given the rank of field marshal which it describes as honorary. That is incorrect, while the rank understandably carries prestige with it, it is a real rank commensurate with the larger forces commanded than those typically assigned to a full general. In American parlance, the 5 Star "general of the armies" is our equivalent of a field marshal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.182.83.219 (talk) 02:26, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

The Photograph of The Statue

This may seem silly, but I'd prefer a picture of Mannerheim's equestrian statue where he doesn't have a seagull on his head.

It is certainly silly to note the preference on the Talk page, however perhaps you should concentrate on the correct use of capital letters. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:205:C92C:F662:FDC1:D013:ABE1:749C (talk) 17:02, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Pronunciation of the name

The pronunciation "kɑːɭ ²ɡɵstav ˈeːmɪl ²manːɛrˌheɪm" is outlandish, extremely bizarre, something you never hear in Finland, with the grave accents and the "ɭ" and some vowel qualities. It is based on the phonology of the Swedish language in Sweden. Could someone please provide a reliable IPA pronunciation for the name in Finland Swedish. The same pronunciation is used, with very slight modifications, in Finnish, too. --Surfo (talk) 08:50, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Baron?

Could someone enlighten me on as to when did he get that baron's title? Marshal, sure, we Finns tend to use this title when referring to him but baron? To my understanding this might be a simple mistake as I sincerely don't remember coming across a reference to him being a baron during my 19 years of life, even when when my country has been talked about in history classes. No joke, I really don't remember him being given that title.Iikka Backman (talk) 11:37, 15 November 2018 (UTC)Iikka Backman

Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim had a noble rank/title that of a 'vapaaherra'. That corresponds to the Swedish 'friherre' and to the German 'Freiherr' - all which correspond to the rank of 'baron' in English. - Wanderer602 (talk) 13:42, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

His daughter Sophie Mannerheim Jr. (1895–1963) is listed with a hyperlink, which just clicks back to this article. Valetude (talk) 22:48, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Manipulated photo

Someone please check out the photo of Hitler and Mannerheim, it has been crudely photoshopped with Trump's face over Hitler's, as can easily be seen when checking out the history of that file. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.55.140.150 (talk) 10:59, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Image reverted - thanks to wikipedia IRC page for help. - Wanderer602 (talk) 12:09, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

"Successfully led the defense"

In the intro: "Twenty years later, when Finland was twice at war with the Soviet Union from November 1939 until September 1944, Mannerheim successfully led the defence of Finland as commander-in-chief of the country's armed forces."

While Finland definitely performed well above its weight class and Mannerheim deserves significant credit for that, I feel the word "successfully" is incorrect due to the fact that Finland technically lost both wars and ceded territory each time. Admitted counter argument: Helsinki never fell and Finland was spared the embarrassments felt by most other nations who lost to the Soviets --52.60.131.138 (talk) 17:46, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:04, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Bad English

Reluctant to edit this myself because I'm not familiar enough with Mannerheim but the English throughout this entire article is pretty poor. The Childhood and Education sections particularly read as if they have been put through Google translate. Is anyone able to do anything about this? Again don't want to do it myself because I'm no expert on him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Francis vb (talk • contribs) 14:08, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

wording issues and source "Meri (1990)"

User:Francis vb commented above about "bad English" without specifics. Here are two details needing fixes:

  • Article states "After Mannerheim's father left the family for his mistress in 1880,[16] his mother Helene and her seven children went to live with her aunt Louise, but she died the following year," citing "Meri (1990)". My guess is that his mother Helene died, not Mannerheim's great-aunt Louise, but it is not clear.
  • Article states: "Called Gustaf at home, Mannerheim was described as a mischievous boy as a child, who, however, had a fresh joy of life and sovereign world-man behavior, a determined energy, and leadership qualities that became more and more evident with age. A sense of justice and duty, as well as a lovable love for hearts, ..." What on earth is a lovable love for hearts? Is that referring to him possibly being an enthusiastic player of Hearts (card game)???

And the abbreviation "Meri (1990)" is repeatedly given in notes, but no expanded reference is available in the bibliography. Does anyone have that source? Maybe it was included in early version of this article, which appears to be translated from Finnish or some other language, or in the Finnish wikipedia version of it. --Doncram (talk) 19:38, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

P.S. The "lovable love of hearts" and more which does not make sense apparently was copied verbatim from the Google translated-to-English version of Finnish language source here. Need a Finnish native speaker to reconsider that source. --Doncram (talk) 19:46, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

It seems that there are some wp:copyvios, e.g., these paragraphs added by User:Cartingcarl (ping) who still is an active editor. They seem to be a member of some sort of collective consisting of other users and bunch of IPs that, together, edit same Finland-related articles. 87.95.206.253 (talk) 20:24, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
I reverted that section to an older version before the copyvio was added. Maybe it should be revision deleted also. The source (Iltalehti) is probably OK, though there should be plenty of better sources available for this kind of topic. The language used in the magazine article is very colorful and it's difficult to translate its substance into English. The Meri 1990 source is quite certainly a biography written by Veijo Meri. -kyykaarme (talk) 18:58, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:12, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Height

He was not 6'4". His actual height was around 6'2". (Westerhaley (talk) 16:24, 13 May 2021 (UTC))

Dalai Lama

The article says:

During his trip to Tibet in 1908 Mannerheim became the third Westerner who had met with Dalai lama.

As far I understand, "Dalai Lama" is a title, not a name. Shouldn't that be "who had met with the Dalai Lama"? JIP | Talk 20:52, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Neutrality

"Twenty years later, when Finland was twice at war with the Soviet Union in the period from November 1939 until September 1944, Mannerheim led the defence of Finland as commander-in-chief of the country's armed forces." Unlike in the Winter War, the Soviets are not the aggressors of the Continuation War so he was not leading the "defence of Finland". Mannerheim and the Finnish army planned joint operations with their Nazi counterparts as part of Operation Barbarossa. According to the German military attache to Finland in WW2, Mannerheim had personally ordered preperations for a joint attack with Germany as early in September 1940. Regardless of whether or not you think about Mannerheim or Finland's role in WW2, it is clear that this should be changed. 23:34, 10 June 2021 (UTC)~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Originalcola (talk • contribs)

The reasons for the Continuation War are manyfold and the question of "agressorship" is not straightforward. The Soviets shot down a Finnish civilian passenger aircraft (the Ju 82 "Kaleva") over the Gulf of Finland with nine persons on board on June 14th, 1940 during the "interim peace" between the Winter War and the Continuation War in an apparent attempt to acquire French and American diplomatic mail being carried by couriers. Foreign minister Vyatcheslav Molotov travelled to Berlin in November 1940 to ask Hitler to allow the Soviet Union to occupy Finland but received a negative answer. Finnish military personnel were acquainted with "Operation Barbarossa" on a visit to Berlin in late May 1941 but did not commit to taking part (as per their orders from the government). There is no evidence that Mannerheim would have "personally ordered preparations for a joint attack with Germany in September 1940"; this would have made no sense since Germany and the USSR were allies at that point, as stipulated by the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact of 1939. In discussions with the Germans in early June 1941, the Finns made it clear that they would only join in a German attack if they were attacked first by the Soviets. The actual military conflict began with the Soviet artillery and Air Force bombarding several military and non-military targets in Finland beginning June 22nd. Finland did not retaliate at first and tried to convince the Soviets of their neutrality. After the Soviet Air Force bombed Helsinki and several other cities (i.e., civilian targets) on June 25th, the Finnish government was forced to admit that it was at war and military operations commenced the next day. Whether the fact that the Finnish troops were able to advance quickly, take back the areas that had been ceded to the USSR after the Winter War and continue further into Eastern Karelia makes Finland the "agressor" is debatable -- one could compare the situation to the 6-day war of 1967 when Israel made a pre-emptive strike when it was fully expecting to be attacked itself -- but according to Marshal Mannerheim's answer to Churchill, the main reason for the advance further than the old border was to shorten the front line and secure a buffer against the Soviet counter attack that was sure to come. Mannerheim's motive was thus the defence of Finland from a renewed Russian attack, which all signs before the Continuation War suggested was being prepared; he just got there "firstest with the mostest men" as a Confederate general is supposed to have said.--Jarmo K. (talk) 16:10, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Controversy

can you all please stop editing out any mention of controversy? wikipedia isn't supposed to be a great man memorial but actually offer accurate information on people and that would include the many controversies.


Mx-Spoon (talk) 01:30, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:52, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 19 September 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. to the title proposed, but there may be support for alternatives in a future RM.(closed by non-admin page mover) ASUKITE 15:36, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim → Gustaf Mannerheim – as per Wikipedia:Article titles#Common names his name should just be Gustaf Mannerheim, not have all of his three given names. He is also called just Gustaf Mannerheim at Wikipedia of his home language, Swedish. 95.199.4.149 (talk) 22:05, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

  • Oppose on the presented grounds alone. At least fi.wp uses the full name, fi:Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim, as does Britannica [12]. If you'd be willing to do a larger survey of how English language sources treat the matter, I'd be willing to amend my !vote, but the presented evidence is not sufficient. Ljleppan (talk) 07:47, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose. He is usually referred to with his full name in English and Finnish language sources. JIP | Talk 07:18, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose. In English-language sources his full name is very rarely used. Usually he's just referred to as Marshal Mannerheim. But when his first names are mentioned, it's usually Carl Mannerheim or Carl Gustaf Mannerheim. I would support moving to one of these and removing the rarely-used Emil. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:53, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Support, most biographies I know of which are written about him, name him just Gustaf Mannerheim, [13], [14], [15], [16], as well as his own memoirs (written in Swedish, which was his mother toungue, and published on the leading Finland-Swedish book publishing house Schildts), [17], however, there are some exceptions, like this Russian translation of his memoirs: [18] - Reaktionär revolutionär (talk) 18:34, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
    This is the English Wikipedia, English language usage is the thing that matters. Ljleppan (talk) 18:48, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
    As you can see, one of the biographies to which I provided a link was in English. He also seems to be called Gustaf Mannerheim in this biograhy: [19] and in the English presentation of this movie: [20] and on this US postage stamp: [21] and in this newspaper article: [22]. -Reaktionär revolutionär (talk) 19:55, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
    To be quite honest, these are not very convincing. IMDB is notoriously unreliable because it's WP:UGC and things where design concerns override are not convincing either (stamps, medals, books covers). Taking the biography as an example, the graphical cover might say "Gustaf Mannerheim", but the introduction and the first image caption starts with "Carl Gustaf Mannerheim". These are not intended to be full names either, as the next chapter then starts with "Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim was born..." If you want to make a convincing argument, I suggest making some type of a survey of relevant academic literature and report how they use the name in the prose. Ljleppan (talk) 20:08, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
    I think it would be very unlikely, an official postage stamp of the U.S. Postal Service were to use the wrong name for a foreign state leader honoured with a stamp. Reaktionär revolutionär (talk) 20:16, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
    You seem to have misunderstood my point: for certain media, various design concerns might influence the name used. For a postage stamp with limited space, a designer might elect to choose one variant of a name, even if they'd use another in long-form prose. But that's no really relevant for the larger point in any case. Ljleppan (talk) 20:47, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Meaning of legacy, *AND* blather that no published scholars agree on DOES NOT BELONG under legacy

1. Firstly, 'fixed some imprecise language.

2. Secondly, LEGACY means what was left behind by someone, in the context used here close in meaning to the person's REPUTATION, what s/he is KNOWN FOR. Obscure content that no published Mannerheim scholar says M is known for, does NOT belong under legacy. If someone wants to create a heading in this article called "Blog of Random Gossip, Obscure Media Projects Including Those that Never Got Made, and Rumors about His Love Life" then the stuff I deleted might have a home.

Sadly, RANDOM GOSSIP is what much of Wikipedia has become.

It doesn't serve this article and especially not its LEGACY section, e.g., to talk about (A) a movie that never was made, (B) a plaque in a foreign, hostile country that was REMOVED, or (C) unsubstantiated rumours about Mannerheim's flings with women, with boys, or whomever or whatever, or about which or what gender(s) he preferred sexually. ESPECIALLY if no published Mannerheim scholars agree that this is what he is known for. Absent the REMOVAL or NON-HAPPENING itself having affected what he is known for, it cannot be part of his legacy.

The placing of the Mannerheim statue in the forest outside Tampere, on the other hand, IS at least in some nominal way a legacy inasmuch as significant numbers of people, especially published scholars, recognize that placement IN THE CONTEXT OF Tampere's political and military history and Mannerheim's involvement there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.114.207.0 (talk) 17:20, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Some other red flags: 1. poorly written, in-places-incoherent use of English, indicating probable copy and paste from some other, likely foreign-language source. 2. it takes 4-5 sentences or more to explain what you're even talking about. (If it's something M is known for a sentence or two with a citation to scholarly work is plenty!) 3. Legacy-CANCELLING words in the actual description of the supposed legacy, e.g., "no consensus", "controversial claims", "rumor in Russia", "Mannerheim scholars have only reacted negatively and characterized the claim just a 'Russian fairy tale'."

CONSIDER: A LEGACY is what someone "leaves behind", What s/he is KNOWN FOR; *AND* one of the most basic rules of editing Wikipedia is that all content must be attributed to SCHOLARLY PUBLISHED SOURCES (although in fairness if this rule were enforced, the content of the "project" would shrink drastically; probably about 60-70 percent or more of the entire "encyclopedia" would have to be axed).

PLEASE ASK before placing anything under M's or anyone ELSE's legacy heading: 1. Is there any CONSENSUS among published scholars that the material is what the subject left behind, what s/he is known for? 2. Or if that is too great a burden, too high a standard, a good START would be are there even ONE or TWO published scholars who say this is something s/he is known for?

What it looks like happened here, is some junior high students or Putin trolls or whoever they were wanted to participate by adding something they heard about M that they thought was interesting. Since they couldn't find a proper heading under which the information belonged, and this was the last section written in sentence form, they just stuck it here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.114.207.0 (talk) 22:01, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Carl_Gustaf_Emil_Mannerheim/Archive_1&oldid=1236585919"