Talk:List of wars between Russia and Sweden

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived 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: moved to List of wars between Russia and Sweden by participant as uncontroversial. -- JHunterJ (talk) 13:15, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

---

Russo-Swedish Wars → List of Russo-Swedish Wars – Per WP:DABCONCEPT, this appears to be a collection of links referring to a series of wars between Russia and Sweden (not all of which are even titled "Russo-Swedish War"). I think that this is better treated as a list, which can have the entries put in a table with additional information, than as a disambiguation page. bd2412 T 21:03, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

• Support, looks uncontroversial to me. -- JHunterJ (talk) 14:04, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
• Comment - having looked at this again, I actually think there may be slightly better targets than the one proposed. At the very least, I think it should be List of Russo-Swedish wars with different capitalisation, since it is not a title, but possibly also something along the lines of List of wars between Russia and Sweden? Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 12:04, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
  • I have no objection to an alternative, so long as it makes clear that this is in fact a list of articles addressing wars between these two particular countries. My objection is to the current characterization of this list as a disambiguation topic. bd2412 T 15:24, 2 January 2014 (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.

Semi-protected edit request on 24 May 2015

Clearly the truth is being suppressed by KGB goons. Wikipedia is not a tool of Putin. Many sources have debated the war and suspect that in a years time a new conflict will undoubtedly occur. 2A02:1810:3D25:CA00:8970:EF84:7BA4:19C0 (talk) 00:12, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. --I am k6ka ^{Talk to me!} _{See what I have done} 01:45, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

• My guess is that there's some continuing vandalism about adding yesterday's Eurovision Song Contest to the list. I saw a screenshot of the edit on another site and came here to see if it was still up; it's not, but my guess is that someone keeps trying to add it back in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.158.178.23 (talk) 19:10, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Language

Someone needs to link the Swedish version of this, which does exist at https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rysk-svenska_krig. I have no idea how to do so myself so I would appreciate it. Gvssy (talk) 00:08, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

I dont think there is a Swedish version Dencoolast33 (talk) 10:40, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

oh, sorry. there is a swedish version Dencoolast33 (talk) 10:44, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

More wars?

Should we include the invasion of Åland and the Swedish intervention in Persia? Dencoolast33 (talk) 10:42, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

I don't think we should, since they weren't techniclly wars because of the lack of a declaration of war Gvssy (talk) 15:10, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

okay, then ill stand down. Dencoolast33 (talk) 15:12, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

@Gvssy, would you mind me opening this discussion again? I think that the Invasion of Åland should be included. Sweden was even involved in the Battles of Godby, and i dont think it needs to be a declearation of war for it to be included on the list. Although, i wont drag this discussion out, if i do not have your blessing to edit it in, then i wont. Dencoolast33 (talk) 09:45, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

I don't have any objections to it, if Swedes actively fought against Russians during the Battles of Godby it should be included although perhaps put a note explicitly saying that there was no official declaration of war. Gvssy (talk) 09:54, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Okay, thank you Dencoolast33 (talk) 10:03, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Åland invasion

@Dencoolast33: First of all, edit warring is not cool. After your suggestion was reverted, the best way to continue would have been to start a discussion in order to create consensus, see WP:BRD. Failing that, I will start it, since I do not fight edit wars.

Re 'Soviets' / 'Soviet Russians': Not as strange as you suggest. The term 'Soviets' is a demonym that was used for citizens of the Soviet Union, which was founded in 1922. It does not make sense to use the term about people in connection with things that happened before that time. However, the Soviet Union was a union of states that had existed for some years, the first of them created with the October revolution of 1917. They were Soviet socialist republics, where the term 'Soviet' is a description of the form of government in those states. The largest of them was the Russian one, which also was a federation, so it was named the 'Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic' in short often called 'Soviet Russia'. It was an independent state from 1917 to 1922, and the demonym for citizens of that state is 'Russians', or, in order to distinguish from the pre-revolution citizenship, 'Soviet Russians'. So your piping [[Soviet Russia|Soviets]] is faulty. It will have to be [[Soviet Russia|Soviet Russians]] or simply [[Soviet Russia|Russians]]. Please correct this.

Re 'mistreatment' and fake news: This is a list article, where the target articles are supposed to give depth to the entries. In this case, the target article has a thorough analysis of the background and reasons for the actions of the various parties to the conflict, and it just mentions the alleged arbitrary and disorder of the Russian troops as a part of the reasoning behind the decision to send out the expedition. Rumours about chaos and bloodshed on Åland was certainly a part of the background for the invasion and not least for its timing. However, the sources do not give this as the only reason for sending the expedition. Your suggested text is completely WP:UNDUE and bordering on WP:OR and WP:SYNTH.

I suggest that you self revert and let the discussion here in the talk page decide what the content of the entry should be. Pinging all editors active on the page this year: @Gvssy, Dushnilkin, Tinkaer1991, Brandmeister, Sadustu Tau, and Julle: --T*U (talk) 22:09, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Personally, I'm not very educated on this topic, but the note should be shortened to something else, although I don't have any suggestions for it. I won't get involved much. Gvssy (talk) 22:13, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Im sorry, i did not mean to edit war. I reverted your edits so i dident have to get back some my old text back manually and add a knew source that was to your liking as the reasson for your revertion of my edit in the first place was becuase you did not thinnk my source was credible enough. I do not know if thats rude as im unfamiliar with wikipedia customs, but if so, i am sorry. Do whatever you want with it, i think that both you and i would benifit if this discussion remained short, but please know that i did not mean any harm. Dencoolast33 (talk) 07:28, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Sources

Do the mainstream sources really treat this as a war? I can't remember ever having read anything which claims that Sweden was at war in 1918. I just re-read the pages on this in sv:Sveriges historia (Norstedts) and that description doesn't really speak for including it here. Which books or articles do? /Julle (talk) 12:36, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

@Julle: In the section #More wars? above, it is stated that Sweden was even involved in the Battles of Godby. If that is correct, it would probably mean that the invasion of Åland belongs here. However, I cannot see that any of the sources actually state that Sweden was directly involved in the Godby fightings. I agree that better sources are needed to include this at all. Dencoolast33? --T*U (talk) 13:19, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

well, Swedens involvment in the battles of godby was pretty small. Sweden ambushed a russian military transport killing one, the response from the Russians was bombarding Finström (a small village in Åland were the ambush occured). However, all the sources that mentions this are all in Finnish, though, i can link one anyways;

VENÄLÄISSURMAT SUOMESSA 1914–22 (page 91)

Though, this is still active combat between Russians an Swedes which would mean (atleast in my opinion) that it deserves a spot on this list.

I hope this answers your questions! Dencoolast33 (talk) 13:53, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

The link you have given seems to be a dead link. Could you try to find a working link? And if the link is in Finnish, perhaps you could give the specific quote (in Finnish) together with your translation (in English, perhaps also in Swedish, if that is easier for you). --T*U (talk) 14:27, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I did not realize that you couldent acces the link, it worked fine when i foung copy-pasteded it.

It should work now:

https://vnk.fi/documents/10616/622938/J0104_Ven%C3%A4l%C3%A4issurmat%20Suomessa%201914%E2%80%9322.pdf/2415ed54-b624-4a33-a3ce-300190a58cc8

Ill provide a quote and a translation:

'Aikaisemmin samana päivänä esiintyi laukaustenvaihtoa Finströmissä lähellä Bjärströmiä. Kylän idänpuoleisella maantiellä ahvenanmaalainen suojeluskunta oli pysäyttänyt venäläisen sotilaskuljetuksen, jota kolme sotilasta vartioi. Syntyneessä käsikähmässä yksi venäläisistä pyrki pakenemaan pellolle, jonne hänet ammuttiin. Kahden muun onnistui kuitenkin päästä pakoon. Kylää ammuttiin seuraavana päivänä kostoksi raskaalla tykistöllä kolmen tunnin ajan aiheuttamatta kuitenkaan vahinkoja.'

A synopisis of the quote in english:

The Åland protectorate (The Swedes) stopped a russian military transport of three in Finström. The Russians decided to flee from the Swedes when during their escape one Russian was gunned down. The response from the Russians was a three hour long bombardment of Finström, though, this did not result in any Swede dying.

(my finnish is not that good so i needed some help from translators, though, i do have a high enough understaning of Finnish to determine if the translator is just making things upp) Dencoolast33 (talk) 15:08, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, Dencoolast33, appreciated!

But this doesn't amount to the typical definition of a war – one isn't at war because one person died, these skirmishes happen quite often in some parts of the world. See 2020–2021 China–India skirmishes which left far more people dead without us considering India and China to be at war with each other, for example. Writings on Swedish history bring it up, but they don't call it a war. /Julle (talk) 22:58, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

I see your point, but maybe in the context of a wider invasion by Sweden, it should be with. I am not saying that in a challenging way, just to share my look on things! Dencoolast33 (talk) 09:00, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes, but the way Wikipedia works is that we summarize information available elsewhere – we try to avoid drawing our own conclusions. In this case, I think that's what we'd be doing: defining this as a war because we've reasoned about it rather than because the sources define it as such. The way Wikipedia typically works, we'd go to what the key sources about Sweden and Swedish wars say – and as far as I can tell, they don't treat this conflict/skirmish as a Swedish war. /Julle (talk) 18:42, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Okay, fair enough. Dencoolast33 (talk) 20:11, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the reasonable discussion about the topic! /Julle (talk) 20:39, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

its the least i can do! thanks to you too. Dencoolast33 (talk) 07:28, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Result

@Dolbegos To prevent an edit war I will begin a discussion here.

I would like to present some key points.

1. The Russian objective (to destroy Olofsborg) ended in complete failure
2. The Russian attacks were repelled

I ask you, in what world is this indecisive? The definition of "Defeat" is as follows: "win a victory over (someone) in a battle or other contest; overcome or beat" The Swedes BEAT the Russians, as is evident from the Russians failing to capture or destroy Olofsborg. Thus, we can conclude the Swedes defeated the Russians, i.e. a Swedish victory in the war.

It would be misleading to label this war as "Indecisive" as it simply wasn't.

I will wait for your response. Gvssy (talk) 14:09, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

This conflict cannot be called a war, because there were no active hostilities, war was not declared. Both sides carried out raids on each other, as a result of which they concluded a truce,Both sides gained nothing from this border conflict.provide a source that the Russians planned to take Olofsborg and destroy it. This was not the reason for the start of the conflict.

This conflict cannot be called a war, because there were no active hostilities, war was not declared. Both sides carried out raids on each other, as a result of which they concluded a truce,Both sides gained nothing from this border conflict.provide a source that the Russians planned to take Olofsborg and destroy it. This was not the reason for the start of the conflict.

This conflict cannot be called a war, because there were no active hostilities, war was not declared. Both sides carried out raids on each other, as a result of which they concluded a truce,Both sides gained nothing from this border conflict.provide a source that the Russians planned to take Olofsborg and destroy it. This was not the reason for the start of the conflict. Dolbegos (talk) 15:58, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Oh, Wikipedia split my text, now there will be a normal answer,Wait Dolbegos (talk) 16:00, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

1 part:

The conquest of Veliky Novgorod by the Muscovite kingdom, the eviction of significant contingents of Novgorodians into the depths of Central Russia, the change of the Novgorod administration and, in connection with this, the loss of control,the decline of discipline in Novgorod Rus', including the lack of control of the Finnish border with Sweden, led to the fact that fugitives and defectors from among the Novgorodians, who did not want to remain under the Moscow administration, as well as part of the Novgorod militia, on the one hand, “accompanying” the defectors, and on the other, who wanted to, under the guise of general unrest in the country plunder the Swedish border lands. Dolbegos (talk) 16:04, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

2 part:

All this destabilized the situation on the Russian (Novgorod)-Swedish border in 1479-1481, especially since the Vyborg Vogts launched “local” punitive extermination in the Karelian land, also taking advantage of the temporary unrest in the Novgorod land. Dolbegos (talk) 16:08, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

3 part:

Since the Danish kings, who owned Sweden at that time, also could not control the situation in Finland,, then on the Russian-Swedish border, on the Karelian Isthmus, in fact, for three years (1479-1482) there was a “small”, “undeclared” war, which was waged by local authorities,solely based on selfish interests, in one’s own favor. Dolbegos (talk) 16:09, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Also, this literally calls it a war. Gvssy (talk) 16:12, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

under the terms of the truce,Both sides stopped raiding each other,Russians received free right to trade with Swedes in Vyborg and Narva,Swedes received free right to trade in Novgorod Dolbegos (talk) 16:12, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

It can most definetly be called a war, war does not necessarily HAVE to be declared in order for it to be one. This was fought as an active conflict, with both sides carrying out raids, yes.

Ulf Sundberg, in his book: "Medeltidens Svenska Krig" says on page 351: "Anläggningen av Nyslott (Olofsborg) fortsätter trots den år 1476 förnyade freden att vara en nagel i ögat för ryssarna. Erik Axelsson Tott, slottsherre på Viborg och även ansvarig för Nyslott, förväntar sig ett ryskt anfall i stor skala."

Rough translation: "The construction of Nyslott (Olofsborg) continues despite the renewed peace in 1476 being a thorn in the side of the Russians. Erik Axelsson Tott, castle lord of Viborg and also responsible for Nyslott, expects a Russian attack on a large scale."

This clearly means that the Russian objective was to halt the construction or completely destroy Olofsborg, there is no going around it. Also, for the source you gave for the war being indecisive does not say so, a truce does not immediately mean a war was indecisive. If this was the case, things like the Polish-Swedish War (1626-1629) would be indecisive, which is absolutely was not.

Your source seems to have questionable reliability aswell, seems to be a forum of some sort centering around Saint Petersburg.

A belligerent in a war failing their main objective, is usually labled a victory for the other side. "Inconclusive" or "Indecisive" would be misleading. Gvssy (talk) 16:11, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

The source I cited was based on a book "Foreign policy of Rus', Russia and the USSR for 1000 years in names, dates, facts." Dolbegos (talk) 16:15, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

The war itself did not start because the Russians were going to prevent the construction of Olofsborg; above I described why the conflict began. Dolbegos (talk) 16:20, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes it did, why are you denying sourced information? The war was clearly started because of the Russian goal of destroying Olofsborg. The source you cited states a very ambigious reason: "solely based on selfish interests, in one’s own favor." which is clearly not true? Gvssy (talk) 17:02, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Give me a source proving that the Russians started a border war out of a desire to prevent the construction of Olofsborg. This did not coincide with the interests of the Russians,After all, there was a threat of a new war with Kazan. Dolbegos (talk) 17:17, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

I did. Did you forget? "Anläggningen av Nyslott (Olofsborg) fortsätter trots den år 1476 förnyade freden att vara en nagel i ögat för ryssarna. Erik Axelsson Tott, slottsherre på Viborg och även ansvarig för Nyslott, förväntar sig ett ryskt anfall i stor skala." - Ulf Sundberg

This obviously means that the Russians started the war in order to destroy the fortification since it was a "thorn in their backside" Gvssy (talk) 17:20, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

In the book by Alexey Shkvarov "Russia - Sweden. History of military conflicts. 1142-1809"

The conflict is described as follows: Dolbegos (talk) 17:31, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

The conquest of Novgorod, the eviction of a significant number of Novgorodians into the interior of Russia, led to the fact that settlers poured into Vyborg County, destabilizing the situation on the Russian-Swedish border. The Vyborg Vogts organized local punitive operations, which eventually resulted in the “small” war of 1479–1482, which ended with the signing of a truce in Vyborg. Dolbegos (talk) 17:32, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

And another source in which there is not a word that the Russians started the war because of the construction of Olofsborg Dolbegos (talk) 17:33, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Erik Axelsson Tott strengthened the walls of Vyborg and built a new fortress, calling it St. Olaf's Castle - the future Neuschlodt (modern Savonlinna). Moreover, he carried out this construction on lands that the Novgorodians considered their property. In 1481, the year of Erik Axelsson's death, they tried to destroy it, but were repulsed, and the next year, the deceased's brother Laurens restored peace Dolbegos (talk) 17:35, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

The same book says that there were attempts to destroy Olofsborg in 1481, before that the Russians did not plan to destroy this fortress, which means that the war did not start because of an attempt to destroy Olofsborg Dolbegos (talk) 17:36, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Does it say directly that the Russians had no plans of destroying Olofsborg? Gvssy (talk) 18:28, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

The reasons for the war do not say this. It only says that the Novgorodians tried to destroy Olofsborg in 1481, but this was not the reason for the start of the war Dolbegos (talk) 18:33, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

But then it does not disprove the reason for the war being to destroy Olofsborg, additionally, even if the starting reason wasnt this, if it later became it, this war can still be described as a Russian strategic failure and thus more accurately called a Swedish victory. Gvssy (talk) 19:18, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

The destruction of Olofsborg was not the reason even after the start of the war, the fact that the Novgorodians planned to destroy it, but could not, does not mean that this was the cause of the war, a plan to destroy it appeared Only during the fighting, Russia did not seek to destroy this fortress, it was not in the interests of the Russian state, therefore it cannot be said that this three-year conflict was won by Sweden,No one benefited from it and both sides signed a truce, which would then last until 1495. Dolbegos (talk) 19:31, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Therefore, the result of this conflict is still indecisive Dolbegos (talk) 19:31, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

You said "It only says that the Novgorodians tried to destroy Olofsborg in 1481" this would undoubtedly mean that it was an objective later in the war, and i'll say it again that Ulf Sundbergs words are: "Anläggningen av Nyslott (Olofsborg) fortsätter trots den år 1476 förnyade freden att vara en nagel i ögat för ryssarna. Erik Axelsson Tott, slottsherre på Viborg och även ansvarig för Nyslott, förväntar sig ett ryskt anfall i stor skala."

This clearly indicates that the Russians began the war to destroy Olofsborg. Gvssy (talk) 19:57, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

You interpret this in a way that suits your interests. But in fact, the destruction of Olofsborg did not cause the war at any stage.An attempt to destroy it was made by A small group of Novgorodians, this was not organized by the state itself, it did not pursue this goal, because at that time Russia was not going to fight with Sweden while there was a threat of war with Kazan khanate Dolbegos (talk) 08:14, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

No I don't, it is quite literally the most accurate thing to be made from the text. Since the fortress was a "thorn in the backside" of the Russians, it is clearly the reason for the war since they first attacked it. Gvssy (talk) 09:01, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

I cited 2 sources, and both of them do not say that Russia fought to destroy Olofsborg.The fact that the fortress was a thorn is an exaggeration,After all, a small group of Novgorodians tried to destroy it, and not a large detachment of Russians Dolbegos (talk) 12:02, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

It does not mean that it is untrue if a source does not say something, and it is not an exaggeration, if I remember correctly the fortress itself threatened trade in the area. If a "small" amount of novgorodians attacked it doesn't change anything. The fortress was still a "thorn in the side" of the Russians. Gvssy (talk) 12:11, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

If the fortress really was such a nuisance and would have been a problem for the Russians, then attempts to destroy it would have taken place throughout the war, and not just in 1481 by a small group of Novgorodians.Again, the Russian state would not start a war over one fortress, I described the reason for the start of this border war.the existence of Olofsborg interfered with the Russians, but not enough to start a war and pursue the goal of destroying it for 3 years, otherwise large detachments of the Russian army would have gone to destroy it Dolbegos (talk) 19:12, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Further attempts to destroy it did likely occur, as Ulf Sundberg points out: "År 1481 avlider Erik Axelsson och överlämnar Viborg till sin bror Lars Axelsson, som fortsätter driva gränsstriderna till år 1482 då ett stillestånd ingås"

Translation:

"In 1481, Erik Axelsson dies and his brother Lars Axelsson inherits Viborg, who continues the border skirmishes until 1482 when a truce is established"

These border skirmishes likely included further attempts to destroy Olofsborg, seeing as this was the reason for the war in the first place. Also, it was very common for countries at the time to begin wars over things such as a fortress that threatened their position. Gvssy (talk) 19:32, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

border skirmishes took place over a larger territory, and it was not necessary that these were skirmishes at Olofsborg. Russia had no interest in fighting over a fortress when there was a threat of war with the Tatars (Kazan).A full-scale war between Russia and Sweden did not happen until 1495, and Russia did not care about Olofsborg Dolbegos (talk) 19:57, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Again, Russia clearly cared about Olofsborg if they began an entire war in order to destroy it. Gvssy (talk) 20:10, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

If Russia were very concerned about Olofsborg, then a lot of forces would have been directed towards its destruction, rather than a small detachment. Novgorod detachments tried to destroy Olofsborg only in 1481.I repeat the same thing again Dolbegos (talk) 17:06, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

If a Novgorodian detachment tried to destroy Olofsborg in 1481, this clearly shows that it was concerning for Russia. If I have to repeat it again the fort is described as a "thorn in the side" for the Russians, clearly the reason for the war. Gvssy (talk) 17:38, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Please don't randomly leave a discussion, I would appreciate it if you replied. Gvssy (talk) 12:12, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Maybe these are translation errors (I use a translator because I don’t know english), but there is no ambiguous reason here Dolbegos (talk) 17:21, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Result 2

There seems to be a dispute over the result of a conflict listed here, I would like to join the discussion and form an opinion but that is hard when i have to go through so much information from your disccusion. So would it be possible for you two to reply with your side of the argument and provide some sources? I understand if you're tired from all the disccusing but we cant continue edit warring.

@Gvssy @Dolbegos

Thank you! - Dencoolast33 (talk) 11:47, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

The Russo-Swedish War (1479–1482) is clearly a Swedish victory due to the fact that the Russian goal (to destroy Olofsborg) clearly failed, as we can see from "Medeltidens Svenska krig" by Ulf Sundberg: "Anläggningen av Nyslott (Olofsborg) fortsätter trots den år 1476 förnyade freden att vara en nagel i ögat för ryssarna. Erik Axelsson Tott, slottsherre på Viborg och även ansvarig för Nyslott, förväntar sig ett ryskt anfall i stor skala."

If I remember correctly a book by John Chrispinsson also says this, but I'm not entirely sure.

From the fact that the construction of Olofsborg is considered a "thorn in the side" of the Russians, this can clearly be seen as the Russian goal in the war to destroy Olofsborg.

There is also a new dispute that has begun, namely around the Russo-Swedish War (1554–1557), where I correctly added a "result" heading, since the actual result of the war is disputed among historians, with some saying it was a Russian victory or a Draw. He tried to revert this by just saying it "isn't disputed" which is just plainly wrong. I have seriously lost alot of patience with him. Gvssy (talk) 11:52, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

I See, do you have any online sources? Dencoolast33 (talk) 12:03, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

No, sadly, neither of these books seem to have any online PDFs. Gvssy (talk) 12:20, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Okay, i doubt that you would just make those citations up, but online citations are prefered.

Regarding the Olofsborg dispute, i do agree that it should be counted as a Swedish victory. The Russians failed to achieve their aims of destroying Olofsborg, which would make it by definition a Swedish victory as the Swedes were the only party to succeed in their objectives.

I am not very educated on the war of 1554-57 though, but if the result of that conflict is disputed between historians, then there should be some online sources avalible confirming your statements. Dencoolast33 (talk) 12:34, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Obviously the page where Ulf Sundberg claims the 1554-1557 war is not online, although I was able to find the statement by John Chrispinsson here: 1 Gvssy (talk) 12:47, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Could you tell me the statement so that i can search it up in the search bar? Dencoolast33 (talk) 12:51, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

"Kriget slutade med remi" should work Gvssy (talk) 13:01, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Okay, if there are statements of indicisiveness, then i think that adding a result heading is a fair and pretty harmless edit. However, i am yet to hear @Dolbego's side of the argument, even though it will be hard for Dolbego to diss-proove sourced material. Dencoolast33 (talk) 13:15, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

I'll try to refute this, but not now Dolbegos (talk) 14:32, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

I have already explained that the destruction of Olofsborg was not the main goal of the Russians in this war Dolbegos (talk) 14:31, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Your argument seems to be "My sources don't say it was the goal" which doesn't disprove anything, I also have books on Swedish history that don't explicitly state that the sky is blue, does this now mean that the sky is not blue? Obviously not. Gvssy (talk) 14:35, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

If all of your points are already in your first reply, then there shouldent be a need to respond, otherwise this topic will get as long as the last one. Dencoolast33 (talk) 14:37, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

my sources indicate the main reason for the start of the war, and this is not the existence of Olofsborg, I don’t know what else needs to be explained Dolbegos (talk) 14:37, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

make a reply containing all of your points instead, or this topic will get too long. provide your sources too Dencoolast33 (talk) 14:39, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

I have already described everything, provided sources and argued why this war is not a Swedish victory, I see no point in continuing to talk about this war Dolbegos (talk) 14:43, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Okay, could you provide links to them again? Dencoolast33 (talk) 14:45, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Okay, make a reply containing all of your points when you have the time. Dencoolast33 (talk) 14:35, 15 April 2024 (UTC)