It is not clear the difference: why are the thin and wide green boundary lines?
What is the white boundary lines meaning?
Why some lakes or sees are surrounded with greed boundary line, but some lakes or sees no?
What is the black color symbology? German and annexed territories + occupied countries + alliance countries? But why Slovakia is gray and Finland is green?
If green is neutral countries color so why Finland is green?
My guess is the arrows have something to do with annexations and occupations by Nazi Germany. But then it is quite strange that the arrow to Austria should begin in Bohemia, and that Hungary and Romania should have arrows at all. Yaan (talk) 15:13, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
the Baltic islands have now been colored; Arrows are annexations, alliances and occupations and obviously symbolic, not actual army/politician paths perfectly straight for hundreds of miles; border width is meaningless on the map; white boundaries are the new boundaries between Soviet and German held areas only as of late 1940; black is for Axis, annexations and occupations; red is for Soviet annexations and occupations; KFSSR is shown; Moldavian SSR boundaries are shown (but no Oblasts or ASSRs are shown); Northern Bukovina is shown as being Soviet held/annexed; Northern Austria is now redrawn; Green Hungarian border lines and Green Czech border lines are as of 1938 -- no post 1938 country border lines changes are shown on this map (white lines only indicate Soviet/German annexations/occupation/alliance borders). Mosedschurte (talk) 17:17, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The question is why there are such arrows (paths?) between Germany and Romania/Hungary or between Czechoslovakia and Austria in the first place. Just who travelled along any paths that could be "symbolized" by these arrows?
I don't think it is a good idea to simply ignore the post-1938 changes. In the case of Czechoslovakia, the status of the Sudeten areas was very different from that of the Protektorat Böhmen und Mähren, and the situation in the Protektorat was again very different from that in Slovakia - Slovakia had its own army, was not occupied, you see.
Last not least, what's up with the Memel area? Yaan (talk) 18:00, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Re: Just who travelled along any paths that could be "symbolized" by these arrows?"
Re: I don't think it is a good idea to simply ignore the post-1938 changes.
This map definitely does not go through the 1938 and beyond various individual border changes in Czechoslovakia, Hungary et al., nor should it. It's just Soviet-German alliance/occupation/annexations. People have commented both ways on Slovakia -- it was obviously a puppet and effectively a Nazi ally by late 1940 and is drawn on almost all maps accordingly, but it wasn't fully annexed or comprehensively occupied (though Wermacht troops were there). I had it gray before, but after reading more about it in late 1940 and looking at some other maps, it's now black. By the way, that map also (correctly, I should addI'm not sure there's a "right" answer for Slovakia.Mosedschurte (talk) 18:21, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think "the Wehrmacht" travelled from Czechoslovakia to Austria. Maybe the other way 'round. I'd also think conclusion of alliances should not be treated the same way as military occupations or even invasions. The simple solution would be to simply have different colours for allies and occupied territories and leave away thse arrows that have nothing to do with occupation or invasion. And then the right answer for Slovakia would be pretty obvious. And btw. why is Finland still green? Yaan (talk) 18:33, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Green was chosen for Finland for the highly important reason that the color green contrasts well on a map with black, red and blue (water). It's color is meaningless, and it obviously wasn't annexed, etc., with an attempt made in the Winter War, and its red parts reflect the lower portions for the Moscow Peace Treaty. The most "simple solution" is to keep it simple -- that is, not to distinguish between variations and just use one color for each side to avoid long discussions about, say, the shade of color that Slovakia or the Sudetenland should be on a map where Slovakia wasn't particularly important for these purposes anyway and the Sudetenland stayed in German hands throughout most of the war. Such discussions could go on for pages, which is quickly being approached now.Mosedschurte (talk) 18:53, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The conception of this map is difficult to understand for me. If the task was to show actual situation June 22 1941, so what with 1938 boundaries? In 1941 was no Austria, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Danzig. It was no neutral Finland, you see, as Finland took part in this war as German satellite. Hungary/Slovakian bundary was very different as Hungary/Romanian too. New German boundaries - it is special question, but all mapping sources you need are present in Wiki.
And about details. If you are sure you've depicted North Bukovina - you are not right. The same with the KFSSR - its territory you didn't show on this map, sorry. Moldavian SSR boundaries were not shown, sorry.
Slovakia took part in this war, it was a German satellite.
And if you don't show country divisions, so why you added SSR (USSR divisions) boundaries?
And all these arrows are very, very confusing.
And I strongely support Yaan's position to make a different colors for annexed territories and alliances Bogomolov.PL (talk) 19:04, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, my last post on these topics:
The map does not purport to depict "the situation on June 22, 1941", not has it ever purported to state this. It's simply a map showing the old beginning of 1938 borders and the German and Soviet military and political advances in Eastern Europe through late 1940. That was really all, and if you want a specific June 22, 1941 map showing inter-country border changes of a few miles between say, Hungary and Czechoslovakia with the First Vienna Award, you might want to check another map. Luckily, this one doesn't purport to show these things on this particular map, so it doesn't matter.
Finland was not a German satellite as early as 1940. Just click through Wikipedia to read the history on it, because I'm not going to blow another five minutes typing something on it.
The Hungary border is as it was beginning in 1938 (pre-Vienna Award). I checked four different maps for it before the last edit.
I generally agree on Slovakia being essentially a German satellite and it is black now if you check the map (it changed, this morning, so click shift-refresh on your browser to flush the page cache) -- your argument is with Yaan here who seems to think it might not should be. I don't really care either way because it's black on this map anyway (as you noted) as it was a German ally.
Romania and the Moldavian SSR are as they existed in 1938 and after the SSR creation, and the old Modavian ASSR (a territory within the Ukraine) is not depicted, nor does it purport to be depicted to on this map.
The map DOES show country divisions -- they're the green lines, as they existed in the beginning of 1938.Mosedschurte (talk) 19:16, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I see you are a bit tired of discussing your map, but could you please at least
remove that arrow from Czechoslovakia to Austria. It's just very very wrong.
remove those arrows to Hungary and Romania. All the other arrows are for results of military force being applied. These two are not. Hungary and Romania are basically in the same class as Italy.
paint the Memel area black.
I think Bogomolov's problem re. Slovakia (but not only Slovakia) is that it was not occupied by and did not become part of Germany until the end of the war, and should therefore not be the same black as Poland or Czech. Yaan (talk) 14:03, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Mosedschurte! It would be better to remember that you've created this map with the description (since February 12 to March 9) "Second world war map on June 1941". When I was talking to you about June 1941, your map had this description. When you wrote here "The map does not purport to depict "the situation on June 22, 1941", not has it ever purported to state this. It's simply a map showing the old beginning of 1938 borders and the German and Soviet military and political advances in Eastern Europe through late 1940." your map had the description from February 12. It was 19:16, 9 March 2009 (UTC). Next (NEXT!) you've made map description editions. It was 19:32, 9 March 2009 (UTC). Actually map description in your latest version is: "Map depicting most of Central and Eastern Europe, showing 1938 borders, along with Axis (black) and Soviet (red) military and political advances until late 1940". WikiPedia was designed to remember all edits, you see.
It is not very comfortable to discuss this way, you change your map description, but before you did this change, when you map had "Second world war map on June 1941" description, you wrote:
"The map does not purport to depict "the situation on June 22, 1941", not has it ever purported to state this. " - it looks like I didn't understood map description and this my misunderstanding was the main reason of my criticism. But it is not true - you (in your mind) planned to change your map description, but when I wrote my post, and you wrote your replica, this planned map description was not made yet. Next you wrote:
"It's simply a map showing the old beginning of 1938 borders and the German and Soviet military and political advances in Eastern Europe through late 1940. That was really all, and if you want a specific June 22, 1941 map showing inter-country border changes of a few miles between say, Hungary and Czechoslovakia with the First Vienna Award, you might want to check another map. Luckily, this one doesn't purport to show these things on this particular map, so it doesn't matter." - you was trying to persuade I was mistaken talking about June 1941. Your behavior is surprising, I see.
"a few miles between say, Hungary and Czechoslovakia with the First Vienna Award" - your map will have less encyclopedic value without these "few miles" In 1938-1939 almost 1/2 of Slovakian territory was annexed by Hungary. "A FEW MILES?". And I was talking about the Second Vienna Award too, as you know. You didn't claim this territory change as "few miles" - you ignored it.in August 1940 43,100km² to Hungary - as large as all Slovakia
"Finland was not a German satellite as early as 1940. Just click through Wikipedia to read the history on it, because I'm not going to blow another five minutes typing something on it." - as you know (just several clicks) in August 18th, 1940, the Wehrmacht was granted rights to use the Finnish ports of Vaasa, Oulu, Kemi, Tornio and Turku plus rail lines from the ports to Ylitornio and Rovaniemi. After the Winter war and after German troops arrived Finland was not neutral, you see. Your map new description claims late 1940, you see.
And about North Bukovina again - since August 1940 it was Ukrainian, but is shown as Romanian at your map. Why you are ignoring this problem? Bogomolov.PL (talk) 22:59, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You still don't get this. One more time in large bold letters:
THE MAP DOESN'T REFLECT BORDER CHANGES AFTER THE BEGINNING OF 1938
Other maps I've made do, but this one doesn't. This one just reflects the military and/or political advancement of the Axis and Soviets up until late 1940 through colors on the old map. Thus, the green lines are the old 1938 borders on this map. And no one said that Finland was entirely netural, just that they weren't a German ally yet, and no historical source I've read has ever stated otherwise. Mosedschurte (talk) 02:41, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yaan: I'll move the arrows and color Memel when I fire up the map next time I'm on that computer.Mosedschurte (talk) 02:41, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Mosedschurte! I'm really glad you've find a possibility to answer me.
Your map actual (it is possible you will change it again) description is:
Map depicting most of Central and Eastern Europe, showing 1938 borders, along with Axis (black) andSoviet (red) military and political advances until late 1940.
So my question again about the North Bukovina - since August 1940 it was Ukrainian (or Soviet), but is shown as Romanian at your map. Why you are ignoring this problem?
And what with the Finland neutrality problem? You shifted your map deadline from June 1941 to late 1940 (6 months back), but don't you see the alliance with Finland was one of the significant changes of the geopolitical situation in Europe? How do you think, dear Mosedschurte, may be a map, reflecting real progerman bloc structure before the war with the Soviets, will have better encyclopedic value? As it is no map reflecting situation of June 1941 (your map intended to be this kind of image is not actual now). Bogomolov.PL (talk) 09:40, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
