This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | Archive 19 |
User:Michaelwuzthere: You added, "... and after unsuccessful efforts to form an anti-fascist alliance with Western powers ..." to the leading paragraphs. But this is not supported by the main text, or by a Wikilink, or by a footnote. Could you add the appropriate sourcing? I looked around on the Web but couldn't find it. I dimly recall something like that from Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, but I no longer have a copy of that book. Bruce leverett (talk) 01:09, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Joseph_Stalin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Joseph_Stalin/Archive_21#signed_a_non-aggression_pact_with_Nazi_Germany,_resulting_in_their_joint_invasion_of_Poland._was_not_a_joint_invasion_they_invaded_On_the_17th_of_SeptemberJack90s15 (talk) 04:37, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
The only example of Nazi-Soviet cooperation in warfare was in Poland. However, it is hard to say if it was close enough to call them de facto allies. At least, for contemporaries it didn't look close: just read what Churchill wrote about that. Only after the secret protocol was discovered some people started to speak, retrospectively, about an alliance, however, if something didn't look like an alliance in 1939, how can a discovery of some paper make it a de facto alliance? Ok, I could agree that, had some secret document been discovered that was a secret military alliance between Nazi and Soviets, we could speak about a de jure secret allians, however, "de facto allies that didn't look like allies according to the contemporary observers" sounds odd. Moreover, on Sept 9 Ribbentrop sent a telegram to Stalin asking if the USSR was going to invade Poland, and threatening that if it would not invade, Germany would have to occupy Eastern Poland. By no means that can be interpreted as "close cooperation". Furthermore, there was no Axis in September 1939, however, if we assume there was some informal Axis by that time (which actually developed from the Anti-Comintern pact, an alliance directed against the USSR (sic!)), we have to keep in mind that there was a de facto state of war between another future Axis member, Japan, and the USSR, which ended with an armistice (not a peace treaty) only on September 15. How could be the USSR a de facto member of some de facto alliance in a situation when it was still having a military conflict with one member of this alliance? Next, there is a fraction of historians who believe that all USSR's territorial gains in 1939-40 were the result of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact. However, this view is shared only by a significant minority of authors, mostly political journalists. Actually, only Eastern Poland was obtained in accordance with the pact, all other territories were not. German and Soviet interpretation of "spheres of interest" were different, and, whereas "mutual assistance treaties the Baltic states were forced to sign with the USSR were in accordance with the pact, a complete occupation and subsequent annexation were considered as a hostile act by Hitler. It was annexation of the Baltic states which triggered a start of preparations for Barbarossa planning. Moreover, Geoffrey Roberts writes (in "Stalin's War") that the decision about annexation was made by Stalin after he saw how easily and quickly was France, the strongest military power in Europe, was defeated by Hitler. Stalin realized that, from that moment on, the USSR is vis-a-vis with the extremely strong and efficient military machine, and he decided to move the border of the USSR westward as far as possible. In other words, occupation of the Baltic states was a part of preparations to the future war with Germany, according to Roberts. And, again, Hitler correctly interpreted that as a hostile step. If these relationships were de facto alliance, then I even don't know what to say. Finland. If you remember, the whole Winter war started because Finland refused to cede territories around Leningrad, as well as the Hanko military base. What was the reason for that request? A military threat from which power forced Stalin to do that? Obviously, neither Finland nor any other power except Germany was incapable of posing any serious threat to Leningrad, therefore, the goal was, again, to prepare for was with Germany. And, by the way, Germany unofficially supported Finland in this war, at least, German public opinion was on Finnish side. Bessarabia. In contrast to Eastern Poland, Finland, or Baltic states, the USSR had never recognized annexation of Bessarabia by Romania (it occurred according to the scenario that was very close to the recent annexation of Crimea by Russia), moreover, if I remember correct, some other states, including the US, didn't recognize it too. Therefore, this case is a separate story, and, again, annexation of Bessarabia was seen as unfriendly act by Germany, because it threatened to the strategically important Romanian oil fields. With regard to Bukovina, it was a direct violation of the pact. To summarize, despite the fact that the USSR made some territorial acquisitions during 1939-40 (I am not aware of any acquisitions in 1941), there is no consensus in scholarly community on whether they were made in accordance with the Nazi-Soviet pact, and whether they can serve as a demonstration of de facto allied relationship.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:World_War_II/Archive_56#Since_1939_and_until_1941_Soviet_Union_was_in_Axis_de_facto_and_is_trying_to_hide_this.Jack90s15 (talk) 02:36, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
@My very best wishes: No one Denies troughs things I don't This was about the Pact that is why I referenced a another Conversation by a Experienced user I don't want to Fight over this I want to learn Jack90s15 (talk) 04:11, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
This edit request to Soviet Union has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
On the third paragraph, the title "World War II" is misspelled as "Word War II" (second sentence). Crs1000 (talk) 02:06, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
Drought was negligible to a man-made famine which resulted in up to 7.5 million deaths. The hyperlink to Droughts and famines in Russia and the Soviet Union states that "One of the most serious crises before 1900 was the famine of 1891–92, which killed between 375,000 and 500,000 people", i.e. merely around 5-10% of the 1932 famine. Moreover, the page states that drought "was not severe in the affected areas at this time" of 1932. Even scholars who have denied that it was an intentional genocide, such as Mark Tauger (1991), still conclude that it was the direct fault of the regime and not drought! So where is this information coming from?
Further, "There is still debate over whether or not Holodomor was a massive failure of policy or a deliberate act of genocide" i.e. drought is NOT considered a primary factor; rather, those who disagree it was genocide, instead claim it was due to Stalin's prioritisation of the regime rather than saving lives.CMFante (talk) 07:41, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
The accumulation of evidence means that it matters less, nowadays, whether the 1932-3 famine is called a genocide, a crime against humanity, or simply an act of mass terror. Whatever the definition, it was a horrific assault, carried out by a government against its own people ... That the famine happened, that it was deliberate, and that it was part of a political plan to undermine Ukrainian identity is becoming more widely accepted, in Ukraine as well as in the West, whether or not an international court confirms it.[1]
There is absolutely no justification for having the emphasis on the drought - this is pure bias. As we have each reverted 3 times in a 24 hour period, I will not revert again. Most likely we will have to resolve via a third opinion.CMFante (talk) 11:02, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
I reverted the recent change on neutrality grounds and the inclusion of wikilinks that appeared to be inappropriate (i.e, Holodomor denial). Regardless, I think Tauger's position is being mischaracterized here. This from his review of Applebaum's book Red Famine:
While this review article does not allow for a full discussion of the issue of genocide and Stalin’s responsibility, we can at least note certain conclusions from the sources presented here. Stalin and other leaders made concessions to Ukraine in procurements and were clearly trying to balance the subsistence needs of Ukraine and other regions, especially people in towns and industrial sites who could not access the surrogate foods that some peasants relied on to survive (see for example Applebaum ch.12). Soviet leaders did not understand the 1932 crop failure: they thought that peasants were withholding food to drive up prices on the private market, as some of them had in 1928. They worried about the Japanese take-over of Manchuria in 1931-1932 and the Nazi victory in Germany in early 1933, and feared nationalist groups in Poland and Austria could inspire a nationalist rebellion in Ukraine. Faced with these “threats,” Soviet leaders were reluctant to make the USSR appear weak by admitting the famine and importing a lot of food, both of which they had done repeatedly earlier. The famine and the Soviets’ insufficient relief can be attributed to crop failure, and to leaders’ incompetence and paranoia regarding foreign threats and peasant speculators: a retaliatory version of the moral economy.
--C.J. Griffin (talk) 14:56, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
In addition to drought, which was a primary factor in a long history of regularly occurring famines in the region, agricultural collectivization contributed to a major famine in 1932-33, causing millions of deaths.
--C.J. Griffin (talk) 20:24, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
Our work has confirmed - if confirmation were needed - that the grain campaign in 1932/33 was unprecedentedly harsh and repressive. Within this dominant context, state policy was more ambiguous and confused than is generally believed.
A further major factor in the poor harvests in 1931 and 1932 was the weather . . . But in 1930-34 the weather was poorer than usual over the last five years, with particularly bad conditions in 1931 and 1932. This was a factor over which the Soviet government had no immediate control.
References
This is a truism, and has no citation. I think it should be removed.--Jack Upland (talk) 01:18, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
This edit request to Soviet Union has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change Date of WW2 Victory to May 8th instead of May 9th 2601:1C2:5280:BB40:60B9:E96B:ECB1:3912 (talk) 00:35, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
This edit request to Soviet Union has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The link to the National Anthem Of Soviet Union is link to the current anthem of Russian Federation. Its not link to the Soviet Anthem Šimon Palenčár (talk) 19:24, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I have inserted Infobox on Soviet Union سوويت يونين article on Sindhi Wikipedia but due to the large size of this image File:Soviet Union on the globe (Soviet Union centered).svg which is used in that article's Infobox, Article Infobox has become extra large, I resized its size at (| image_map = Soviet Union on the globe (Soviet Union centered).svg | image_map_size = 10) image map size from 220 to 10 but this infobox is still too large may be because of that file size, Its requested, please help fixing this issue on the mentioned Soviet Union سوويت يونين page on Sindhi Wikipedia. Thanks JogiAsad Talk 10:01, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
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) 16:38, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
@CapLiber: @Davide King: The use of small text in the infobox, for example "de jure" and "de facto", makes it hard to read on a mobile device. I notice that this is explicitly mentioned in MOS:SMALLTEXT, which strongly discourages editors from the practice. I will fix this, unless there are objections. Thanks for your attention. Bruce leverett (talk) 04:35, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
I think this article skims over the history also when talking about the famine in Ukraine I think go into more detail since it is a very confusing topic and can easily be misinterpreted and probably has, another thing is that the U.S.S.R was too influential to let anyone edit the article after all it’s very recent history so it has a lasting impact and Captain James Cook was special enough to get special editing access so defiantly the Soviet Union should receive such treatment.14.200.36.51 (talk) 01:05, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
The HDI figure cited for the Soviet Union is from the 1990 version of HDI. This used a method so old that the Wikipedia article on HDI does not even cover it. To be specific, here are the notable differences in the 1990 method:
The inclusion of a 1990 HDI figure here is clearly going to mislead people, as it's not clear that a 1990 HDI figure represents not only a different date but also a totally different methodology. To give you an idea of how big the difference is, the US 2018 HDI figure is 0.920. This may lead someone to think that the HDI of the USSR in 1990 and the US today is comparable. However, if you calculated the US HDI using the 1990 method, you'd get somewhere between 1.200 and 1.300. Yes, over 1.
For now, I have removed the HDI from the infobox. It could be replaced with a 1990 figure calculated using the current method, if such data could be found.Tophattingson (talk) 02:37, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
There is an HDI value for 1990 using current methods in Human Development Report 2019. They describe the issues you mention in this report on Russia and present an HDI value of 0.734 for 1990. I've added this value to the infobox. Subvisser5 (talk) 21:43, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
Might it not be a good idea to cite the source? Also, mention (in the footnote) that the source's figure of 0.734 is for Russia only, not for the whole Soviet Union. Bruce leverett (talk) 22:29, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
This edit request to Soviet Union has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The short description for this article lists the Soviet Union's active years as 1992 to 1991.
Can we correct this to "1922 to 1991"? Rmuzzey (talk) 22:36, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
This edit request to Soviet Union has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
A troika and brief power struggle needs to be changed to "after a troika and brief power struggle" ItsAHooman (talk) 20:23, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
Jack Upland What's wrong with the the leftist section in you're opinion? You said it's wrong, how so. Thanks. Vallee01 (talk) 00:15, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
The lead section is too long per MOS:LEADLENGTH. Perhaps the paragraphs that talk about WW2 and the Cold War are better suited for the (currently empty) sections within the body of the article, while keeping a more summarised version of its foundation and dissolution Oqwert (talk) 13:16, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
The question of whether there are to be flags in the infobox should be settled here rather than by edit war.
For comparison, I went to Yugoslavia and Austria-Hungary, which have the flags. I can't think of other former countries to compare, though perhaps there are some. Bruce leverett (talk) 22:17, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
The sentence "The first big fiasco for the USSR was the landing on the moon by the Americans, when the Russians were not able to respond to the Americans in time with the same project" under the Space Program subsection sounds like it could be better without the comma and broken up into two pieces. Also, I feel like the N1 should be briefly mentioned. Jackson1953 (talk) 17:21, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
Compromise: Make a collage of the historical flags of the USSR. Vallee01 (talk) 20:18, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Pro-Soviet. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 November 20#Pro-Soviet until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. TheAwesomeHwyh 16:10, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
Use of the present tense in "The Soviet Union is a defunct ... state" is simply wrong. It is not equivalent to "The Soviet Union was a ... state", because it implies that the state still exists. Indeed, the second half of the sentence uses the past tense, so now they don't match. MOS:TENSE gives comparable examples. Bruce leverett (talk) 03:55, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
In 1924 to 1953 the Soviet Union was led by a Stalinist totalitarian dictatorship — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.93.145.210 (talk) 21:21, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
In the "Post-Soviet states" section under "History", many sentences are grammatically incorrect and lack the word "the". Zyncox (talk) 19:07, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
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) 08:36, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
This edit request to Soviet Union has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
which led to significant economic growth, but also led to a ____man-made___ famine in 1932–1933
It should be (allegedly a man-made famine), as this is disputed. StalinAlwaysBallin (talk) 21:59, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
ok 2409:4042:4E84:4FB2:0:0:F78A:E813 (talk) 18:37, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
This edit request to Soviet Union has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add that. At the time of the collapse, the USSR occupied almost 1⁄6 of the inhabited land area of the Earth with a population of 294 million people, as well as the 2nd place in the world in terms of industrial production - 16.5% of the world volume and 7th place in the world in terms of national income (3.4%). It was formed on the territory that by 1917 was occupied by the Russian Empire without Finland, part of the Polish kingdom and some other territories. It is text adding from the russian version. Meilcont (talk) 17:03, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
I seriously doubt the USSR had the second leading economy, there is really no way to gauge its economic output since it had a closed economy, and the currency was worthless outside their borders, but when the Soviet Union collapsed, it was ranked in the 10th to 11th range, so that is probably what it was before the collapse. I do know that the USSR had to import a great portion of their food from United States, Canada and Australia (see link), so that alone would suggest Soviet was essentially a failed state, that couldn't even produce enough food. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1979/10/04/huge-grain-sale-to-soviet-union-approved-by-us/41b3bc1d-8f75-4ed6-98db-77556322a3d9/ RomanGrandpa (talk) 17:19, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
((edit semi-protected))
template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:24, 28 April 2021 (UTC)@RomanGrandpa: You added a sentence about pseudoscience in the lead, this was reverted by another user, then restored it with a source about Lysenkoism, however where in that source is the subject referred to as "great propagaters of pseudoscience"? Did you just make that conclusion from the source? And your edit referred to pseudoscience in general, while like I said, the source is only about Lysenkoism. So can you explain this? I trust you not to edit war over this, you cannot tell me to build consensus on removing this when you just added this and it was removed by not just me. Mellk (talk) 08:29, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
@Visioncurve: Do you think that edit is still questionable?
You have to click the link to Bourgeois pseudoscience . Lysenkoism is just the best example.
It says... Bourgeois pseudoscience (Russian: Буржуазная лженаука) was a term of condemnation in the Soviet Union for certain scientific disciplines that were deemed unacceptable from an ideological point of view[1][2] due to their incompatibility with Marxism-Leninism. For example, genetics was not acceptable due to the role of random mutations of an individual organism in evolution, which was perceived as incompatible with the "universal laws of history" that applied to masses universally, as postulated by the Marxist ideology.[3] At various times pronounced "bourgeois pseudosciences" were: genetics,[notes 1] cybernetics, quantum physics, theory of relativity, sociology and particular directions in comparative linguistics (Japhetic theory). This attitude was most prevalent during the rule of Joseph Stalin.
The Soviet Union was actually a society based on a belief system and communistic dogma , it was not particularly a population geared toward reason nor science. They did not even believe in supply=demand....this has to be profiled in the lede....and while the USSR did make some innovations in the space race, they lacked in many other areas....especially agriculture. The Soviet Union was the largest country in the world, yet they still had to import a good proportion of their food. RomanGrandpa (talk) 14:56, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
@Mellk.....if killing people and destroying all their scientific research , as Stalin did, in order to propagate a false narrative, isn't a "great propagator"...then honestly all arguments are lost with you, I prefer to have others weigh in. RomanGrandpa (talk) 15:09, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
This edit request to Soviet Union has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
"* 1927–1953:
Federal Marxist–Leninist one-party socialist state under a Stalinist totalitarian dictatorship[1]" should be removed for being extremely inaccurate as "stalinism" isnt a real thing and it sure wasnt totalitarian under his rule. Beanboi64 (talk) 18:59, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
References
I added a link to the Eastern Block just in case someone visits USSR article thinking of Yugoslavia/Bulgaria/East Berlin and DDR in general while confusing USSR and E.Bloc. Uchyot (talk) 10:56, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
I added some info on Soviet Lunar program. It was comme ci, comme ca; over 50% of spacecraft failed; no attempts to launch a person were made; so it was a loss of the lead in Space Race (or Moon Race if one wishes); rather than a particular fiasco resulting a drama or tragedy. Uchyot (talk) 11:00, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
I shall please be allowed to edit this Page please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.29.90.243 (talk) 16:39, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
Do you think we should put a notice next to the USSR's 1990 value of HDI to note that the values in 1990 were calculated differently than they are now and so you shouldn't compare them with today's values. For example, in 1990 (using the provided source on page 121 of http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/reports/219/hdr_1990_en_complete_nostats.pdf) japan had an HDI of 0.996, no country has anything close to that now (because they changed how it is calculated). (also the same thing applies to the east germany article) Bwmdjeff (talk) 19:30, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
This edit request to Soviet Union has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The phrase ".. Soviet forces eventually captured Berlin and won World War II in Europe on 9 May 1945. .." seems to state that the Soviet Union was the prime/only protagonist that was responsible for Germany losing WW II in the European theatre
Please clarify 2600:6C64:4F3F:D3AC:703E:6351:B2D2:9E (talk) 01:26, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
This edit request to Soviet Union has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The Cold War was a war starting in 1947 to 1991 between the United States and the Soviet Union. RedCaptainAmerica (talk) 06:48, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Are we really going to let it like this? It's not exactly correct from a scientific point of view. It seems written by a 14 years old minecraft player. --SamZane (talk) 09:26, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
This edit request to Soviet Union has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Just a typo: In the "Geography" section, there is a space missing after the comma between "Czechoslovakia,Hungary" that should be added. HelloHamster (talk) 17:34, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
This edit request to Soviet Union has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The USSR was a Communist State, not a Socialist State. The intellectuals and leaders of the USSR state that socialism is a tool towards communism. 207.107.138.62 (talk) 20:34, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Guys i am engaged in a content dispute with אברהסה בו over the Soviet Union flag. The Soviet Union changed its flag in 1980 to a lighter red, from the 1955 one. So that hence is a flag change. would you not agree? aaron106 (talk)
Can you stop with the edit war its still red. The Flag was First used in 1955. אברהסה בו (talk) 03:40, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
They changed there flag in 1980 to a lighter red. Its a Flag Change! That was their last change Not in 1955 with the dark red aaron106 (talk)
Sure you can go here https://historyplex.com/soviet-union-flag-history-meaning "In 1980, a final was made, in which the red color was changed into a lighter shade. This flag remained the official national flag till the breakup of the Soviet Union on December 25, 1991" aaron106 (talk)
The final version of the Soviet flag was adopted in 1980. GoodDay (talk) 04:33, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
You can see the use of the light shade of red in play here https://images0.persgroep.net/rcs/lMWLAVLeo_RQz12hcPbTydH9haM/diocontent/137309815/_fill/1353/900/?appId=21791a8992982cd8da851550a453bd7f&quality=0.9 with Bush and Gorbachev in 1991. They did officially change their flag in 1980 to a lighter shade of red. It is a official flag of the Soviet Union they used it until it ceased to exist in '91. --Aaron106 (talk) 23:05, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
References
Looks like my edit summary didn't parse correctly. I am adding Soviet Union to Category:Totalitarian states. This is not a change to the status quo. Category:Communist states was formerly a subcat of C:Totalitarian states, but this is no longer the case per this related discussion. I am using List of totalitarian regimes as a sort of objective way to re-sort what goes back into the parent category C:Totalitarian states. This is not a value judgement about Communism. I am just restoring the status quo. Feel free to revert, but please don't eat me. Schierbecker (talk) 06:06, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
Soviet Union was not a totalitarian state as there exist some kind of Democracy known as Soviet Democracy which is a form of direct Democracy where people directly elect their leader from Soviets i.e. Councils Mr. Arya Chandra (talk) 14:07, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
And they could only vote for one candidate approved by the communist party, just because you can vote does not make something democratic at all. Pyromilke (talk) 14:28, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
@SuperSkaterDude45: Why isn't it overlinking to make a link to United States in the paragraph in question? MOS:OVERLINK says,
Do you think that this reference to the United States is somehow an exception to that?
Earlier in MOS:OVERLINK, the general principle is enunciated: links compete for attention with each other; and if there are too many links that no one will need to click on, such as to United States, it is harder for the reader to find or to notice the links that he might want to click on. Bruce leverett (talk) 02:46, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
socialism is when the workers control the means of production and is democratic in the ussr the workers controlled nothing and it was extremely authoritarian
No true Scotsman -Pyromilke (talk) 14:30, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
not true Person1662626271717 (talk) 01:43, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect All-union. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 7#All-union until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Gaioa (T C L) 14:48, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
This edit request to Soviet Union has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The Chernobyl disaster in 1986 was the first major accident at a civilian nuclear power plant. Unparalleled in the world, it resulted in a large number of radioactive isotopes being released into the atmosphere. Radioactive doses have scattered relatively far. 4,000 new cases of thyroid cancer were reported after the incident, but this led to a relatively low number of deaths. Looking to add this citation to data: https://www.who.int/news/item/05-09-2005-chernobyl-the-true-scale-of-the-accident Martystlouis21 (talk) 20:16, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
This edit request to Soviet Union has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Can I change the 1944-1991 anthem from instrumental to vocal? The file is at high risk of being deleted. SaberingSidewinder (talk) 17:24, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
X to Yformat. This isn't used to request user rights.
Finland became independent in 1917. For some reason the article mentions Finland as part of the Soviet Union until 1940 at the list of former parts of Soviet Union.
On the topic of the preceded by list in the infobox, why are the constituent republics in there? Shouldn't we list the actual preceding entities, not things that were formed as part of teh cccp?—blindlynx (talk) 18:45, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
There should be a period after the first sentence of the second paragraph. Instead there is a comma: "The Soviet Union had its roots in the October Revolution of 1917 when the Bolsheviks, headed by Vladimir Lenin, overthrew the Provisional Government that had earlier replaced the house of Romanov of the Russian Empire, They established the Russian Soviet Republic, the world's first constitutionally guaranteed socialist state" Portmain (talk) 05:57, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
@Portmain: You should fix it --Aaron106 (talk) 02:53, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
@Portmain: Fixed. Next time, feel free to do it yourself. Also, I think this article can use some copy editing for style. MxWondrous (talk) 21:40, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
@MxWondrous: Thanks, will do. I am a new user, so I didn't know about edit requests.
@Sgweirdo: Could you explain what you do not like about the caption of the map in the Infobox? It looks rather conventional, i.e. it looks like analogous captions of Infobox maps for other former countries such as Austria-Hungary and Yugoslavia. And, it has been there for a while. Thus, removing it altogether requires consensus. You have also attempted to edit it to be more verbose, but you have not explained why. Bruce leverett (talk) 19:06, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
According to this page, the USSR had a HDI of 0.920, but this is fairly misleading because of how methods of calculating HDI have changed since the publication of the UNDP's report in 1990. A HDI of 0.920 would make the USSR roughly equivalent in quality of life to Israel today - despite the USSR having a life expectancy over a decade lower, and a GDP per capita of around a quarter. Thus I would suggest adding either a disclaimer, or removing this stat entirely (I have seen several people cite this page as evidence for how good it was to live in the USSR).
I've fixed this. The modern approximate of the HDI for the USSR recorded in 1990 is 0.720, taken down 0.2 points. I calculated this equivalence by comparing the HDI for the UK at the same time (0.970, citation: http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/reports/219/hdr_1990_en_complete_nostats.pdf) to a study found here, which records it as 0.770 or 0.775. https://www.statista.com/statistics/876249/human-development-index-of-the-uk/ --Aubernas (talk) 02:32, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
This article currently uses a modern calculation of the Soviet Union’s HDI based on this report, http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/reports/219/hdr_1990_en_complete_nostats.pdf, however, I feel that this inappropriate. There is no precedent for this, no other article which uses the same report uses a modern calculation of a former nations HDI, for example, the article for Zaire. Using a modem calculation to me specifically for this article seems to intentionally be trying to skew the perception of the reader in one direction. I think that the HDI should be reverted back to what it was on the report, but perhaps, add the ranking of the country, so that is less misleading? 69.126.201.182 (talk) 04:13, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
This article was revised to the former HDI, however, it has the same problem that caused it to be changed in the first place. There was no "very high" category in 1990, only high, so the HDI should be edited to reflect that. Again, I would like to suggest adding the ranking of the country on the report so as to avoid misleading anyone in either direction.
This edit request to Soviet Union has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
the cold war wasn't really a war, but more of a spying, racing, and trying to show off the true super power! USA'S allies, would not ally the USSR, Most of Europe would not ally the ussr. thats why some of USSR'S allies were Asian nations because they would accept their alliance, some famous allies were china and Vietnam. it was kind of a war, but USA would only declare war on their allies, probably most famous to be declared war on is Vietnam The USSR did launch people to space first, but USA got a man to the moon! The USSR fell before they could even start war with Europe or USA. but if they never fell people on YouTube predicted that the USSR would of won. Both sides had plans and inventions incase they were gonna go to war, which probably would happen sooner or later! but looks like USA won the cold war The chance of USSR returning is low but NOT zero -- 04:42, 23 November 2021 67.14.231.223
Calling Stalin the "leader" of the Soviet Union in 1924 (as is done in the listing at the top of the article) is rather misleading. He certainly was one of those who had a strong position after Lenin's death, but he was not yet overall "leader". The position of Communist Party General Secretary was not proclaimed to be the highest office in the party when it was first created (According to our article: "In 1922, the office of General Secretary [was] a purely administrative and disciplinary position, whose role was to do no more than determine party membership composition"). And Alexei Rykov seems to have held the highest government offices. It was not until 1929 that Stalin fully consolidated sole power in his own hands. I'm afraid that from 1924 until at least 1927, there was a "polycentric" competition for power in the Soviet Union, with no one overall leader. AnonMoos (talk) 08:04, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
@A.h. king: Timeline of national flags says that the flag of Ukraine changed (change in dimensions) around 1991 to 1992. I don't know what source that article is using (there are sources but not inline citations). What is your source for the claim that the flag has not changed since independence? Bruce leverett (talk) 02:18, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
@Izzet sabrie: Before posting a notice to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring, I am obliged to make an attempt to remonstrate with you about your bogus edits on this talk page.
Moscow was the largest city of the Soviet Union. I do not think it should be necessary to cite a source for this. I should ask if you have some source that claims that Moscow was not the largest city.
If you have no source, I ask that you desist from edit-warring in this article. Bruce leverett (talk) 20:55, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
@Izzet sabrie: Dude, I'm not sure if you're aware or you simply don't care, but you're THIS close to being banned. I logged in here for the first time in years specifically to tell you how infuriating your edits are. I don't understand why you're so insistent on claiming that Alma-Ata is the largest city in the former Soviet Union (not to forget Yekaterinburg as the largest city in modern Russia) when this is clearly and abundantly NOT the case.
Are you aware how citations work? (Good luck anyway finding a credible source for Alma-Ata being the largest city in the USSR.) Are you aware how talk pages work? Seems like you don't since you wholesale blanked out this entire section when people called you out on your disruptive editing. And finally, judging by your scarcely legible comments and insults thrown at other users on the edit summaries, do you even have any proper grasp of English?
I note Bruce leverett has reported you to the admins for edit warring. Again, I'm not even sure if you're aware what this means. You've posted no proper responses either here or on your own user talk page, where other editors have likewise warned you about your persistent vandalism.
Stop. Now. Be a productive user and add value to the encyclopaedia. Otherwise, we'll be more than happy to kick out yet another vandal out of the building. Argentsky (talk) 07:13, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
...And he's blocked. Tried to warn you, buddy. 🤷🏿♂️ Argentsky (talk) 14:45, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
@Bruce leverett: I believe there was a previous person who changed the largest city of the Soviet Union from Moscow to Saint Petersburg, but that appears to have been fixed. Karl Malone the Mailman (talk) 00:35, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
"Up until his death in 1953, Joseph Stalin controlled all foreign relations of the Soviet Union during the interwar period." This is not specific to his policies in the Second World War. "As for ideological goals, the Soviets regarded moderate socialists as its most hated enemies, but eventually co-operated with them during the Spanish Civil War." This is also ridiculous, as the Spanish Civil War ended before World War 2. This section needs a major cleanup. Fijipedia (talk) 01:13, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
Under Space Program, this sentence appears "He once flew around the Earth and successfully landed in the Kazakh steppe."
That should be changed to "He flew once around the Earth and successfully landed in the Kazakh steppe."
I would change it, but there is not "edit" button — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.134.155.18 (talk) 17:26, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
In the "Etymology" section, where it says "UdSSR in German", please insert "(Union der Sozialistischen Sowjetrepubliken)" by way of explanation. I saw the abbreviation somewhere, and had to look it up in the German wikipedia. Thanks. 2601:648:8202:350:0:0:0:C115 (talk) 00:18, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
An edit war is starting over the "Succeeded by" list in the infobox. One editor wants to include Transnistria and Chechnya in the list, though they are generally unrecognized. What about South Ossetia, Artsakh, and Abkhazia? Has this question been the subject of earlier discussions in this talk page (or elsewhere)? Bruce leverett (talk) 21:11, 2 March 2022 (UTC)