Jump to content

Talk:Vladimir Lenin: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
DMPineau (talk | contribs)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{skiptotoctalk}}
{{talkheader}}
{{talkheader}}
{{-}}
{{Controversial}}
{{Article history
{{circles}}
|currentstatus=FA
{{calm talk|#FFCCCC}}
{{notforum}}
{{controversial (history)}}
{{pbneutral}}
{{-}}


{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
{{WP1.0|v0.5=pass|class=B|category=History|VA=yes|WPCD=yes|nested=yes}}
{{WikiProject Soviet Union|class=B|importance=Top|nested=yes}}
{{WikiProject Russia|class=B|importance=Top|nested=yes}}
{{WPMILHIST|class=B
<!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. -->
|B-Class-1=yes
<!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. -->
|B-Class-2=yes
<!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. -->
|B-Class-3=yes
<!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. -->
|B-Class-4=yes
<!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. -->
|B-Class-5=yes
|Russian=yes
|nested=yes}}
{{wpa|class=B|nested=yes}}
{{WikiProject Politics|class=B|importance=high|nested=yes}}
{{philosophy|class=B|importance=low|philosopher=yes|nested=yes}}
{{WPBiography|living=no|class=B|priority=Top|core=yes|politician-work-group=yes|listas=Lenin, Vladimir|nested=yes}}
{{ArticleHistory
|action1=FAC
|action1=FAC
|action1date=11:07, 23 August 2006
|action1date=11:07, 23 August 2006
Line 37: Line 10:
|action1oldid=71316682
|action1oldid=71316682
|aciddate=14 March, 2007
|aciddate=14 March, 2007
|currentstatus=FFAC
|nested=yes
}}
}}
{{-}}


|action2=PR
{{to do}}
|action2date=00:24, 16 April 2015
{{OnThisDay|date1=2004-04-16|oldid1=6718191|date2=2005-04-16|oldid2=12561118|date3=2006-04-16|oldid3=48688594|date4=2007-04-16|oldid4=123313856|date5=2008-04-16|oldid5=205963014}}
|action2link=Wikipedia:Peer review/Vladimir Lenin/archive1
|action2result=reviewed
|action2oldid=656640752


|action3=GAN
== Problems with sources ==
|action3date=09:52, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
|action3link=Talk:Vladimir Lenin/GA1
|action3result=not listed
|action3oldid=683443529


|action4=GAN
Wikipedia states:
|action4date=22:44, 14 April 2016
*''Wikipedia articles should use reliable, third-party, published sources. Reliable sources are credible published materials with a reliable publication process; their authors are generally regarded as trustworthy or authoritative in relation to the subject at hand.''
|action4link=Talk:Vladimir Lenin/GA2
|action4result=listed
|action4oldid=715298766


|action5=PR
This article contains sources that do not conform to Wikipedia's policies. First, Robert Gellately is not a specialist on the history of Russia. Nor is Melgunov's nearly 90-year-old work reliable because he was a politician, not a professional historian. Melgunov, as a member "People's Socialist Party", a right-wing faction of the SR Party, was a politician hostile to the Russian Government. Aleksandr Yakovlev was not a professional historian at an academic institution but was a politician who supported the policies of Yeltsin. Professor Donald Rayfield is a specialist in literature, not history. These sources have to be removed. Examples of reliable sources include work by specialists on Russian history such as Alexander Rabinowitch, Evan Mawdsley, Sheila Fitzpatrick, Diane Koenker, Isaac Mints, G.N. Golikov and others. [[User:Kasernewinkt|Kasernewinkt]] ([[User talk:Kasernewinkt|talk]]) 18:44, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
|action5date=04:19, 8 May 2016
:First of all, we are quoting Gellately directly from a book he wrote...about Hitler, Stalin, and <b>Lenin</b>. Melgunov's wikipedia article states, and I quote: "Sergei Petrovich Melgunov was a Russian historian, publicist and politician best known for his opposition to the Soviet government." The other sources all seem semi-reliable/questionable at best. "Gellately, Earl Ray Beck Professor of History at Florida State University, <b>claims</b>...Gellately <b>claims</b>" You see, even if Robert Gellately is not a specialist on the history of Russia, that doesn't mean he does not understand the material. He is a historian, and a Professor of History. Look at you or me. We're not specialists, yet we edit Wikipedia to the perspectives that we find correct...albeit those verifiable.<span style="border:1px solid black;background-color: red">[[user:LunaRain|<font color="gold" size="2px">Luna</font> <font color="gold" size="2px">Rain</font>]][[user talk:LunaRain|<sup>HowL</sup>]][[Special:Contributions/LunaRain|<sub>Cry</sub>]]</span> 02:07, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
|action5link=Wikipedia:Peer review/Vladimir Lenin/archive2
:: We are not specialists. But there are plenty of people who ''are'', who disagree with Gellately. And plenty who ''do'' make their central interest Russian history. If we will follow deference to academia, as you (rightly) suggest, then we must stop quoting Gellately. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/128.232.247.64|128.232.247.64]] ([[User talk:128.232.247.64|talk]]) 08:10, 27 February 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
|action5result=reviewed
The test is the quality of evidence and reasoning deployed, not the professional position of the writer. So Gellately should not be relied on, nor Richard Pipes or Robert Conquest. Signed Will Podmore <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/78.105.85.214|78.105.85.214]] ([[User talk:78.105.85.214|talk]]) 20:03, 18 April 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
|action5oldid=722876800


|action6=FAC
== Nadezhda Krupskaya ==
|action6date=2016-09-24
I noticed that on a few occasions in the article mention is made of "Lenin's wife", and there is even a picture with the caption "Lenin and his wife"; but there is no mention whatsoever of her name; [[Nadezhda Krupskaya]]. As this article is "semi-protected" would one of the page's dignatories like to correct this ommission? Thanks! --[[User:TTKK|TTKK]] ([[User talk:TTKK|talk]]) 19:18, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
|action6link=Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Vladimir Lenin/archive1

|action6result=promoted
== This is getting ridiculous. ==
|action6oldid=740963294

|maindate=November 7, 2017
'''This is an encyclopedia, not a forum for propaganda.''' Criticism of Lenin is understandable and quite possibly deserved; but no matter what your position on the man and his deeds, sections like the one about the Red Terror are simply absurd. To mention that crimes were committed is fine; to go into lurid and lengthy detail about them smacks of the blandest of propaganda. Mentioning the opinions of anti-communists is also fine; but it has to be taken into consideration that these are not "neutral" sources and cannot make up such a large proportion of the article (neither can those of his defenders). This article reads like it was written by crazy conspiracy theorists, or by Joe McCarthy. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/79.221.56.17|79.221.56.17]] ([[User talk:79.221.56.17|talk]]) 17:55, 3 April 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
|otd1date=2004-04-16|otd1oldid=6718191

|otd2date=2005-04-16|otd2oldid=12561118
You cannot ignore the atrocities which took place, justice to the dead requires that they be explored even if the details are horrifying and sickening <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/58.160.116.181|58.160.116.181]] ([[User talk:58.160.116.181|talk]]) 11:08, 1 September 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
|otd3date=2006-04-16|otd3oldid=48688594

|otd4date=2007-04-16|otd4oldid=123313856
== Article title ==
|otd5date=2008-04-16|otd5oldid=205963014

|otd6date=2013-04-16|otd6oldid=550595404
Is "Vladimir Lenin" the correct title for this article? This is a subjective view, but I don't recall ever hearing or reading of him by this name - it's either "Lenin" or "Vladimir Ilyich Lenin". Can anyone point to sources that say that "Vladimir Lenin" is the [[WP:COMMONAME]] for this person? [[User:Phil Bridger|Phil Bridger]] ([[User talk:Phil Bridger|talk]]) 22:11, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
|otd7date=2014-04-16|otd7oldid=604258641

|otd8date=2016-04-16|otd8oldid=715546300
I see nobody seems interested in this issue, so if there are no objections in the next couple of days I'll move this article to [[Vladimir Ilyich Lenin]]. Using Google Books searches, which is the best way I could think of for judging the most commonly used name, I find [http://books.google.co.uk/books?client=firefox-a&um=1&num=100&q=%22Vladimir+Lenin%22&btnG=Search+Books 959 hits without the patronymic] and [http://books.google.co.uk/books?client=firefox-a&um=1&num=100&q=%22Vladimir+Ilyich+Lenin%22+OR+%22Vladimir+Ilich+Lenin%22&btnG=Search+Books 1435 with]. Amongst the sources with the patronymic [http://books.google.co.uk/books?client=firefox-a&um=1&num=100&q=%22Vladimir+Ilyich+Lenin%22&btnG=Search+Books Ilyich] and [http://books.google.co.uk/books?client=firefox-a&um=1&num=100&q=%22Vladimir+Ilich+Lenin%22&btnG=Search+Books Ilich] are pretty nearly equal, but [[WP:RUS]] would suggest using Ilyich. [[User:Phil Bridger|Phil Bridger]] ([[User talk:Phil Bridger|talk]]) 18:35, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
|otd9date=2018-04-16|otd9oldid=836655329
:it is my understanding that the pseudonym ''Lenin'' did not include a patronymic, and this is a confusion. But in any case, we don't normally use patronymics in article titles; compare Stalin, Pushkin, Tolstoy, Prokofiev, and Shostakovich. ''Ilyich'' should be twice avoided; the spelling variation makes the article harder to find and link to. [[User:Pmanderson|Septentrionalis]] <small>[[User talk:Pmanderson|PMAnderson]]</small> 03:57, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
|otd10date=2021-04-16|otd10oldid=1018030983

}}

{{British English}}
==Public Perception?==
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=FA|vital=yes|living=n|listas=Lenin, Vladimir Ilyich|1=

{{WikiProject Biography|military-work-group=y|military-priority=Low|politician-work-group=y|politician-priority=Top|core=yes}}
From my readings, I am a little unsure. How was Lenin perceived as a leader from the general public?
{{WikiProject Soviet Union|importance=Top}}
Had he have been around for much longer (and not died) I believe he would've been like Stalin, however his body was pickled and perserved. My understanding is that he wanted a regular funarel and he is still considered a 'hero' today.
{{WikiProject Socialism|importance=Top}}
Can anyone comment on this and maybe clear it up as I can't find anything that makes this clear. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/60.234.222.217|60.234.222.217]] ([[User talk:60.234.222.217|talk]]) 06:14, 28 May 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
{{WikiProject Russia|importance=Top|hist=yes}}

{{WikiProject Military history|class=FA
Well, given a choice, the people of what was then Leningrad much preferred the name of St. Petersburg. I would imagine that similar sentiments were across all Russia. [[User:SmokeyTheCat|<span style="border:2px solid Red;padding:2px;"><b><font style="color:Black;background:Red" size="0">&nbsp;SmokeyTheCat&nbsp;</font></b></span>]]&nbsp;[[User talk:SmokeyTheCat|<font color="Red" size = "0">•TALK•</font>]] 15:44, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
<!-- B-Class 5-criteria checklist -->

|b1 <!-- Referencing and citations --> =n
== Requested move ==
|b2 <!-- Coverage and accuracy --> =y
<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;"><!-- Template:polltop -->
|b3 <!-- Structure --> =y
:''The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. ''
|b4 <!-- Grammar and style --> =y

|b5 <!-- Supporting materials --> =y
The result of the proposal was '''NO CONSENSUS''' to move page, per discussion below. -[[User:GTBacchus|GTBacchus]]<sup>([[User talk:GTBacchus|talk]])</sup> 02:18, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
|Biography=y|Russian=y|WWI=y}}
<hr/>
{{WikiProject Atheism|importance=Mid}}
Also refer to previous discussion on the topic [[#Article title|above]].
{{WikiProject Jewish history|importance=Low}}

{{WikiProject Politics|importance=high}}
*'''[[:Vladimir Lenin]] → [[:Vladimir Ilyich Lenin]]''' — Most sources either just say "Lenin" or use the patronymic --[[User:Phil Bridger|Phil Bridger]] ([[User talk:Phil Bridger|talk]]) 18:44, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
{{WikiProject Economics|importance=high}}
**This move discussion is actually above in the section "Article title", as clearly indicated in the move template at the top of this talk page. Please don't create duplicate discussions that can only lead to confusion. [[User:Phil Bridger|Phil Bridger]] ([[User talk:Phil Bridger|talk]]) 21:45, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
{{WikiProject Philosophy|importance=low|philosopher=yes}}
***Previous discussion noted and link changed. No harm in having the discussion here to keep the talk page in chronological order. — <span style="border:1px solid blue;padding:1px;">[[User talk:AjaxSmack|<font style="color:#fef;background:navy;">''' AjaxSmack '''</font>]]</span> 02:27, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
|collapsed=yes}}
*'''Oppose''' for reasons under [[#article title]]. [[User:Pmanderson|Septentrionalis]] <small>[[User talk:Pmanderson|PMAnderson]]</small> 03:59, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
{{Section sizes}}
*'''Oppose'''. First of all, the change would make the article harder to find and to link to (although a good percentage of readers will just type "lenin" and be redirected here). Secondly, the [[Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people)#Multiple surnames|naming convention]] specifically states that the Russian patronymic is usually not to be included in the article title. [[User:Jafeluv|Jafeluv]] ([[User talk:Jafeluv|talk]]) 08:24, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
<!-- please do not remove this tag -->
*'''Oppose''' Only if there were 2 Vladimir Lenins and both of equal notability would we need to move article to include the patrynomic. --[[User:Russavia|Russavia]] <sup>[[User talk:Russavia|Dialogue]]</sup> 09:35, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.</div><!-- Template:pollbottom -->
|target=Talk:Vladimir Lenin/Archive index

|mask=Talk:Vladimir Lenin/Archive <#>
== The Iskra or the Zarya? ==
|leading_zeros=0

|indexhere=yes}}
I'm a High School student trying to do an essay on Lenin, yet two of my sources contradict each other...
{{User:MiszaBot/config

|archiveheader = {{aan}}
Encyclopedia Britannica states that, after leaving Russia to Germany in 1900 that he began working for the ''Iskra''
|maxarchivesize = 100K

|counter = 13
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/335881/Vladimir-Ilich-Lenin
|minthreadsleft = 5

|algo = old(90d)
However, the American Law Encyclopedia Vol 6 states that he began working for the ''Zarya''
|archive = Talk:Vladimir Lenin/Archive %(counter)d

}}
http://law.jrank.org/pages/8215/Lenin-Vladimir-Ilyich.html

I'd like to clear up any confusion here, can someone please enlighten me to which newspaper he did, indeed work on? Wikipedia says the ''Iskra''...and if this is incorrect, I'd like it to be changed.

[[Special:Contributions/24.8.128.152|24.8.128.152]] ([[User talk:24.8.128.152|talk]]) 00:35, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

==Cause of his death was syphilis==

The article forgets the cause of Lenin's death.He died of [[syphilis]].Please see these sites: [[http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/22/science/a-retrospective-diagnosis-says-lenin-had-syphilis.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss New York Times]] and [[http://discovermagazine.com/2005/jan/syphilis-killed-lenin]] .[[User:Agre22|Agre22]] ([[User talk:Agre22|talk]]) 19:33, 8 May 2009 (UTC)agre22

Oh, please! The NYT article doesn't even name the Treponema Pallidum correctly. Only a very bad doctor would confuse stroke with syphilis. Man, kids that study medicine these days have a complete disregard for propedeutics depending exclusively on specialized diagnostic procedures. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/68.105.171.232|68.105.171.232]] ([[User talk:68.105.171.232|talk]]) 03:27, 27 July 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== On popular underwear ==

A [[cartoon]] representation of an iconic image of Lenin's speech appeared on men's [[underwear]] manufactured by British fashion retailer [[Next]] in 2009. The underwear was recalled after complaints from customers who believed the image depicted [[Adolf Hitler]].<sup>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandconsumer/5391922/Next-recalls-underwear-after-complaints-over-Hitler-image.html]</sup> [[User:Digwuren|Διγουρεν]]<sub>[[User talk:Digwuren|Εμπρος!]]</sub> 10:58, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

== "Bob Ryan"? ==

The article currently has the mention of one Bob Ryan as the man to whom the assassination attempt gunmen belonged, and also translates Lenin's name at the top of the page as "Bob Ryan". Is there something I don't know, or is this vandalism? Just wanted to make sure, first-time editor here. [[User:Lexi M-V|~Lexi]] ([[User talk:Lexi M-V|talk]]) 12:47, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
:Vandalism would be my guess, so I have reverted it.[http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Vladimir_Lenin&diff=293935038&oldid=293931003] -- [[user:zzuuzz|zzuuzz]] <sup>[[user_talk:zzuuzz|(talk)]]</sup> 12:53, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

== Red Terror ==

I find it odd that the so-called "White Movement" is said to have started the [[Russian Civil War]] as the section on the Red Terror currently suggests. As the "Whites" were defending the "status quo" and the "traditional" form of Russian government and state, surely the Civil War and the Revolution cannot be distinguished. They are one and the same. The Revolution thus began the Civil War in and of itself, and the "White Movement" was only a reaction (hence, "reactionary") to the Revolution (Kornilov vs Kerensky and then a larger movement against the Bolsheviks). Therefore, I am going to edit this sentence unless someone advances a compelling reason not to: "In 1918, the White Movement started the [[Russian Civil War]] against the newly created [[Russian SFSR]]." I would replace it with: "In 1918, anti-Bolshevik forces consolidated and began to take military and political action against the revolutionary regime." Also, there must absolutely be a cite (non-Bolshevik) that suggests that the Red Terror was in fact a reaction to the White Terror (who would have thought the Bolsheviks were also reactionaries?) or I will remove it.[[Special:Contributions/99.240.139.189|99.240.139.189]] ([[User talk:99.240.139.189|talk]]) 23:14, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Have consolidated these threads, it seems to be the major action item on the article. Please use proper formatting. [[User:Lycurgus|Lycurgus]] ([[User talk:Lycurgus|talk]]) 10:28, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

=== Red Terror too long ===
The section is too long and goes back and forth. It should be summarized and reduced in length. Biographies about Lenin do not devote one-fifth of the content to a period in 1918 spanning a few months. [[User:Kasernewinkt|Kasernewinkt]] ([[User talk:Kasernewinkt|talk]]) 00:33, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Rather than reverting it 6 times, why don't you wait until a discussion has began. You can't just revert things because of your opinion. Get some other editorial support. By the way, for breaking 3RR, expect to be banned. <span style="border:1px solid black;background-color: red">[[user:LunaRain|<font color="gold" size="2px">Luna</font> <font color="gold" size="2px">Rain</font>]][[user talk:LunaRain|<sup>HowL</sup>]][[Special:Contributions/LunaRain|<sub>Cry</sub>]]</span> 01:42, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I agree it's too long. Let's create a draft here. [[User:Chelentano|Brown99]] ([[User talk:Chelentano|talk]]) 04:55, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

:After the [[Bolshevik Revolution]] of October 1917, [[Anti-Communist]] grouped themselves loosely into the '[[White movement|White Movement]]'. In 1918, the White Movement started the [[Russian Civil War]] against the newly created [[Russian SFSR]]. The mass arrests and summary executions carried out by the White Movement became known as the ''White Terror''. The Red Terror was claimed to be introduced in reply to [[White Terror#Russian White Terror|White Terror]]. Following the assassination attempt on Lenin and the successful assassination of Petrograd chief of secret police [[Moisei Uritsky]], [[Stalin]], in a telegram argued that a policy of “open and systematic mass terror” be instigated against “those responsible”. The other Bolsheviks agreed, and instructed [[Felix Dzerzhinsky]], whom Lenin had appointed to head the [[Cheka]] in 1917, to commence a “[[Red Terror]]”, which was officially announced to the public on 1 September 1918, by the Bolshevik newspaper, ''Krasnaya Gazeta''.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/RUSterror.htm|title=Red Terror}}</ref> According to Christopher Read, at this time, due to the assassination attempt by Kaplan, Lenin was lying severely wounded in the hospital and was too ill to advise retaliatory measures.<ref>Christopher Read (2005) ''Lenin: A Revolutionary Life'': 250</ref> But, according to [[MI5]]'s official historian at the [[University of Cambridge]], [[Christopher Andrew]], and [[Richard Pipes]], while recovering from his wounds, Lenin instructed: "It is necessary - secretly and ''urgently'' to prepare the terror."<ref name="Mitrokhin"> [[Christopher Andrew]] and [[Vasili Mitrokhin]] (2000). The [[Mitrokhin Archive]]: The KGB in Europe and the West. Gardners Books. ISBN 0-14-028487-7, page 34.</ref><ref>{{cite journal
|last=Bernstein
|first=Richard
|title=Lenin Paints Himself Black With His Own Words
|journal=The New York Times
|publisher=
|date=30 October 1996
|url=http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9504EEDD1239F933A05753C1A960958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all
|accessdate=}}</ref> According to Pipes, [[Lenin's Hanging Order]], which was translated and published by [[Robert Service (historian)|Robert Service]] Professor of history at [[Oxford]] and an outspoken [[anti-communist]],<ref>{{cite book |last=Service |first=Robert |title=Comrades!: A History of World Communism |publisher=Harvard University Press |year=2007 |id=ISBN 067402530X}}</ref> claims that Lenin himself ordered terror on 11 August 1918, before he was fired on.<ref>{{cite book |last=Pipes |first=Richard |title=The Unknown Lenin: From the Secret Archive |publisher=Yale University Press |year=1996 |pages=pp. 50-52 |id=ISBN 0-300-06919-7}}</ref>

:Lenin remained an advocate of red terror, according to [[Richard Pipes]]. In a letter of 19 March 1922, to Molotov and the members of the Politburo, following an uprising by the clergy in the town of Shuia, Lenin outlined a brutal plan of action against the clergy and their followers, who were defying the government decree to remove church valuables: “We must (…) put down all resistance with such brutality that they will not forget it for several decades. (…) The greater the number of representatives of the reactionary clergy and reactionary bourgeoisie we succeed in executing (…) the better.”<ref>{{cite book |last=Pipes |first=Richard |title=The Unknown Lenin: From the Secret Archive |publisher=Yale University Press |year=1996 |pages=pp. 152&ndash;154 |id=ISBN 0-300-06919-7}}</ref> Estimates of the numbers of the clergy killed vary. According to [[Orlando Figes]]<ref>
{{cite journal
|last=Figes
|first=Orlando
|title=Censored by His Own Regime
|journal=The New York Times
|publisher=
|date=27 October 1996
|url=http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C04E1DB1230F934A15753C1A960958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2
|accessdate=}}
</ref> and ''The Black Book of Communism''<ref>{{cite book |last=Courtois |first=Stephane |title=The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression |publisher=[[Harvard University Press]] |year=1999 |pages=p. 126 |id=ISBN 0674076087}}</ref>, 2,691 priests, 1,962 monks and 3,447 nuns were executed as a result of Lenin's aforementioned directives. Historian Christopher Read estimates from the records that a grand total of 1,023 clergy were killed in the whole period 1917-23.<ref>Christopher Read (2005) ''Lenin: A Revolutionary Life'': 251</ref> However, the late [[Alexander Nikolaevich Yakovlev|Alexander Yakovlev]], the architect of [[glasnost]] (openness) and [[perestroika]] (restructuring) and later head of the Presidential Committee for the Rehabilitation of Victims of Political Repression, cites documents that confirm nearly 3,000 were shot in 1918 alone.<ref>[[Alexander Nikolaevich Yakovlev]]. ''A Century of Violence in Soviet Russia.'' [[Yale University Press]], 2002. ISBN 0300087608 [http://books.google.com/books?id=ChRk43tVxTwC&pg=PA156&dq=three+thousand+clergy+shot+in+1918+alone&ei=6w5NSZz7IIOUMtTP6LEO]</ref> Yakovlev stated that Lenin was "By every norm of international law, posthumously indictable for [[crimes against humanity]]."<ref>[[Alexander Nikolaevich Yakovlev]]. ''A Century of Violence in Soviet Russia.'' [[Yale University Press]], 2002. ISBN 0300087608 [http://books.google.com/books?id=ChRk43tVxTwC&pg=PA15&dq=By+every+norm+of+international+law,+posthumously+indictable+for+crimes+against+humanity&ei=FdqDSYiDL6SayASMuenpCw pg 15]</ref>

:During the [[Russian civil war|Civil War]], atrocities were carried out by both Reds and Whites.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm#Russian |title=Twentieth Century Atlas{{ndash}} Death Tolls}}</ref> According to historian Christopher Read the numbers killed by the White forces were on a comparable scale to the Bolsheviks and can probably be numbered in hundreds of thousands.<ref>Christopher Read (2005) ''Lenin: A Revolutionary Life'': 250</ref> For instance, the Whites killed 115,000 Ukrainian Jews in 1919 alone.<ref>Christopher Read (2005) ''Lenin: A Revolutionary Life'': 250</ref> But, according to ''The Black Book of Communism'', the two types of terror were not on the same level. The [[Red Terror]], which was official policy, was more systematic, better organized, and targeted at whole social classes (i.e. [[Decossackization]]). The [[White Terror]] was never systematized in such a fashion, and was almost invariably the work of detachments that were taking measures not authorized by the military command.<ref>''[[Black Book of Communism]]'', p. 82</ref> Professor [[Donald Rayfield]] asserts that only [[Roman Ungern von Sternberg]], [[Nestor Makhno]] and some [[Cossack]] forces employed terror on a scale comparable to the Red Terror.<ref>[[Stalin and His Hangmen]]: The Tyrant and Those Who Killed for Him by [[Donald Rayfield]], pg 84</ref> However, according to historian Evan Mawdsley, the White general [[Anton Ivanovich Denikin|Anton Denikin]] "deserves criticism" for not fully condemning anti-Jewish [[pogroms]].<ref>Evan Mawdsley (2008) ''The Russian Civil War'': 291</ref> According to Lenin critic [[Robert Conquest]], "Lenin's terror was the product of years of war and violence, of the collapse of society and administration, of the desperate acts of rulers precariously riding the flood, and fighting for control and survival. Stalin, on the contrary, attained complete control at a time when general conditions were calm."<ref>Robert Conquest (1990) ''The Great Terror - A Reassessment'': 251</ref> The late Australian historian and leftist intellectual [[Manning Clark]] described Lenin as "Christ-like, at least in his compassion."<ref>[[Australian Broadcasting Corporation]], [http://www.abc.net.au/time/episodes/ep8a.htm "Timeframe"], 1997</ref> Some of Lenin's own writings tend to contradict this view; like in ''"How to Organize the Competition,"'' which proclaimed the common, united purpose of purging the Russian land of all kinds of "vermin, of fleas—the rogues, of bugs—the rich, and so on" and that "one out of every ten [http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/idler idlers] will be [[Extrajudicial punishment|shot on the spot]]."<ref>[http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/dec/25.htm How to Organise Competition?]</ref> [[Christopher Hitchens]], a former [[Trotskyite]], also describes Lenin as "a great man."<ref>{{cite book |last=Amis |first=Martin |title=Koba the Dread |publisher=Miramax |year=2002 |pages=25 |id=ISBN 0786868767}}</ref> According to Hitchens: "One of Lenin's great achievements, in my opinion, is to create a secular Russia. The power of the Russian Orthodox Church, which was an absolute warren of backwardness and evil and superstition, is probably never going to recover from what he did to it."<ref>Christopher Hitchens, [http://www.pbs.org/heavenonearth/interviews_hitchens.html 2005 interview]</ref> Some [[social democratic]] Marxists from Lenin's time, such as [[Julius Martov|Yuliy Osipovich Martov]] and [[Karl Kautsky]], were highly critical of his regime's use of capital punishment, which Kautsky described as "terrorism".<ref>[http://www.marxists.org/archive/martov/1918/07/death-penalty.htm Down with the Death Penalty!] by [[Julius Martov|Yuliy Osipovich Martov]], June/July 1918</ref><ref>[[Karl Kautsky]], [http://marxists.org/archive/kautsky/1919/terrcomm/ch08b.htm#s6 ''Terrorism and Communism''] Chapter VIII, The Communists at Work, The Terror</ref> [[Russian Provisional Government]] minister [[Viktor Chernov]] described Lenin as "a virtual [[Robespierre]]."<ref>{{cite book |last=Volkogonov |first=Dimitri |title=Lenin{{ndash}} A New Biography |publisher= |date= |pages=343 |id=ISBN 0-02-933435-7}}</ref>

=== Red Terror ===

I note that the subsection on Red Terror includes the following:

<blockquote>"Some of Lenin's own writings tend to contradict this view; like in "How to Organize the Competition," which proclaimed the common, united purpose of purging the Russian land of all kinds of "vermin, of fleas—the rogues, of bugs—the rich, and so on" and that "one out of every ten idlers will be shot on the spot.</blockquote>

Lenin did not publish this. In fact, it was first circulated by Stalin in 1929{{ndash}}five years after Lenin's death{{ndash}}as a justification for the forthcoming terror that would be instituted under Stalin. Robert C. Tucker, who is not at all sympathetic to Bolshevism, even admits that in all likelihood Lenin had very different second thoughts after rereading the article. In all likelihood, the passage has no bearing on Red Terror.

Anybody may see the text of Tucker's book at <blockquote>http://books.google.com/books?id=L9pcTIEP1OQC&pg=PA90&lpg=PA90&dq=Lenin+idlers+shot&source=bl&ots=Z0JdBidZ92&sig=hMLJDNv7Rm5QRZZ69QV1Bb7fQJk&hl=en&ei=wKXdSeTuNZKimAeu8NikDg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3#PPA90,M1</blockquote>

If not, simply enter the phrase<blockquote>Lenin idlers shot</blockquote> into Google; the third hit I got was the Tucker excerpt. For convenience's sake, I shall reproduce Tucker's writing right here:

<blockquote>Another document that proved useful was "How to Organize
Competition," an essay written by Lenin in January 1918
and withheld from publication. It appeared in ''Pravda''
on 20 January 1929 under the title "Lenin--Banner of the
Millions," sharing space that day with Krupskaya's
"Ilyich and ''Kolkhoz'' Construction.
<br>In one part of this previously unpublished article, Lenin
launched into a tirade against "the rich and their
hangers-on, and the crooks, the idlers, and the hooligans"
and those described as "these dregs of humanity, these
hopelessly decayed and atrophied limbs, this contagion,
this plague, this ulcer that socialism has inherited
from capitalism." He went on: "No mercy to these enemies
of the people, the enemies of socialism, the enemies of
the toilers! War to the bitter end to the rich and their
hangers-on, the bourgeois intellectuals; war on the rogues,
the idlers, the hooligans!" As for the way to wage the war,
and "to cleanse the land of Russia of all sorts of harmful
insects, of the flea-crooks and bedbug-rich, and so on and
forth," Lenin had these thoughts to offer: "In one place
half a score of the rich, a dozen crooks, half a dozen
workers who shirk their work (in the hooligan manner in
which compositors in Petrograd, particularly in the party
printing shops, shirk their work) will be put in prison.
In another place they will be put to cleaning latrines.
In a third place they will be provided with 'yellow tickets'
after they have served their time, so that all the people
shall have them under surveillance, as ''harmful'' persons,
until they reform. In a fourth place, one out of every
ten idlers will be shot on the spot." After appearing
in ''Pravda'' and other soviet [sic] papers, this short
essay was put out as a pamphlet with a circulation of
3.5 million copies.<br>
Why Lenin chose to whithold it from publication is
unknown. Krupskaya's much later statement in her memoirs
that he did so b ecause he considered it "unfinished" is
not convincing; it is as finished as other quickly written
pieces that he did publish. Conceivably, '''he himself was taken aback by its extremism when he reread it''' on returning from
the brief vacation in Finland during which he wrote the essay.</blockquote>

--Robert C. Tucker, ''Stalin in Power: The Revolution from Above, 1928-1941''. W. W. Norton & Company, 1992 ISBN 0393308693, ISBN 9780393308693. Pp. 89-90; emphasis mine.

Since I am not one of the elect Wikipedians charged with disseminating enlightenment on all subjects, I myself am rendered it incapable of editing the article. I would appreciate, however, if somebody "nuanced out" what is presently written with the addition of Tucker's highly important commentary on this issue.

Even Andrzej Walicki, in ''Marxism and the Leap to the Kingdom of Freedom'' (Stanford University Press, 1997. ISBN 0804731640, ISBN 9780804731645. P. 307.), throughly condemning Lenin and Leninist policy, is forced to admit as much:

<blockquote>True, the article containing these practical recommendations never appeared in print</blockquote> http://books.google.com/books?id=NgZ6vitEjq4C&pg=PA307&lpg=PA307&dq=Lenin+idlers+shot&source=bl&ots=R_5B1_CyEG&sig=nv2pUnfZVREJGtDM3pGzclOkzdg&hl=en&ei=wKXdSeTuNZKimAeu8NikDg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9

[[Special:Contributions/166.217.251.170|166.217.251.170]] ([[User talk:166.217.251.170|talk]]) 09:37, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

*This is described in all textbooks. The orders by Lenin were send as secret ;etters/telegrams to Bolshevik regional authorities and Cheka. It was only much later that the original texts became public. Stalin cited a few of Lenin's letters to justiy the terror and to prove that he was a good follower of Lenin (and in fact he was).[[User:Biophys|Biophys]] ([[User talk:Biophys|talk]]) 14:52, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Biophys, given the POV advocated in your contributions, you're going to need a source for that. If you have references for the idea that Lenin sent out the same words as those in "Competition" in secret telegrams, we'll accept them. [[User:PasswordUsername|PasswordUsername]] ([[User talk:PasswordUsername|talk]]) 17:13, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

*Almost any good Western books on the subject tell about secret telegrams by Lenin (like [[Lenin's Hanging Order]]): "Black book of Communism" by European historians, "Russia under Bolshevik regime" by Pipes, books by [[Robert Conquest]], books by many Russian historians like [[Edvard Radzinsky]], and so on.[[User:Biophys|Biophys]] ([[User talk:Biophys|talk]]) 03:35, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

:*Biophys, I think you'll find that every source you've listed here should be treated with extreme scrutiny given the explicitly Anti-Communist leaning of their authors. Not only are the authors mentioned here embroiled in academic controversies for these works(with the exception Black Book of Communism, which is almost laughable from a scholarly point of view) these sources are sensationalist histories, intended either to entertain or discredit the Soviet system (Conquest, for instance, received grants from the CIA*) the impartiality of these studies deserves questioning.<br>
:[*]http://www.cambridgeclarion.org/e/fo_deceit_unit_graun_27jan1978.html

OK, a completely different order, one which is not known to have been actually carried out in actual fact. I find it interesting that of all the books out there you choose to cite a British intelligence agent and a TV host to carry across your point. [[User:PasswordUsername|PasswordUsername]] ([[User talk:PasswordUsername|talk]]) 07:48, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

:My suggestion is that this &sect; become an article in its own right or have much of its content moved to an existing one if it already exists. Then this section can refer to that article and concentrate on Lenin's role. Please use proper indentation, this thread is very hard to follow. [[User:Lycurgus|Lycurgus]] ([[User talk:Lycurgus|talk]]) 10:07, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

:: It turns out there is already a [[Red Terror]]. Have added the main link to the &sect; and will perform edit to focus the &sect; on the subject of this article if no one else does. [[User:Lycurgus|Lycurgus]] ([[User talk:Lycurgus|talk]]) 11:04, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

:::A posthumously published article which never appeared in Lenin's lifetime is irrelevant and should not be discussed at length. It will be removed per undue weight. [[User:Srazin|Srazin]] ([[User talk:Srazin|talk]]) 21:03, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

::::You (Srazin) are a [[User:Jacob Peters|banned vandal]] therefore your opinion is irrelevant. Your latest sockpuppet account will be banned soon enough. But I concur with others here that the Red Terror section is too long. I propose deleting the entire last paragraph.--[[User:C.J. Griffin|C.J. Griffin]] ([[User talk:C.J. Griffin|talk]]) 21:48, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

==White Anti-Semitic Terror==
Anyone have any thoughts about this sentence: "For instance, the Whites killed 115,000 Ukrainian Jews in 1919 alone.[79]" (Reed, 2005) Does anyone have Reed's book and can they check the citation? I understand that the Whites were absolutely vicious when it came to the Jewish population but does the mention of "Whites" in this context include Ukrainian nationalists and irregulars, who, while perhaps considered "Whites" by the Bolsheviks, were at various times fighting Germans, Poles, "Whites" proper (e.g. Russians) and Bolsheviks? E.g. I note that the [[Symon Petliura]] notes that Ukrainian nationalist pogroms claimed tens of thousands of Jewish lives: "the number of Jews killed during the period is estimated to be between 35 and 50 thousand." Similarly, are some Polish anti-Jewish atrocities being attributed to the "Whites"? [[Special:Contributions/99.240.139.189|99.240.139.189]] ([[User talk:99.240.139.189|talk]]) 09:13, 28 June 2009 (UTC)


== Propose moving sub section "death and funeral: 1923-1924" up as a top level section. ==
== "Religion" entry in infobox ==
I don't quite know what's behind [[User:DR2006kl]]'s objection to the infobox "Religion" entry of "None (Atheist)". It's beyond doubt that Lenin was an atheist &ndash; I've provided a single citation from a reliable source to support that, and can find dozens more, if necessary &ndash; and also beyond doubt that atheism is not a religion. I read the entry as saying "Lenin did not have a religion, however he was an atheist" or "Lenin did not practice a religion, the reason being his atheism." In other words, "Atheist" is not being supplied as an answer to "Religion", but as a further explanation of why Lenin had no religion. That's how I read it, and I don't see anything wrong with that -- however DR2006kl obviously does, so I've invited him here to explain what his objection is. (I don't think DR's last version, piping to "Atheism" with a display of "None", is a particularly good compromise, since it hides the fact of the matter where it's only seen by someone curious enough to click the link.) <span style="white-space:nowrap;"><b><i>[[User:Ed Fitzgerald|Ed Fitzgerald]]</i> <sub>[[User talk:Ed Fitzgerald|t]] / [[Special:Contributions/Ed Fitzgerald|c]]</sub></b></span> 11:47, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
:No answer from this editor for over 48 hours. <span style="white-space:nowrap;"><b><i>[[User:Ed Fitzgerald|Ed Fitzgerald]]</i> <sub>[[User talk:Ed Fitzgerald|t]] / [[Special:Contributions/Ed Fitzgerald|c]]</sub></b></span> 18:18, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
::Technically, Atheism doesn't imply a lack of religion, just a lack of belief in god (and usually as in Chinese society, demons, ghosts, and the supernatural in general). Buddhism (Theravada at any rate) and others are, essentially, atheistic in this sense. So probably the matter of fact, if the highest standards of language usage were in effect would be simply "None". However the thing that caught my attention about this is how you seem to have squatted this article setting this 48 hr. and other various rules which you have made yourself the enforcer of. Editors are not paid here and so your setting a time period for them to respond and two days at that is curious. Just make the change if it's justified and if there's likely to be contention and a time period for response is to be set, unless the subject matter calls for urgency, at least "several" days is appropriate. [[User:Lycurgus|Lycurgus]] ([[User talk:Lycurgus|talk]]) 19:48, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
:::Interesting interpretation. Let's see how it sounds expressed another way: I made an attempt to resolve a conflict, which was not responded to, so after waiting more than a reasonable amount of time, I went ahead and restored the prior status of the article, before the editor began fooling around with it. Seems pretty reasonable to me. <span style="white-space:nowrap;"><b><i>[[User:Ed Fitzgerald|Ed Fitzgerald]]</i> <sub>[[User talk:Ed Fitzgerald|t]] / [[Special:Contributions/Ed Fitzgerald|c]]</sub></b></span> 20:12, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
::::Oh, wait - I remember you now... You're the editor who [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ed_Fitzgerald/archives_12_June_2009#Comment.2FAction_per_your_request called me a "stupid asshole"] (twice! - [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Vladimir_Lenin&diff=294373683&oldid=294361757 once in quasi-German]) and then [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lycurgus&diff=next&oldid=294569403 admitted on your talk page] that you really '''''didn't know''''' if I was a stupid asshole or not! Have you taken to following me around, or something? Got nothing better to do with your precious volunteer time? <span style="white-space:nowrap;"><b><i>[[User:Ed Fitzgerald|Ed Fitzgerald]]</i> <sub>[[User talk:Ed Fitzgerald|t]] / [[Special:Contributions/Ed Fitzgerald|c]]</sub></b></span> 21:43, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
::::: |:) Always have tiem for the crusty ole skanks klub. [[User:Lycurgus|Lycurgus]] ([[User talk:Lycurgus|talk]]) 01:43, 14 June 2009 (UTC)


Currently "death and funeral: 1923-1924" is a sub section under "Lenin's government". Does not seem logical. His death is really not a part of his government. <i>[[user:PastafarianMonk|PastaMonk]]</i> 11:13, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Atheism is not a religion. Hence, it cannot be an answer to the religion question. Besides, there is no evidence that Lenin was [[atheist]] and not [[nontheist]], for example. Finally, Lenin was baptized into the Russian Orthodox Church, hence he was Christian for at least part of his life. None with a reference to atheism may be fine but I have to think about the issue first. [[User:DR2006kl|DR2006kl]] ([[User talk:DR2006kl|talk]]) 09:52, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
:I think the status quo is preferable; it is generally neater. [[User:Midnightblueowl|Midnightblueowl]] ([[User talk:Midnightblueowl|talk]]) 10:37, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
::{{ping|Midnightblueowl}}- A couple of months ago, I was reading a comment on Facebook that Lenin was assassinated on the orders of Stalin (this statement is seen very frequently on social media). I had a suspicion this is wrong information. I vaguely remember, he died of some illness. I came to this page to double check. I don't find this information. The average Wikipedia user does not have have the time or inclination to read the entire article, digest it, admire it's beauty etc. They need information they can look up quickly. That is what people expect from an encyclopedia. If the information cannot be found easily, it's not very neat. Agree ? <i>[[user:PastafarianMonk|PastaMonk]]</i> 09:50, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
::{{ping|Midnightblueowl}}When viewed on Wikipedia mobile phone app the section "death and funeral: 1923-1924" is easy to find. For web users (on PC or laptop) it's not easy to find. The main sections appear collapsed. So, he won't know which one to expand to find the section on "death and funeral" <i>[[user:PastafarianMonk|PastaMonk]]</i> 11:53, 27 March 2024 (UTC)


== Proposed changes to lede ==
: Well for the purposes of these fora, what a religion is is defined by en.wikipedia.org categories. Since [[Secular Humanism]] is not in one of these and furthermore a lot of processing about what constitutes a Religion value in the template not being a good, crusty #1's adjudication should probably stand. [[User:Lycurgus|Lycurgus]] ([[User talk:Lycurgus|talk]]) 17:45, 15 June 2009 (UTC)


I propose the following changes to the lede section, which I added as of this revision ([[Special:Permalink/1224837838]]) and that were recently reverted by [[User:Midnightblueowl|Midnightblueowl]]:
== Whoe started Civil War? ==
#State in the first paragraph that Lenin was the "{{tq|founder and leader of the [[Bolsheviks]], which led the [[October Revolution]] that established the world's first [[socialist state]]}}". This is key information (as important as his leadership of the Soviet state), and should be included early.
#Mention the [[Russian Civil War]], the event which dominated his administration, in the first paragraph.
#Add some detail on Leninism in the first paragraph, as it constitutes his political legacy beyond his leadership: "{{tq|his developments of Marx's theories of [[Vanguardism|party]], [[Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism|imperialism]], [[The State and Revolution|the state, and revolution]] are called [[Leninism]].}}" The use of wikilinks in this is up for debate.
#Remove mentions of his wife [[Nadezhda Krupskaya]] and the location of his death ([[Gorki Leninskiye|Gorki]]), as they are not comparatively important.
#Add a mention of the [[April Theses]], which was one of the most important political documents that Lenin wrote.
#Add a mention of [[war communism]] (and its major expression in the [[Prodrazverstka|requisitioning of grain]] from the peasantry), which is as important as the [[New Economic Policy]], which is already mentioned. It needs to be mentioned to demonstrate what was "new" about the NEP.
#Expand on "{{tq|popular uprisings}}" by mentioning the two most significant by name: "{{tq|revolts such as the [[Tambov Rebellion|Tambov]] and [[Kronstadt rebellion]]s}}".
#Rephrase this info: {{!tq|"His administration defeated right and left-wing anti-Bolshevik armies in the [[Russian Civil War]] from 1917 to 1922 and oversaw the [[Polish–Soviet War]] of 1919–1921. [...] Several non-Russian nations had secured independence from Russia after 1917, but five were forcibly [[Treaty on the Creation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics|re-united into the new Soviet Union]] in 1922, while others repelled Soviet invasions.}}" as such: "{{tq|Some non-Russian nations of the former empire were [[Treaty on the Creation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics|re-united in the Soviet Union]] in 1922, while others (notably [[Polish–Soviet War|Poland]]) gained independence.}}" This should be kept simple. The Whites should not uniformly be described as "right-wing", and the "left-wing" armies such as the [[Green armies|Greens]] and [[Makhnovshchina|Makhnovites]] played a comparatively small part; the [[Allied intervention in the Russian Civil War|intervention of the Allies]] and [[Central Powers]] were more important, but shouldn't be mentioned for concision. Regarding the separatists, much more than five breakaway nations were re-united in the Soviet Union (see [[Pro-independence movements in the Russian Civil War]]).
#Expand on "{{tq|his health failing}}" by including that he "{{tq|suffered three debilitating strokes in 1922 and 1923 and died the following year}}", which is important because it hints at the power vacuum and struggle which began in 1922, and contextualizes the leadership transition to Stalin.
#Add that it was under Stalin's leadership that he became the figurehead of [[Marxism–Leninism]], and specify that it was the state ideology.
#Rephrase the summary of his legacy: "{{!tq|Lenin is viewed by his supporters as a champion of [[socialism]], communism, [[anti-imperialism]] and the [[working class]], while his critics accuse him of establishing a [[totalitarian dictatorship]] that oversaw [[Political repression in the Soviet Union|mass killings and political repression of dissidents]].}}" as such: "{{tq|Lenin is praised by his supporters for establishing [[soviet democracy]] and a "[[dictatorship of the proletariat]]" which took steps towards socialism, while critics accuse him of overseeing [[Political repression in the Soviet Union|mass killings and political repression of dissidents]] and either leading or preparing the way for a [[totalitarian dictatorship]].}}" The current text says the same thing in several ways, while the proposed adds detail on what Lenin and his supporters believed that he was establishing from his Marxist perspective. Also, as elaborated within the article, not all scholars and critics characterize Lenin's government as a totalitarian dictatorship, though almost everyone acknowledges that he laid the groundwork for Stalin's.


I support all of these changes to the text, but they can be discussed point by point. Thoughts? — [[User:Goszei|Goszei]] ([[User_talk:Goszei|talk]]) 22:18, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
I prefer "In 1918, fighting erupted between the White Movement and the revolutionary regime, the newly created [[Russian SFSR]]" to "If In 1918, the White Movement started the [[Russian Civil War]] against the newly created [[Russian SFSR]]". The former states a fact, the latter is an opinion. One can equally blame reds for disbanding constitutional assembly and therefore starting a civil war. [[User:DR2006kl|DR2006kl]] ([[User talk:DR2006kl|talk]]) 09:13, 2 July 2009 (UTC)


:This article is FA-rated, so it has already been scrutinised extensively by a wide number of editors. For this reason, we should be very cautious about alterations, because these could easily result in a decline in quality, at which its FA status would have to be removed. My concerns about the proposed changes are principally to do with length. This article is already very long; indeed, it is actually too long according to [[WP:Article size]]. Expanding it further in order to add further detail is not a good idea in that scenario. The lead needs to be kept as clean and concise as possible, and in its present, largely stable form it does that. [[User:Midnightblueowl|Midnightblueowl]] ([[User talk:Midnightblueowl|talk]]) 13:05, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
::According to Lenin in November 1917 [http://www.marxistsfr.org/archive/lenin/works//1917/nov/04a.htm]
::Not all of these points add length (though most do). It's been FA since 2017 (was it) & a touch-up may be in order. It would be nice to lose "His health failing, Lenin died in Gorki,..."! On the overall length, there are tons of sub-articles, and trimming the detail lower down should be tedious but straightforward. Maybe [[User:Goszei|Goszei]] could start there? [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 13:29, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
::I have just implemented what I hope is a lasting compromise for the lead along the general lines of what I pointed out above. My edit reduced the size of the text, which should assuage any concerns about length and concision. — [[User:Goszei|Goszei]] ([[User_talk:Goszei|talk]]) 21:43, 21 October 2024 (UTC)


== Jewish ==
<blockquote>
Does Lenin's Jewish heritage mean he deserves to be added to Jewish-related categories?[[User:MagicatthemovieS|MagicatthemovieS]] ([[User talk:MagicatthemovieS|talk]]) 03:04, 2 July 2024 (UTC)MagicatthemovieS
The civil war was started by a handful of men. It is not over. Kaledin’s troops are approaching Moscow, and the shock troops are approaching Petrograd. We do not want a civil war. Our troops have shown great restraint. They held their fire, and it all began when three of our men were killed. Krasnov was given soft treatment. He was only placed under house arrest. We are against civil war. But if it nevertheless goes on what are we to do?
</blockquote> [[User:Srazin|Srazin]] ([[User talk:Srazin|talk]]) 21:06, 15 August 2009 (UTC)


:No. Lenin had distant Jewish ancestry, but no "Jewish heritage" unless you consider this to be an undefinable quality acquired by birth. He had absolutely no Jewish upbringing, and didn't even know that one of his ancestors was a convert. This "Jew-tagging" of unrelated articles serves no encyclopaedic purpose; we should reserve these categories for those individuals where their Jewish background is/was relevant to their life and work. This does not apply in Lenin's case. <span style="font-family: Papyrus">[[User:RolandR|RolandR]] ([[User talk:RolandR|talk]])</span> 09:40, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
== Trotsky, Lenin and Kamenev at the II Party Congress in 1919 ==
:The issue of Lenin's supposed 'Jewishness' also feeds into bigoted ideas of Judeo-Bolshevism, fuelling antisemitism and tainting rational assessments of Lenin, as well as his role in the revolution and the state it producted. [[Special:Contributions/2A0A:EF40:35B:101:2D23:12FF:BC27:6B65|2A0A:EF40:35B:101:2D23:12FF:BC27:6B65]] ([[User talk:2A0A:EF40:35B:101:2D23:12FF:BC27:6B65|talk]]) 13:27, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
::Yeah, do not include.--[[User:Jack Upland|Jack Upland]] ([[User talk:Jack Upland|talk]]) 00:08, 14 October 2024 (UTC)


== Lead ==
The incription underr the picture says ''Trotsky, Lenin and Kamenev at the II Party Congress in 1919''. In fact the 2nd congress was long bfore 1919.--[[Special:Contributions/79.111.130.49|79.111.130.49]] ([[User talk:79.111.130.49|talk]]) 10:51, 13 July 2009 (UTC)


The lead says: {{tq|Several non-Russian nations had secured independence from Russia after 1917, but five were forcibly re-united into the new Soviet Union in 1922, while others repelled Soviet invasions}}.
== What does this mean?==
"...popularized Kautsky's take". Despite being English myself, I don't understand what this combination of words means. Could someone who does understand it please rephrase it? [[User:Pawebster|APW]] ([[User talk:Pawebster|talk]]) 07:57, 9 August 2009 (UTC)


The five nations mentioned are presumably Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, and Ukraine, as mentioned in the body under {{sectionlink|Vladimir Lenin|Civil War and the Polish–Soviet War: 1918–1920}}, although there were only four republics (including Russia) that signed the [[Treaty on the Creation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics]]. There were also many more 'nations' and other state formations that were created (that later became part of the USSR), so I am not sure why only these states are mentioned in particular.
I'm under the impression that it simply means: popularized Kautsky's perspective. But I'm not even English.--[[User:Pedro magalhaes86|Pedro magalhaes86]] ([[User talk:Pedro magalhaes86|talk]]) 20:47, 8 September 2009 (UTC)


For example, the [[Belarusian Democratic Republic]] (BDR) is linked when referring to the 1921 treaty with Poland and as having "secured independence", which was created under German occupation, although it lost control after German troops left those territories and Soviet power was established with the [[Socialist Soviet Republic of Belarus]] in December 1918, so why is the BDR linked here instead? This gives the false impression that there were not various factions fighting for control and only one legitimate entity in each of those territories, in this case the BDR for Belarus (which pushes the POV that this was purely nations fighting for their independence versus Russian Bolsheviks). [[User:Mellk|Mellk]] ([[User talk:Mellk|talk]]) 03:13, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
==Adoption of the name==


== Semi-protected edit request on 1 August 2024 ==
When did Vladimir Ulyanov start using the name Lenin? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/82.198.250.66|82.198.250.66]] ([[User talk:82.198.250.66|talk]]) 17:43, 26 August 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


{{edit semi-protected|Vladimir Lenin|answered=yes}}
Should we place an [[WP:NBSP]] for {{code|Soviet&nbsp;Union}} on infobox? [[Special:Contributions/49.150.12.163|49.150.12.163]] ([[User talk:49.150.12.163|talk]]) 10:36, 1 August 2024 (UTC)


[[File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done:'''<!-- Template:ESp --> I don't think it's necessary. [[User:PianoDan|PianoDan]] ([[User talk:PianoDan|talk]]) 17:06, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
*Note that I've rangeblocked the OP for block evasion.-- [[User:Ponyo|<span style="color: Navy;">'''Ponyo'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Ponyo|<span style="color: Navy;">''bons mots''</span>]]</sup> 16:20, 11 August 2024 (UTC)


== Semi-protected edit request on 23 September 2024 ==
== Last photo of Lenin ==


{{Edit semi-protected|Vladimir Lenin|answered=yes}}
The alleged last photo of Lenin is incredibly dubious. I mean, the guy was paralysed, he couldn't face the camera like that or even stand straight like that, and the photo doesn't resemble him at all. It looks like a Chinese guy in a pyjama. Also, there is no information concerning the author of such photograph. It strikes me as false. --[[User:Pedro magalhaes86|Pedro magalhaes86]] ([[User talk:Pedro magalhaes86|talk]]) 20:40, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Should we remove "Russian SFSR", as per [[Talk:Joseph Stalin#Linking subdivisions]]? [[Special:Contributions/175.100.92.40|175.100.92.40]] ([[User talk:175.100.92.40|talk]]) 09:20, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
:[[File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done for now:''' please establish a [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] for this alteration '''[[Wikipedia:Edit requests|before]]''' using the {{Tlx|Edit semi-protected}} template.<!-- Template:ESp --> <span style="font-family:Arial;background-color:#fff;border:2px dashed#69c73e">[[User:Cowboygilbert|<span style="color:#3f6b39">'''Cowboygilbert'''</span>]] - [[User talk:Cowboygilbert|<span style="color:#d12667"> (talk) ♥</span>]]</span> 01:44, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 21:43, 21 October 2024

Featured articleVladimir Lenin is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on November 7, 2017.
On this day...Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 23, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
April 16, 2015Peer reviewReviewed
September 30, 2015Good article nomineeNot listed
April 14, 2016Good article nomineeListed
May 8, 2016Peer reviewReviewed
September 24, 2016Featured article candidatePromoted
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on April 16, 2004, April 16, 2005, April 16, 2006, April 16, 2007, April 16, 2008, April 16, 2013, April 16, 2014, April 16, 2016, April 16, 2018, and April 16, 2021.
Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive This article was on the Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive for the week of March 14, 2024.
Current status: Featured article

Propose moving sub section "death and funeral: 1923-1924" up as a top level section.

[edit]

Currently "death and funeral: 1923-1924" is a sub section under "Lenin's government". Does not seem logical. His death is really not a part of his government. PastaMonk 11:13, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the status quo is preferable; it is generally neater. Midnightblueowl (talk) 10:37, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Midnightblueowl:- A couple of months ago, I was reading a comment on Facebook that Lenin was assassinated on the orders of Stalin (this statement is seen very frequently on social media). I had a suspicion this is wrong information. I vaguely remember, he died of some illness. I came to this page to double check. I don't find this information. The average Wikipedia user does not have have the time or inclination to read the entire article, digest it, admire it's beauty etc. They need information they can look up quickly. That is what people expect from an encyclopedia. If the information cannot be found easily, it's not very neat. Agree ? PastaMonk 09:50, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Midnightblueowl:When viewed on Wikipedia mobile phone app the section "death and funeral: 1923-1924" is easy to find. For web users (on PC or laptop) it's not easy to find. The main sections appear collapsed. So, he won't know which one to expand to find the section on "death and funeral" PastaMonk 11:53, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed changes to lede

[edit]

I propose the following changes to the lede section, which I added as of this revision (Special:Permalink/1224837838) and that were recently reverted by Midnightblueowl:

  1. State in the first paragraph that Lenin was the "founder and leader of the Bolsheviks, which led the October Revolution that established the world's first socialist state". This is key information (as important as his leadership of the Soviet state), and should be included early.
  2. Mention the Russian Civil War, the event which dominated his administration, in the first paragraph.
  3. Add some detail on Leninism in the first paragraph, as it constitutes his political legacy beyond his leadership: "his developments of Marx's theories of party, imperialism, the state, and revolution are called Leninism." The use of wikilinks in this is up for debate.
  4. Remove mentions of his wife Nadezhda Krupskaya and the location of his death (Gorki), as they are not comparatively important.
  5. Add a mention of the April Theses, which was one of the most important political documents that Lenin wrote.
  6. Add a mention of war communism (and its major expression in the requisitioning of grain from the peasantry), which is as important as the New Economic Policy, which is already mentioned. It needs to be mentioned to demonstrate what was "new" about the NEP.
  7. Expand on "popular uprisings" by mentioning the two most significant by name: "revolts such as the Tambov and Kronstadt rebellions".
  8. Rephrase this info: "His administration defeated right and left-wing anti-Bolshevik armies in the Russian Civil War from 1917 to 1922 and oversaw the Polish–Soviet War of 1919–1921. [...] Several non-Russian nations had secured independence from Russia after 1917, but five were forcibly re-united into the new Soviet Union in 1922, while others repelled Soviet invasions." as such: "Some non-Russian nations of the former empire were re-united in the Soviet Union in 1922, while others (notably Poland) gained independence." This should be kept simple. The Whites should not uniformly be described as "right-wing", and the "left-wing" armies such as the Greens and Makhnovites played a comparatively small part; the intervention of the Allies and Central Powers were more important, but shouldn't be mentioned for concision. Regarding the separatists, much more than five breakaway nations were re-united in the Soviet Union (see Pro-independence movements in the Russian Civil War).
  9. Expand on "his health failing" by including that he "suffered three debilitating strokes in 1922 and 1923 and died the following year", which is important because it hints at the power vacuum and struggle which began in 1922, and contextualizes the leadership transition to Stalin.
  10. Add that it was under Stalin's leadership that he became the figurehead of Marxism–Leninism, and specify that it was the state ideology.
  11. Rephrase the summary of his legacy: "Lenin is viewed by his supporters as a champion of socialism, communism, anti-imperialism and the working class, while his critics accuse him of establishing a totalitarian dictatorship that oversaw mass killings and political repression of dissidents." as such: "Lenin is praised by his supporters for establishing soviet democracy and a "dictatorship of the proletariat" which took steps towards socialism, while critics accuse him of overseeing mass killings and political repression of dissidents and either leading or preparing the way for a totalitarian dictatorship." The current text says the same thing in several ways, while the proposed adds detail on what Lenin and his supporters believed that he was establishing from his Marxist perspective. Also, as elaborated within the article, not all scholars and critics characterize Lenin's government as a totalitarian dictatorship, though almost everyone acknowledges that he laid the groundwork for Stalin's.

I support all of these changes to the text, but they can be discussed point by point. Thoughts? — Goszei (talk) 22:18, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article is FA-rated, so it has already been scrutinised extensively by a wide number of editors. For this reason, we should be very cautious about alterations, because these could easily result in a decline in quality, at which its FA status would have to be removed. My concerns about the proposed changes are principally to do with length. This article is already very long; indeed, it is actually too long according to WP:Article size. Expanding it further in order to add further detail is not a good idea in that scenario. The lead needs to be kept as clean and concise as possible, and in its present, largely stable form it does that. Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:05, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not all of these points add length (though most do). It's been FA since 2017 (was it) & a touch-up may be in order. It would be nice to lose "His health failing, Lenin died in Gorki,..."! On the overall length, there are tons of sub-articles, and trimming the detail lower down should be tedious but straightforward. Maybe Goszei could start there? Johnbod (talk) 13:29, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have just implemented what I hope is a lasting compromise for the lead along the general lines of what I pointed out above. My edit reduced the size of the text, which should assuage any concerns about length and concision. — Goszei (talk) 21:43, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish

[edit]

Does Lenin's Jewish heritage mean he deserves to be added to Jewish-related categories?MagicatthemovieS (talk) 03:04, 2 July 2024 (UTC)MagicatthemovieS[reply]

No. Lenin had distant Jewish ancestry, but no "Jewish heritage" unless you consider this to be an undefinable quality acquired by birth. He had absolutely no Jewish upbringing, and didn't even know that one of his ancestors was a convert. This "Jew-tagging" of unrelated articles serves no encyclopaedic purpose; we should reserve these categories for those individuals where their Jewish background is/was relevant to their life and work. This does not apply in Lenin's case. RolandR (talk) 09:40, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The issue of Lenin's supposed 'Jewishness' also feeds into bigoted ideas of Judeo-Bolshevism, fuelling antisemitism and tainting rational assessments of Lenin, as well as his role in the revolution and the state it producted. 2A0A:EF40:35B:101:2D23:12FF:BC27:6B65 (talk) 13:27, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, do not include.--Jack Upland (talk) 00:08, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

[edit]

The lead says: Several non-Russian nations had secured independence from Russia after 1917, but five were forcibly re-united into the new Soviet Union in 1922, while others repelled Soviet invasions.

The five nations mentioned are presumably Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, and Ukraine, as mentioned in the body under Vladimir Lenin § Civil War and the Polish–Soviet War: 1918–1920, although there were only four republics (including Russia) that signed the Treaty on the Creation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. There were also many more 'nations' and other state formations that were created (that later became part of the USSR), so I am not sure why only these states are mentioned in particular.

For example, the Belarusian Democratic Republic (BDR) is linked when referring to the 1921 treaty with Poland and as having "secured independence", which was created under German occupation, although it lost control after German troops left those territories and Soviet power was established with the Socialist Soviet Republic of Belarus in December 1918, so why is the BDR linked here instead? This gives the false impression that there were not various factions fighting for control and only one legitimate entity in each of those territories, in this case the BDR for Belarus (which pushes the POV that this was purely nations fighting for their independence versus Russian Bolsheviks). Mellk (talk) 03:13, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 1 August 2024

[edit]

Should we place an WP:NBSP for Soviet&nbsp;Union on infobox? 49.150.12.163 (talk) 10:36, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: I don't think it's necessary. PianoDan (talk) 17:06, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 23 September 2024

[edit]

Should we remove "Russian SFSR", as per Talk:Joseph Stalin#Linking subdivisions? 175.100.92.40 (talk) 09:20, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 01:44, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]