 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. |
|
 Start |
This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. |
| Mid |
This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. |
|
|
|
|
Much of the history of the article can be found in Soviet's history. --Jerzy(t) 04:56, 2004 Apr 30 (UTC)
[edit] The first Soviet
According to the Soviet hagiography, the first was Ivanovo Soviet in Ivanovo-Voznesensk. What exactly was Voline's Sovet? References? mikka (t) 08:53, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] No! Voline meant the first workers' soviet, not the first soviet
Please see Soviet (disambiguation) article for a lot of information about the uses and meanings of this Russian abstract noun meaning 'advice'. Even as a concrete noun denoting an organised body, its usage dates back at least as far as the (Tsarist) 'State Soviet', which existed from as early as 1810. This is not a typo - I mean EIGHTEEN TEN. More information at: A Note on the Use of the Word 'Soviet 158-152-12-77 01:00, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
- Ivanovo Soviet was also workers' soviet.--Nixer 20:53, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Rewriting needed
The final paragraph currently says "Based on the view of the state implicit in the Bolshevik use of the term, the word "soviet" naturally extended, or consciously was extended, to mean in effect any body formed by a group of soviets to delegate, up a hierarchy of soviets, the authority to express and effect their will." This sentence doesn't make any sense, I don't know if it is missing clauses or what. I hesitate to edit it it, since I don't know with certainty what it is trying to say. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nmerriam (talk • contribs) 05:59, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Y Done --Kubanczyk (talk) 10:30, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Practise/practice (as verb)
The question is one of consistency within the same article (see "Retaining the existing variety"). This article had a preponderant legacy of American preferences, and the subject matter lacks sufficient reason to switch to British. Consequently, practice is the spelling of the verb (same as the noun). Rammer (talk) 17:36, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Pro bolshevik bias
The last line in the introduction reads "In October 1917 the Bolsheviks secured a majority in the Soviet, and Lenin, staying true to his word, overthrew the Provisional Government, giving all power to the Soviets and the Bolsheviks who governed in their name." Anyone with elimentory knowledge of the revolution knows that the opposite is true, the soviets were independantly created and ended by Lenin. Someone fix that. 109.76.147.42 (talk) 07:21, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
- I concur and I've added a POV tag on this. In the future, I'll work to clean it up a bit. Anatoly-Rex (talk) 22:40, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, I agree. I've tried to reduce the bias with citations from a 1920 Americana article which has its own POV problems but is good in that it actually tries to describe a soviet as a political organization. It is of course weak as to how this system evolved in the later course of the U.S.S.R.'s development. I think the objective descriptions of soviets as a component in various political systems should be a part of this article as well, realizing that these are different political entities at different times in Russia's history, though probably with some common threads. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 17:05, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
