Talk:Propaganda in the Soviet Union

Unsubstantiated claim by a single KGB member does not merit lengthy paragraph

There is a long paragraph on the claim by Sergei Tretyakov (intelligence officer) that the Soviets invented the idea nuclear winter as propaganda, but the only evidence for this claim is Tretyakov's word, and the author of the book which reported it notes that whether this is true is "impossible to discern". With no evidence given that historians or members of the intelligence community find this claim likely to be true, devoting so much space to it seems to violate Wikipedia:NPOV#Undue weight. I suggest either removing the paragraph entirely, or adding the following to the existing list of Soviet propaganda:

• Senior SVR officer Sergei Tretyakov made the claim to writer Pete Earley that the KGB "created the myth of nuclear winter" as disinformation (see Sergei Tretyakov for details), although Earley said that the accuracy of this claim "is impossible to discern".

Also see the existing discussion on an attempt to add a similar section to the nuclear winter article at Talk:Nuclear winter#Edit Conflicts on this page. Hypnosifl (talk) 21:22, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

We need a at least a couple of phrases to explain what the claim was about and put it in proper context. What others think?Biophys (talk) 21:54, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Why are details needed here, when anyone interested can just click the link to Tretyakov's own article as suggested? I copied all the same information you had written here into that article. Again, putting lots of info here is giving "undue weight" to a completely unsubstantiated claim. Hypnosifl (talk) 21:57, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Why? Because information about Soviet propaganda belongs to article about Soviet propaganda.Biophys (talk) 22:55, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Information about Soviet propaganda that large numbers of experts in the field believe to be true belongs here, but mere unsubstantiated assertions by individual KGB members should not be given "undue weight", if they are mentioned at all. As I said in the disinformation talk page, putting a disproportionately large paragraph on one unsubstantiated claim just because you have the information is not the way to build a good, encyclopedic article. Hypnosifl (talk) 23:29, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

O'K, if you insist, just make some kind of a compromise version that you are comfortable with. I will be working with that article some time later.Biophys (talk) 02:53, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Well H did make a compromise, but you reverted it [1]. The idea the NW was a massive disinfo campaign is insupportable, even if we take all your sources at face value, and I don't William M. Connolley (talk) 21:50, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I would have been happier deleting it entirely, but this was meant to be my compromise version:

*Senior SVR officer Sergei Tretyakov made the claim to writer Pete Earley that the KGB "created the myth of nuclear winter" as disinformation (see Sergei Tretyakov for details), although Earley said that the accuracy of this claim "is impossible to discern".

Do you consider this unacceptable? If so, why? Hypnosifl (talk) 02:17, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Fine, let's keep your version restored by William. This article should be improved and expanded a lot, so it is meaningless to argue about this minor detail right now.Biophys (talk) 16:43, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I copied the section in question to Nuclear winter#Criticism of nuclear winter theory, where it belongs. I suggest to trim it here to a b brief summary. `'Míkka>t 18:32, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

I took it out of NW; we have a long discussion on talk already and don't want it, thanks. Its junk from one person. Why do you believe it? William M. Connolley (talk) 20:29, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

This is sourced to book by Pete Earley who dedicated almost a chapter of his book to this story. This is a reliable (perfectly "verifiable") secondary source (as confirmed at WP:RS), not simply a claim by Sergey Tretiakov, which would be notable enough even by itself.Biophys (talk) 21:27, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

There is a source for the fact of ST making the claim, but not for the truth of the claim itself William M. Connolley (talk) 21:46, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

I cited a secondary source. Pete Earley asserts, after looking at other materials that Tretiakov was right. Which does not make their claim "the truth", but this is not required per WP:Verifiability.Biophys (talk) 22:33, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Earley himself writes that it "is impossible to discern" whether it is truth or not. Wikipeia is for facts which are (a) encyclopedic and (b) notable. You have to demonstrate that Tretiakov's claim is a notable blurb, i.e., widely discussed. Yiou are right, truth is not the issue; we have articles about various hoaxes and conjectures. But these are notable. Tretiakov's claim's notability is questionable. `'Míkka>t 16:22, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

After stepping back and looking what this issue about, I realized that this is not "propaganda". This is disinformation, a rather different Soviet kind of information warfare. Therefore I removed it from here. `'Míkka>t 16:29, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

BTW, Earley's book reveiws way that the main interest is Tretiakov's inside view in KGB training, etc., and skeptical about his numerous claims about KGB successes. `'Míkka>t 17:17, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Reliability of Soviet propaganda photographs

Please see Talk:Soviet_historiography#Soviet_propaganda_photos_as_a_source.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 06:19, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Polish-Soviet War and Soviet influence on western peace movements

Please see Talk:Soviet-run_peace_movements_in_the_West#On_the_Russian_Revolution_and_the_Polish-Soviet_War_section. There is a discussion as to whether Soviet foreign propaganda of 1920s should be discussed in that article. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 15:55, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Effects and aftermath

movements influenced by soviet propaganda and policy that they advocate to this day should be noted this is the most felt influence of the soviet union outside the CIS today. 79.176.49.28 (talk) 13:45, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

ex - policy towards states and factions , political parties , international holidays etc. 79.176.49.28 (talk) 13:45, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

oh also try to separate the 'well meaning' political art and idea presenting especially of the early communists from the more extreme and practical manipulations of the latter mid ussr and the world-left movements 79.176.49.28 (talk) 13:52, 21 March 2010 (UTC)