Jump to content

Talk:Bolsheviks

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Gregbard (talk | contribs) at 17:02, 19 September 2010 (per Discussion using AWB). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Controversial (history)

Cult

Although the word "cult" does actually have a neutral meaning, I think its meaning is somewhat weighted in todays usage. For the purpose of objectivity i think that this line " . . and in addition the cult of Lenin as a heroic leader." should be made to have a less slanted, how do you say, flavor. perhapse " .. .and in addition the adoption of Lenin as great leader."

I think the intention of the original writer was to allude to the cult of personality phenomenon. I don't know whether this truthfully applies to the Bolshevik era that is the subject of the article, though. Hephaestos 19:16 21 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Anti-semitic vandalism

Moved following to talk Cautious 12:07, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC) SO I SEE YOU ALLOW NO EDITS TO YOUR "FREE" ENCYCLOPEDIA WHICH IMPUGNS THE "GLORIOUS HISTORY" OF THE GODDAM BOLSHEVIKS WHO MURDERED OVER FIFTY MILLION PEOPLE?!

Cautious, please be aware that 66.124.101.229 (contributions) is systematically going through Communist and Bolshevik-related pages adding anti-semitic rants about the supposed "Jewish-Communist World Empire". It's already listed on the Vandalism in progress page. -- ChrisO 12:22, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I hope that you don't find communism and Jews sunject as taboo. Simply let'S make it NPOV Cautious 13:26, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)
No, but I do find incoherent, badly spelled and anti-semitic additions objectionable. Leaving aside the politics, it's very badly written and doesn't conform with the Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines. I've copied it below so that anyone who really feels like bothering can work out a better form of words. -- ChrisO 15:08, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Do you find the discrimination and racism against Arabs in Israel as objectionable? Recently on Channel One of Israeli TV Israeli public figures openly discussed how to reduce the numbers of Arabs. I thought that was sick. --71.247.44.253 22:02, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My daddy said to me that goddamn bolsheviks murdered not fifty million but fifty milliards people.--81.91.50.7 (talk) 17:03, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From 66.124.101.229:

Since the Jews in Russia were discriminated, many of them were atracted by the non-nationalist vision of Russia after socialist revolution. Both fractions of the party had big shared of Jewish memebers. This lead to oficially anti-Semitism as the way of fight of Tsars police Okhrana against those underground organisations.

This led to the characterization of the Communist Revolution as a vengeful Jewish conquest of Russia in view of the murder of the royal family and the annihilation of tens of millions of ethnic Russians and Ukranians in the 1920's and 1930's.

The view of the communism as the Communist-Jewish ambitions were also popular in other countries especially after the communist revolution, as achieved in Hungary, under the Jew Bela Kuhn.

This dualistic view ( fashism or communism ) contributed to the rise of National Socialists (Nazis) in Germany, and lead to defeat European democracy.

Can anyone suggest a NPOV version of the above? -- ChrisO 14:53, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I don't think the above could have NPOV version at all :-). I don't think it's worth mentioning here, because it was on little significance for the October Revolution. Drbug 15:12, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)
What is POV here? OK, I will try. Pro 16:20, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Let's resume things that are worth adding to main article:
  1. When Bolsheviks became Communist party (1936)
  2. Why extreme ideas were attractive to minorities, particulary to Jews?
  3. National composition of avarage members of Bolshevik fraction (over time)
  4. National composition of the prominent members of Bolshevik fraction (over time)
  5. In what way anti-Semitism was used by enemies of Bolsheviks: Okhrana, Nazis
  6. The historical process, that led to devils alternative of 1930-ties: communism or Nazism.

Anybody oppose? Cautious 16:38, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)

What's the point of asking if anyone's opposed if you're just going to revert without any discussion (within 15 minutes of you posting this)? Pro has already said s/he will try to come up with another version and I'll see what I can do as well. I suggest that we work here on a new version that we can all agree with. In the meantime, please don't try to revert the article again. The page will end up being locked if this continues. -- ChrisO 17:12, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)
OK, looks like Pro and I have been able to come up with an alternative. See what you think... -- ChrisO 18:27, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)
It's a bit incorrect way to put material into the article. Sorry, but your position is biased. The level of antisemitism in Tsarist Russia is exaggerated. It was not major problem and it was not pumping the revolution. Despite your points are possible correct, and it might be a good theory for the in-depth analysis, they are not of that significance. Maybe they could belong to the "Antisemitism Influence Theory" section, but not to the main body of the article. It's just a theory, nothing more. Drbug 19:40, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I have to agree. I think it would be better placed in the article on History of the Jews in Russia and Soviet Union, which already has a section about the Bolshevik Revolution that alludes to Jewish participation. -- ChrisO 21:08, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Regarding the Jewish-Communist link, I've noted that the Soviet government itself tacitly or explicitly participated in a number of pogroms over the years; not exactly something they would do if they were controlled by Zionists. Also, there was the Jewish Autonomous Republic, billed as a homeland for Jews within the Soviet framework.

In a larger sense, I think that the scope of this article is in danger of spiralling out of control. It's supposed to be about the Bolshevik faction of the RSDLP, not about the History of the Soviet Union or the History of the Jews in Russia and Soviet Union. Kwertii 09:24, 15 Jan 2004 (UTC)

  • In the agreement with the previous remark (but without even seeing it:-), the piece below was cut out of the article as irrelevant to the topic and more than adequately replaced by the link to History of the Jews in Russia and Soviet Union.
<-- and the Soviet Union adopted policies of assimilation, Russification and (by the 1950s) anti-Zionism, often colored by traditional Russian anti-Semitism (most visibly during the last years of Stalin's rule). Indeed, the Soviet government participated in a number of pogroms over the years, where police and troops either tacitly allowed or actively participated in the destruction of Jewish communities. -->
Mikkalai 18:52, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)
  • ...not to say that the last sentense is a total bullshit:
    • Before Stalin there was mostly Russian Civil War, during which there were pogroms indeed, but by White Army, which perceived the Russian Revolution as "Jewish-Bolshevik plot" (Hitler was way far from being original in this respect).
    • Stalin, on the other hand, was demonstratively pro-semitic for quite a long time. His assassination of Jewish "Old Bolsheviks" was only accidental to the word "Jewish" and completely determined by the word "Old". Stalin performed horrible purges of a number of other small nations, but it seems that Jews were down his list. It is argued that he planned something for them: his last days are notable by the preparation of the trial of Doctors' plot, so Stalin's death may be rightfully added to the list of Jewish national holidays as a narrow escape.
Mikkalai

I'm thinking we should cut out all of the history section on actions taken by the Bolsheviks, limit the article to the stuff on the formation of the Bolshevik faction, and put a See also: History of the Soviet Union. There is no point in having a bunch of redundant information in here that's already better dealt with over there. Opinions? Kwertii 09:41, 29 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I think that we should give some historical background to underline why most of people looked at the bolsheviks as monsters. Actually, they were bad guys for public opinion until replaced by Nazis. WolfgangPeters 10:16, 29 Jan 2004 (UTC)
The same people who are allowing all the anglo and NATO countries to become de facto dictatorships right now? How many millions have the NATO bourgeoisies murdered since 1917 I wonder? Personally, I'm more worried about the monsters in the Whitehouse and the Pentagon. And the postwar Nazi love-fest that is the Bundesrepublik for that matter.
Point is: with twisted attitudes like this being expressed by writers to this article, it'll be a year of Sundays before anything like a NPOV will be achieved here.
Pazouzou 11:13, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the following piece, since it is related to a later period, massive resettlement of Kulaks by Stalin.

<-- and resettlement of the 19th century which had been established to deal with political dissidents and common criminals without executing them.-->

(After a second thought I simply moved it down, with more comment.) Mikkalai 18:41, 29 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Politics / religion

why the hell is it important if there were jews ? there were christians too, as well as atheists. it simply makes no point to mention the religion of its members, while describing a political non-religious party, as the bolsheviks.

if, on the other hand, it regards to jews as a tribe or a race, then the entry in itself is rascist....Sedan 17:43, 16 Mar 2004

I thought over this issue many times on different occasions and when editing different articles. In case you didn't notice, quite a few major countries has subsections or full articles specifically devote to jews, see e.g., List of Jewish history topics . It could seem annoying at first. But if you think that Jews lived two millenia in diaspora, without a country on which they could "concentrate" the articles of their long history, you'll understand that to cover the history of Jews, you must make branches of many and many articles. This has nothing to do neither with zionism nor with anti-Semitism. Mikkalai 16:58, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

The Jewish Bolshevik stuff is really a side issue and belongs in the article on the history of Jews in the Soviet Union. It does not merit this much space. I can think of no encyclopedia article on Bolsehvism I've seen that gives so much space to the question except maybe the Jewish Encyclopedia AndyL 01:35, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Have moved the section on Jews to History of the Jews in Russia and Soviet Union AndyL 01:39, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Shouldn't this article discuss 1917 just a wee bit???AndyL

One would think. john 06:33, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Post 1918 info moved to Communist Party of the Soviet Union since the Bolsheviks were known as Communists after 1918.

AndyL you have done a lot of good work here. Do you think we should have more discussion of what was at stake, tactically and ideologically, in the division between Menshiviks and Bolsheviks? I also wonder if we need to say something about the relationship (and competition) between the Party and the Soviets during the revolution -- that is, if we want to identify Bolshevism with "Marxism-Leninism." What do you and others think? Slrubenstein

I don't really have time right now. Perhaps someone else could?AndyL 16:57, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Last moves

There was no such thing "Bolshevik Party". There were a factions of bolsheviks and mensheviks. Mikkalai 15:52, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)

True enough. I think Bolsheviks would make more sense thoughAndyL 16:56, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Yep. But it is easier to create links from singular (you can bracket both [bolshevik] and [bolshevik]s). Also, Wikipedia:naming conventions advises usage of sungular, unless it is really unusable. Mikkalai 17:00, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)

May I sugest that Jews were a very important migrating group at the Rise of Lenin. It was even just as important as in the rise of Hitler! Being a party that supports Communistic or Nationalistic is not just only believing in expansionism or 'One Pure race' as it was the case in hitlers Third Reich. You have to look not only at political situation in a country, but also its economical situation. It is known that in Germany, Jews were taking an important roll in economical positions: small street marketing was the most important factor that helped the country to overcome its economical difficulities. It was the case that most of these shops were owned by the Jews.

Almost the same situation was noticed in Soviet Union, where street marketing was in fact the core of survival. It was only later, when the industrialisation led by Lenin started, the small marketers were sort to say pushed out of the busness. These small marketers, or at least the bigger part of it were in fact Jews.

So you can see that Jew played a big roll in these two countries at the time when Communism and Nationalism existed (also was felt in other countries). Dependence on these groups was a very big headacke to the extremist parites which were ment to be straong and maintaining the situation, so there was no room for dependence, and thats why the small marketing problem was braught up... which is of course connected to the Jews who owned the small markets!

July days

"On July 19, the Kerensky government ordered the arrest of the Bolshevik leadership. Lenin escaped capture, went into hiding, and wrote State and Revolution, which outlined his ideas for a socialist government."

This section is missing any context of the arrests. On July 3rd/4th there were militant demonstrations by the Petrograd working class aimed at overthrowing the Provisional Government. The Bolshevik leadership opposed it as premature, but many rank and file Bolsheviks were anxious for a revolution and fully supported it. The Bolshevik leadership ended up at the head of the demonstations trying to ensure they were non-violent. Troops loyal to the Provisional Government suppressed the demronstations violently, followed by the crackdown alluded to in the article. I propose chaning the article to this;

"In early July widespread discontent in Petrograd led to militant demonstrations calling for the overthrow of the Provisional Government. The Bolshevik leadership opposed this as premature but ended up leading the demonstrations, hoping to prevent any bloodshed. They felt compeled to do this to win the trust of the workers and also in recognition of the fact that many of the Bolshevik rank and file were already organising and supporting the demonstrations. Troops loyal to the Provisional Government suppressed the demronstations violently. The following crackdown resulted in the Kerensky government ordering the arrest of the Bolshevik leadership on July 19th. Lenin escaped capture, went into hiding, and wrote State and Revolution, which outlined his ideas for a socialist government."

Any objections to this change? TheInquisitor 20:11, 30 Sep 2005

Top picture & RS-DRP

Does anyone feel this picture is wholly innappropriate and unnecessary? Sure, it shows some Bolsheviks but it's an awful picture and isn't even Russian!

Secondly, both Bolsheviks and Mensheviks spelt the name of the party Social-Democratic or RS-DRP. If you look at any publications or posters by either you'll see the hyphen. We use the hyphen for Socialist-Revolutionaries so why not Social-Democrats?

--Kristallstadt 14:30, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

On the plus side, the picture shows the most popular/famous Bolshevik leaders circa 1920. On the minus side, its highly stylized, which makes it esthetically interesting, but probably not as informative as one would expect to find in an encyclopedia. A decent photo of some Comintern or Soviet/Party Congress presidium would be certainly preferable if we could find one.
Re: "RS-DLP", it is true that both Menshevik and Bolshevik leaders sometimes used the hyphen in their letters as you can see in Lenin's collected works. However, the English translation is just "RSDLP". If you go to print.google.com and search for "RS-DLP" and then "RSDLP", you will find 4 books (all of them Lenin's works) that use the hyphen and 81 books that don't. Ahasuerus 15:26, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Speaking of pictures, the one of the Bolshevik "Central Committee" on the right is anything but :) The number of women in the picture suggests that it's most likely a group of Kremlin secretaries, which is not exactly on topic here. I will remove it unless we can establish the picture's origins and relevance. Ahasuerus 23:28, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the American picture of the Bolsheviks is a good one. A good example would be a picture of the Central Committee in 1917 (which would also be a reminder of how many of them survived Stalin). Camillus (talk) 20:50, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Opening

Right, i don't know who wrote that but i've just finished editing it. The use of English was so poor it could only have been by someone who either learnt English as a second language or was just an idiot.

That aside, should it even be that long?! I propose that everything from "Bolsheviks had an extreme internationalist outlook" to (before) "Shortly after seizing power..." be removed. It's useless information that's explained in the article anyway and most of it doesn't even make any sense.

--Kristallstadt 23:07, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Calendar question

Can someone clarify in the article whether the dates given are OS or NS?

Trotsky wasn't a Bolshevik

Trotsky wasn't a Bolshevik before and during the February Revolution. Sentence "Before the revolution of February, 1917, main Bolsheviks (Zinoviev, Trotsky, Lenin) lived and worked in Western Europe, receiving financial support from the European social democrats." is false. To make it true name of Trotsky should be removed from the sentence. [OygSimurg]

Babyish

Anyone else think the "Jewish Bolshevism" section is trying too hard to prove the Bolsheviks were not very much Jew-based? It seems like a big childish "nah uh" with unconvincing evidence. 70.146.75.159 13:39, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't say it's babyish, but it does seem to be trying to prove a point, rather than being an NPOV discussion of the subject. Obviously Jews were disproportionately prominent at high levels in the Bolshevik movement, especially as compared to the Tsarist regime that preceded it. The fact that the party membership as a whole was not that Jewish should be mentioned, but isn't really to the point. john k 14:15, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, sure, the current version of the section is highly POV and angenda-driven. "Jews and radicalism" in general and "Jews and Bolshevism" in particular is a well researched and somewhat complicated question (see, e.g., Essential Papers on Jews and the Left, ed. Ezra Mendelsohn, New York University Press, 1997, ISBN 0814755712), but it would take some time to do it justice. One of these days... Ahasuerus 14:21, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The term

The term Bolshevik cannot be derived from Bolsheviki because it is just plural for Bolshevik.--Nixer 15:58, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

User:Nixer keeps removing the following phrase: "the Stalinist regime which existed in the Soviet Union, and the millions of deaths for which it was responsible" and replacing it with "Stalin's rule which existed in the Soviet Union". What is non-NPOV about the former? It is accurate and verifiable, and the deaths are precisely what is associated with it. 72.65.85.60 07:22, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First the term "regime" is not neutral. Second, the phrase is not relevant here. For example, would you any notion of Bush provide with notion of children he killed in Iraq? Third, why not say that the regime saved tens of millions people during WWII? Why only say the people were killed? And fourth, among killed were those who were responsible themself for their death, dont you think so?--Nixer 07:47, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing non-neutral about the term "regime", which merely denotes a governmental system or system of control and administration. Any negative connotation applies solely to governments with authoritarian characteristics, which the Stalinist Soviet Union can not be said to lack, but the term itself does not necessitate this.
This is obviously non-neutral term.--Nixer 09:47, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This article does not concern Bush or political arguments about his policies; please address those concerns at the appropriate article.
The point is thios is not relevant to mention "bloody Stalis's crimes" in any phrase about Stalin Please dont behave as a child.--Nixer 09:47, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As for your example of WWII, the article is here discussing what is and has been associated with Bolshevism, and it is true that the negative aspects of the USSR, including the political murders and so forth, are part of this (and they are verifiable facts). On the other hand, the idea that the USSR "saved tens of millions" is counterfactual conjecture and therefore is inherently unverifiable; as well, it does not have any bearing on the sentence in question.
This is a fact, not contrafactual conjecture. Even if you dont like this.--Nixer 09:47, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As for your last question, I am not sure I understand it.
For example, a criminal making his crimes is responsible for followed execution of him, not the governmenrt.--Nixer 09:47, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Also, please refrain from breaking WP:3RR. It appears that it is quickly coming to that. Thanks. 72.65.85.60 08:25, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I will not allow you put propaganda here.--Nixer 09:47, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid you've now demonstrated yourself to be incapable of rationality on this matter. 72.65.65.154 00:06, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lenin was 1/4 Jewish

- The Federaton of Jewish Communities of Former Soviet Union, supported by Chabad, states on its website: "Many well-known people, such as Decembrist Hirsh Peretz, doctor Israel Blank (Lenin's grandfather) and many others once lived in Perm." http://www.fjc.ru/news/newsArticle.asp?AID=331737

- Furthermore, Wikipedia's article on Lenin states that he had Jewish roots: "The family was of mixed ethnic ancestry. "Lenin's antecedents were Russian, Kalmyk, Jewish, German and Swedish, and possibly others". Lenin was baptized into the Russian Orthodox Church."

Lenin had not Jewish origins

Lenin had not Jewish origins, this is a myth.--Nixer 18:28, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Read some books. Also you are welcome to dispute this where it belongs: in the Vladimir Lenin article. `'mikka (t) 18:33, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Look here: [1]. This is historical mistification.--Nixer 20:25, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Once more: You are welcome to discuss this topic where it belongs: in Vladimir Lenin article instead of going hysterical in revert war basing on a quote from an obscure webpage against books. `'mikka (t) 20:47, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lenin WAS jewish - I am from Estonia, one of many countrys wish suffered greatly from bolsheviks regime. Allmost 1/3 our people where killed or sent to Siberia 1939/40 and 1945/47. My grandfather/mother was executed in front of my 10months old father and father himself was sent to Siberia. He was able only after 1991 to reestablish is family line (it was deep in KGB arhives). So everyone new in 1918-1939 in Estonia about origin of Lenin Stalin and the rest of bolsheviks guerillas "family line" and countrys of origin - it was not a secret those days. They where ample amount of proofs about they "blood" they real names (most of bolsheviks had at least 2 names before revolution of 1917 and after) and the countrys they came from most of bolsheviks wasent even a russians they hade difficultis to speek russian. When bolseviks conquer Estonia in 1939 those books where burned and people have them sent to Siberia (but YOU cant burn all books and information about them). So when You Nixer starting pushing some info please be so kind and learn the truth - unless its you intension to hide truth. Wikipedias policy about neutrality is good but only this far if its backed up by TRUTH. Makruss - contributing to Estonian Wiki more then a year.

Who of bolsheviks had difficulties speaking Russian? Only Stalin had Georgian accent. And all of them of course came from Tsarist Russia (not any other country). I see your ancestors obviously learned well the German propaganda and those burned Nazi books.--Nixer 08:01, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

it was not in 1920s any German propaganda. but unfortunally we hav lots of other kind of propaganda now like this Wiki article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident. last year in wiki I have discovered lots of this kind of propaganda and Wikipedias trustworthiness is all time low. I feel sorry for You because You but first propaganda and not historical facts. I will not return in this articel becouse I do not have any illusions wiki can redeem itself - so I hope when you journey is over in this Earth You can leave peacfully ....

It might be surprizing for you, but German propaganda existed even in 1914 and in 1917, and there were German bookletes describing aryan supemacy theory back by 1917. And many other sources of anti-semitic literature existed in the white-occupied territory, in Poland and in the Baltic states.--Nixer 10:00, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lenin was certainly not Jewish, but it was my understanding that it recently was demonstrated that he had a Jewish ancestor somewhere along the line. At any rate, I don't see why this should be mentioned in this article. john k 21:44, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation

It would be really useful to have some pronounciation of the key words (for the linguistically untalented like myself). And thanks to those who put the content together, it was useful.

Citation 3

Citation 3 is more of an asterisk than a citation. I think it needs to be fixed.

For those who forgot the year 1920. --Ludvikus (talk) 23:46, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Socialism and the Bolshevik Party

I have noticed two omissions on the Bolshevik page. One is that the “political philosophy” (if that is the correct term to use here) of the Bolsheviks was Marxist socialism. Moreover, the objective of the Bolshevik Party was socialist revolution. None of this is mentioned here. In fact, the page does not absolutely establish connection whatsoever between Bolshevism and Marxist socialism. One only needs to look at the Draft Program of the RSDLP written by Lenin in 1902 to confirm my observation.

The Bolshevik Party was in fact the RSDLP(B), but the acronym was only a formal name. Lenin and all the Bolsheviks always referred to the RSDLP(B) as the Bolshevik Party until he proposed to change this name to Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks) in 1918. Also of importance to the Bolshevik page is the fact that before Lenin proposed the change of the party name to RCP, it was Angelica Balabanoff (leader of the Zimmerwald Movement) who made the original critical observation to Lenin. These are facts and I have the sources. I can make the changes if there is no objection. Reinaldo Contreras. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reinaldo Contreras (talkcontribs) 00:45, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Origins of the name

The article states that "the terminology changed to "Bolsheviks" and "Mensheviks", from the Russian "bolshinstvo" (majority) and "menshinstvo" (minority), based on the fact that Lenin's supporters narrowly defeated Martov's supporters on the question of party membership."

This is incorrect. It was in actual fact Lenin who at the 1903 conference suffered a narrow defeat on the question of party membership, with 28 of the delegates voting against his proposals and only 22 voting for. However following the voting for the editorial board of the party newspaper Iskra, Lenin and Plekhanov (both future "Bolsheviks" outnumbered Martov (the leader of the Menshevik faction). It was from this that Lenin took the name Bolshevik to describe his group and insulted Martov by labelling his side the "Mensheviks" because on Iskra, Lenin was in the majority and Martov the minority. This is correctly described in the article on the wider Russian Social Democratic Labour Party which the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks both (for a time) belonged to. However in both this article and the article on the Mensheviks, the origins of the respective names are misattributed to the vote on party membership.

The idea that the name came from Lenin winning the issue on Party membership is incorrect, especially as Lenin didn't win that vote at the 1903 conference. Now, I'm new to the editing of Wikipedia articles, and feel a sense of trepidation at the idea of correcting a major article, but I wanted to highlight the issue and will gladly look for source's from the works of Orlando Figes and Leonard Schapiro.

So, thoughts? --Magus213 (talk) 20:56, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Etimology

For what I know of Russian language, the word "bolshe" does not mean "more", but "much" (the translation for "more" should be все еще. Please, verify. Truman (talk) 12:49, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong. Do you think there were no native Russian speakers who edited this page? - Altenmann >t 16:59, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Communism sidebar? Help me

{{helpme}}

Shouldn't this article display the Communism sidebar?

--Aboudaqn (talk) 04:25, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Polish Propaganda Poster

The caption on the Propaganda Poster "act of Leon Trotsky" makes no sense. It's probably a mistranslation of the polish "akt" meaning "nude". I changed it to "nude caricature of Leon Trotsky", but that was reverted. If there's any problem with this description please let me know. I don't see why anyone would object. 67.204.24.175 (talk) 17:22, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]