This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cold War, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Cold War 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.
This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, realise, defence), and some terms used in it are different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Am curious about this recent renaming of the article, from the "Ministry of Foreign Affairs" to the "Ministry of External Relations". Formally, the renaming was, no doubt - fully correct: It is true that the ministry itself was renamed, and the latter name is the one it had during the last period of its existence (until the dissolution of the USSR). However, that last period was what, 36 days long (and that, during the time when the USSR was obviously on its last legs), as compared to the preceding 45 years during which it was the "Ministry of Foreign Affairs" (or just "MID" in Russsian). The "Ministry of Foreign Affairs" is, of course the name under which it mostly occurs in the English-language literature, while hardly anyone remembers what name it had during its last month of operation. I mean, I read articles on foreign affairs fairly regularly, but it's only from looking at this article today that I learned about the MER moniker! See About 112,000 results on Google Books for 'Soviet "Ministry of foreign affairs"' vs. 970 hits for Ministry of External Relations. -- Vmenkov (talk) 04:23, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
I much agree, the "Ministry of Foreign Affairs" title is much more appropriate per WP:COMMONNAME. Most English sources refer to the agency under the name "Ministry of Foreign Affairs" and very few sources use the "Ministry of External Relations" name. I'll probably post a formal request for a revert move via WP:RM. Nsk92 (talk) 05:27, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:43, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Ministry of External Relations (Soviet Union) → Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Soviet Union) — Per WP:COMMONNAME, the title "Ministry of Foreign Affairs" is much more appropriate than "Ministry of External Relations". The agency was known as the "People's Commissariat of Foreign Affairs" from 1923 to 1946, as "Ministry of Foreign Affairs" from 1946 to 1991 and as "Ministry of External Relations" for a few months 36 days in 1991, at the end of its existence. The article encompasses the entire period (1923-1991) of the agency's existence. All three of the above mentioned names are formally correct, but the name "Ministry of Foreign Affairs" is the most common in terms of the usage in English sources and most familiar to the readers (even in the former Soviet Union few people now remember that the ministry was briefly known as the "Ministry of External Relations" for a few months 36 days in 1991). E.g. a GoogleBooks search for "ministry of external relations of the USSR" returns only 4 hits while a Googlebooks search for "ministry of foreign affairs of the USSR" returns 3990 hits. Other variations of GoogleBooks and GoogleNews searches return similarly disparate results. The page name was moved, without discussion, from "Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Soviet Union)" to "Ministry of External Relations (Soviet Union)" last month. Nsk92 (talk) 05:43, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
Support, as the proposer. Nsk92 (talk) 05:43, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
Oppose, i don't really see the difference. The article has so few viewers per day that it would really matter what name it was. This was its last official name, it makes more sense to keep it this way so people better understand that it renamed 26 before the USSR's fall. --TIAYN (talk) 14:58, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
In terms of our policies and guidelines, the number of page-views is not a relevant factor and neither is what was the last official name of the entity. WP:COMMONNAME gives clear guidance here: the most commonly used by English sources name must be used as the article title, and there is no question that of the three official names, the current article title is the LEAST common name used. Most people, even those from Russia, have never heard of it and many readers (from Russia or not) will get actively confused by the current title and will not know if they are in the right place. WP:ASTONISH is also a relevant principle here. Nsk92 (talk) 15:12, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Support, as per the proposer. First, though I would like to thank TIAYN for greatly expanding the article. I do not think that the "MER" is incorrect name for the article - in fact, if the organization were a going concern, its latest official name would certainly be the most appropriate title for the article. But since it went out of existence within weeks after renaming, I feel that it would make more sense pragmatically to use the name under which it was associated with most of USSR-related diplomatic events in the living memory (and appeared so in the literature). -- Vmenkov (talk) 16:06, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
I will review this article. -- Cirt (talk) 19:41, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Since Cirt's busy with other matters, I will review this article, hopefully soon. WizardmanOperation Big Bear 05:42, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
Here are the issues I found:
Done "From 1946 to 1991 known as Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Russian: Министерство иностранных дел), or for short, MFA." sentence fragment
Done "but the MER also represented the country abroad and participated in talks with foreign delegations on behalf of the Soviet government." not sure if 'but' is the right word choice, since both parts of the sentence seem to connect.
Done "economic interests were carried out joinly with" jointly
Done "overal Soviet consular" overall
Done "Notable goals adopted by the Collegium was" were
Done "Further, the Collegium" furthermore
Done "This joint gathering led to more participations" participation, unless you meant participants
Done "This organ also discussing" discussed
Done "there were no longer any distinction between" was
Done "structure as following:" as follows:
Done "for propaganda purposes and so-called "active measures" then other non-Soviet affiliated foreign ministries" than other
Done "and the use accusations and derogatory terminology," use of
Done "the Soviet MER, had a much higher budget than" no comma needed
Done "Andrei Gromyko notes in his memoirs," noted; make sure no present tense like that is in article.
Done "He's ideas" His ideas
Done Getting someone from WP:GOCE to copyedit this would be a bonus, since I may have missed a thing or two.
I'll put the article on hold. When the issues are fixed, I'll either pass it or request an outside copyeditor browse through the article first; that I'll sleep on. WizardmanOperation Big Bear 05:15, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.