Talk:People's Republic of Bulgaria

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Were there ever Soviet troops in Bulgaria?[edit]

Were there ever Red Army stationed in communist Bulgaria? 71.33.224.73 (talk) 06:17, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Soviet troops entered Bulgaria in September 1944 (when the Red Army invaded). As for when they pulled out: "In February 1947 the peace treaty had been signed and within ninety days of its final ratification the Red Army would be leaving Bulgaria" (Page 186 - R.J. Crampton. A Concise History of Bulgaria, 2005). -- Kndimov (talk) 23:27, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

History of leadership[edit]

Tell me if I am wrong but this is mainly a history of communist leadership, I refuse to believe this comprises Bulgarian history of that period. No cultural history, art (art was essentially different during communism), no intellectual history, nothing about the Agrarian party, the forming of agrarian cooperatives, just na-na-na about Zhivkov, nothing even about Politburo, this is not even uninteresting but untrue. --Aleksd (talk) 16:18, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

viewed in the West[edit]

This is WP:OR, the sources do not actually say this, either find a source for it or it will be removed. Darkness Shines (talk) 16:53, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Exactly. There are no sources at all for a factual assertion that the People's Republic of Bulgaria was a satellite state either, for the simple reason that it isn't 'fact', it is subjective opinion - and all the arguments I've seen to the contrary (e.g. at Talk:East Germany) have been firmly in WP:OR territory. In any case, this doesn't belong in the lede, as the term isn't discussed elsewhere in the article in greater detail - see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section. I will thus remove the reference to 'satellite state' entirely. AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:46, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Strange then that the source explicitly states otherwise then? The source most certainly does say as a fact that it was a satellite state. Darkness Shines (talk) 17:54, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
One can find all sorts of sources for all sorts of assertions that X or Y is a 'fact' - that doesn't prove it is. In any case, this doesn't belong in the lede. AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:07, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Then why did you not move it to the body? Or would you prefer I do that? Darkness Shines (talk) 18:12, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Ok, I shall add this to the body of the article. "As a loyal a Satellite state of the Soviet Union[1] [2] both agriculture and industry increased dramatically.[3]" Darkness Shines (talk) 18:48, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Does the third source you cite say that these increases were the consequence of Bulgaria being a 'satellite state'? AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:57, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Yes. Darkness Shines (talk) 21:09, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
I think we could do with much better sourcing, all the same. The first two sources don't seem to be written specifically about Bulgaria, judging from the titles, and the third one is a tertiary 'Encyclopedia of world geography' that covers Bulgaria with a single page. What we need are sources that analyse in detail the relationship between Bulgaria and the USSR, rather than ones that mention it in passing. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:24, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

(out) Are you saying the sources are not reliable or that they do not support the edit? Darkness Shines (talk) 23:54, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm saying that we need better sources than that, to justify saying anything regarding Bulgaria being a 'satellite state'. If these are the only sources you can find, it seems highly questionable. I can't believe that there aren't sources discussing Bulgaria - USSR relations in more detail than these. Or are you only looking for sources that justify your conclusion? AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:15, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
I see, So you feel sources from academic publishers are not of a good enough quality? No doubt you already know there are thousands of sources which both call Bulgaria a satellite state and discuss their relationship with the Soviet Union. I have no intention to post the here. The sources are fine, if you disagree go to the RSN board. Darkness Shines (talk) 10:52, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
So your argument comes down to 'better sources exist, but I can't be bothered to find them'? Ridiculous. And from your response, it seems self-evident that you are more concerned with justifying the label than with actually describing the Bulgaria-USSR relationship to our readers. So much for NPOV. AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:54, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
That is not what I said. I said the sources are fine and support the edit, I also said there are no shortage of sources which discuss this. You are the one saying better sources than the academic press are needed, so you can go find them. I am quite content with the sources presented. You are also on 2R with the IP, you may wish to stop edit warring. Darkness Shines (talk) 17:59, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
Actually make that you are on 3RR, I forgot you reverted my addition yesterday. Darkness Shines (talk) 18:00, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
Asking an IP to conform to policy, and discuss matters on the talk page, isn't 'edit warring'. As for you being 'quite content' with the sources, I dare say you are. I'm not, for reasons which I have already explained, and to which you have provided no cogent response. Incidentally, this source [1] if it is acceptable for an assertion that Bulgaria was 'a loyal satellite state' is then also clearly acceptable as a source for the assertion that in contrast the GDR, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Hungary and Romania weren't - it makes the assertion as an explicit contrast with them. I take it you have no objection to me pointing this out on the relevant talk pages? AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:12, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
Were in that book does it say the GDR, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Hungary and Romania were not loyal? You do realize that you can edit war against an IP editor as well as those who have created an account? You are more than welcome to point out on the relevant talk pages of the other articles that this book does not say something, I doubt that it will get you very far. Darkness Shines (talk) 13:17, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
"Countries differed under Communist rule. The German Democratic Republic was economically the most prosperous but politically among the most repressed, as the state security system encouraged friends and family members to spy on each other. Street demonstrations against Soviet domination by Czechs and Slovaks, Poles and Hungarians were put down by Soviet force. Bulgaria was a loyal satellite that benefitted economically by following the Moscow line. In Romania Nicolae Ceausescu maintained totalitarian repression and a cult of the leader long after Moscow had repudiated Stalinism" (p. 54). So the author states that the GDR, Czechoslovakia, Poland and Hungary were victims of 'Soviet repression', Romania went its own way, and only Bulgaria was a 'loyal satellite'. I suppose you could argue that the qualifier here is 'loyal', but what the heck would a 'disloyal satellite state' be? The phrase 'satellite state' is claimed (by those who wish to used the term in the context of eastern Europe) to be a neutral, scolarly, term, giving a clear and objective defininition of the relationship between states. As these examples make clear, the relevant relationships weren't clearcut. That the Hungarian state was on occasion 'disloyal' to the USSR (for which I express my entire approval, just in case anyone should think otherwise) is a matter of historical record, as indeed is true elsewhere, though to differing extents. and with regards to Romania, the state seems to have gone out of its way to avoid more concessions to Moscow than were expedient. Lumping the lot together under a simplistic label hides more than it reveals. Each inter-state relationship was unique, all evolved over time, and (according to this author) only Bulgaria remained a consistant 'loyal satellite'. How is it in the interests of our readers to reduce complex and sometimes contradictory relationships to simplistic labels which appear more rooted in Cold-War rhetoric than in scholarly analysis? It isn't... AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:17, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

{{od}{Yes people id the satellite states rebelled against the USSR, the question is did those running the show also rebel? If the local politico's remained loyal, did nothing to prevent the soviet crackdown, then yes, they remained loyal. You are more than welcome as I said to argue this on the respective pages of the articles in question. I assume you have no further objection to my proposal? I am actually thinking of creating a section on relationship with the USSR. Darkness Shines (talk) 10:27, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Darkness Shines, AndyTheGrump, I think you know almost nothing about the history of Bulgaria and Eastern Europe, to say this. The first anti-communist revolt in Europe became in Bulgaria. Read Goryani.--Stolichanin (talk) 19:02, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

History[edit]

I suggest that the History section is separated in a different article similarly to the History of Bulgaria (1878–1946) and History of Bulgaria since 1989 --V3n0M93 (talk) 13:48, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Infox "status" section[edit]

I changed the former label "Satellite State of the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact state during the Cold War" by separating it to make it more easy-to-read. I also omitted the "during the Cold War" part of the former label due to its redundancy, as the Warsaw Pact existed until the end of the Cold War. Thus, its existence during the Cold War is already implied.

If there are any digressions please let me know.

BUjjsp (talk) 18:04, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Official system?[edit]

Hello all, as I saw the article (Narodna republika Bǎlgarija) mistranslittered with the official and unscientifical one I wasted my time and corrected then my contribution was then [reverted by StanProg by saying that it necessarily would be translitterated with official system. As known, the scientifical way is of transliteration is widely used in the academical world, why some people force an unscientifical way of transliteration in an scientifical encyclopedia? Anton.aldemir (talk) 20:14, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on People's Republic of Bulgaria. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:02, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on People's Republic of Bulgaria. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:09, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

  1. ^ Rose, Richard (2002). Elections without order: Russia's challenge to Vladimir Putin. Cambridge University Press. p. 54. ISBN 978-0521016445. Bulgaria was a loyal satellite that benefited economically by following the Moscow line  Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  2. ^ Streissguth, Thomas (2002). The Rise of the Soviet Union. Greenhaven. p. 225. ISBN 978-0737709292. 
  3. ^ McColl, R. W. (2005). Encyclopedia of world geography. Facts On File. p. 125. ISBN 978-0816057863.