Talk:Collaboration in the German-occupied Soviet Union

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

Requested move 14 March 2018[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: consensus to move the page, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 20:36, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Russian collaborationism with the Axis powers → Russian collaboration with Nazi Germany – There was no collaboration with Italy, and this article doesn't discuss Japan at all. Let's make it more precise, just like for example pages on Luxembourgish collaboration with Nazi Germany. (In either case, grammar change by removing -ism is needed too). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:49, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support certainly remove the ism. Not completely sure about the absence of Italy and Japan from article, that may be a result of an unfinished article. But if it's not then the move is justified. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:05, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Italy and Japan don't even feature. Any Russian collaboration with Japan or Italy would be entirely different in nature. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:48, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nomination, In ictu oculi and SmokeyJoe. Uniformity of Wikipedia titling forms is desirable in general and, when sensitive topics are discussed as part of series, such uniformity is desirable in particular. A concurrent RM is presently active at Talk:Byelorussian collaboration with the Axis powers#Requested move 14 March 2018. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 04:27, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom, because that is exactly what it was. Poeticbent talk 04:46, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It is a more natural and accurate title. Shadow007 (talk) 00:14, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

What is the subject?[edit]

Does the page describe Soviet collaboration or exclusively Russian?Xx236 (talk) 08:49, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 15 April 2018[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:14, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Russian collaboration with Nazi Germany → Collaboration in German-occupied Soviet Union – Only logical, since the first sentence of the article says "Soviet citizens", and titles need to reflect accurately the content of the article. 198.84.253.202 (talk) 01:06, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Other SSRs have their own articles on this topic: see Ukrainian collaboration with Nazi Germany. To move this to "Soviet" would envelop those articles. Dekimasuよ! 01:21, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, then this article needs to be rewritten (because it is confusing, making much more mention of collaboration in the Soviet Union - only the specific examples are purely "Russian"), and possibly, a proper overreaching article needs to be created (if we don't settle on moving this one and expanding it). 198.84.253.202 (talk) 01:39, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Except that countries like Luxembourg, France, Poland, etc, were actually independent entities, and not geographic divisions of a larger country (in this case, the Soviet Union). Therefore, we should, like with other countries, have an article about collaboration in the whole of the Soviet Union. Anyway, the article in it's current state is more about Soviet collaboration than it is about collaboration within the Russian SSR. 198.84.253.202 (talk) 00:54, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic and its successor, Russian Federation, the world's largest nation, by territory, has been the home to a great variety of ethnic groups. If a single Wikipedia article attempted to present a relatively detailed account combining the experience of Russia's diverse populations with that of Ukraine, Belorussia, Moldavia and any other republic applicable to this subject, it would most likely need to be subdivided into article forks anyway, in the same manner as is done within the all-inclusive article, Collaboration with the Axis Powers.    Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 02:01, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Luxembourgish collaboration with Nazi Germany is fine because it is clearly about citizens of certain country, not about an ethnic group. The idea of collaboration of certain ethnic groups (rather than countries or individuals) with Nazi was the basis for Stalinist deportations after WWII. We should not follow such logic. All these pages should be renamed along the lines "Collaboration of country X citizens with Nazi occupiers". Consider Collaboration in German-occupied Poland. This is good title except it should probably be Collaboration with Nazi in German-occupied Poland. Ukraine, Belorussia and Russian Federation were parts of the Soviet Union at the beginning of WWII. Therefore, all of them should be merged in the single page about the "Soviet collaboration", or "Collaboration on the Soviet territory" with Nazi. My very best wishes (talk) 01:47, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle, but should probably be Collaboration in German-occupied Soviet Union, of which "Ukranian collaboration..." etc could be daughter articles, also possibly renamed into "Collaboration in German-occupied Ukraine"; compare with Collaboration in German-occupied Poland. "Soviet collaboration with Nazi Germany" sounds too much like the Molotov-Ribbentrop Act, various trade agreements, etc. As an aside, I don't think "with Nazi" qualifier is necessary; of course, collaboration was with the occupational authorities - who else was there to collaborate with? K.e.coffman (talk) 02:10, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds reasonable - agree. My very best wishes (talk) 02:35, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with this. My very best wishes (talk) 02:35, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@My very best wishes:Not necessary to write "I agree" next to everybody who shares your opinion. Unless somebody opposes it (and those who !voted support seem to agree on it, so it shouldn't change much), I went ahead ahead and changed the move target. 198.84.253.202 (talk) 02:51, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
We hear you. You don't need to WP:SHOUT. Poeticbent talk 16:24, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This is not worth fighting over, but the section you linked says, "Bolding may be used to highlight key words or phrases (most usually to highlight "oppose" or "support" summaries of an editor's view), but should be used judiciously." The bolding summarizes my proposal, and at the time you removed my bolding, your comment had more words in bold than mine, so this leaves me a bit bemused. The same page also states, "The basic rule—with some specific exceptions outlined below—is that you should not edit or delete the comments of other editors without their permission" (WP:TPO; this is not one of the exceptions). Dekimasuよ! 16:42, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. Like you say, this MOS:EMPHASIS is 'not worth fighting over.' Poeticbent talk 16:52, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Recent edit[edit]

Preserving here by providing this link. My rationale was: "rm unsourced / trivial". Please let me know if there are any concerns. --K.e.coffman (talk) 02:32, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

State cooperation removed[edit]

I remove a mention of Nazi-Soviet collaboration from the background section, because it is totally irrelevant to the article's subject.--Paul Siebert (talk) 13:29, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed this text was re-added again without discussion. That is unacceptable. This text violates out WP:NOR policy, because no sources have been presented that link cooperation between the two states before the German occupation started and collaboration of Soviet citizens with the Nazi occupants against the Soviet regime.--Paul Siebert (talk) 18:41, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

After the article was renamed, German-Soviet cooperation before the 41' invasion is indeed out of scope. (removed content). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:35, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move V3[edit]

as per the above discussions, this is not synced with the other articles in the same vein such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_collaboration_with_Nazi_Germany so move all to the same style of title any way the consensus agrees, note Ukraine was occupied by USSR and Germany so the Ukraine article I used as a "type" here has much more relevance and importance to balance ASAP. 2404:4408:638C:5E00:9180:E43:9970:A5D4 (talk) 13:14, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Collaboration_in_the_German-occupied_Soviet_Union&oldid=1201030575"