The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Please supply full citations when adding information, and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
Soviet Union was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) 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 is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism 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.
Soviet Union is part of WikiProject Atheism, which aims to organize, expand, clean up and guide Wikipedia articles relating to atheism. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article and visit the project page.
Add Atheism info box to all atheism related talk pages (use {{WikiProject Atheism}} or see info box)
Ensure atheism-related articles are members of Atheism by checking whether [[Category:Atheism]] has been added to atheism-related articles – and, where it hasn't, adding it.
Try to expand stubs. Ideas and theories about life, however, are prone to generating neologisms, so some stubs may be suitable for deletion (see deletion process).
State atheism needs a reassessment of its Importance level, as it has little to do with atheism and is instead an article about anti-theist/anti-religious actions of governments.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Colonialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Colonialism 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.
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. L293D (☎ • ✎) 02:09, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
protected edit request Started =on 31 August 2018[edit]
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. L293D (☎ • ✎) 15:34, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
Eight long paras is too much for any lede. The article in its entirety is bouncing against the reasonable limit. I suggest that the lede be brutally edited. Listing every country on its frontiers is superfluous, for example. The past tense is sufficient; past perfect is unnecessary wordiness. Four para devoted to history in the lede is too much. And so on and so forth.
I understand that this article generates a lot of interest. That would make wholesale editing problematic. I propose to write a draft, put it here, and see if there is massive dispute. Otherwise, after some work, it could be replaced in the mainspace. After that, the lede would serve a model to trim the article overall. Rhadow (talk) 21:55, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
I agree wholeheartedly. There is some serious bloat here. Kurzon (talk) 07:12, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 19 September 2018[edit]
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
In the introduction, there's a statement that "Stalin died". Could you change that to "Stalin died"? A link saying only "died" makes it look like someone linked the death article, but if a link says "Stalin died", its only sensible destination is to an article on Stalin's death. 208.95.51.53 (talk) 18:01, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Let's talk about the "Stalinist One Party Dictatorship" Government[edit]
So, it says that from 1922-27 the Soviet Union was a Federal Marxist–Leninist one-party socialist republic which is very accurate. However, it says that from 1927-53, it was a "Stalinist one-party totalitarian dictatorship". I have a lot of issues with this.
For one, does this mean it ceased being a federal state when Stalin came to power? Because it wasn't, it was in fact during Stalin's leadership that many of the republics were born within the USSR. The other thing is that Stalinism isn't an ideology comparable to that of Marxism-Leninism, it was simply the governing and related policy of Stalin in his leadership (as described by the Wikipedia page of Stalinism). My last criticism is that it was Stalin who came up with the term "Marxism-Leninism" in the first place, this just doesn't make sense.
This should be changed from what it is now to 1922-1990: Federal Marxist–Leninist one-party socialist republic. It doesn't help that the current replacement for Stalin's period of leadership has only one source that just says that it was a dictatorship and doesn't prove anything. We should also change the RSFSR page to say the same thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xelathing (talk • contribs) 14:01, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
The article quotes Vladislav Zubok twice, saying the same thing, once in the lead section, once in the section "Dissolution". Presumably one of these would be sufficient, but I will not try to decide which one. Bruce leverett (talk) 02:26, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
There is a citation of "Smith 1976", but the actual bibliographic entry for that book seems to have been removed in this edit: [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bruce leverett (talk • contribs) 15:29, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 15 October 2018 - 16 October 218[edit]
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. L293D (☎ • ✎) 16:18, 15 October 2018 (UTC)