Talk:Vladimir Lenin#Xx236 - Please stop with the disruptive editing

I will add some information:

• The NEP succeeded in creating an economic recovery after the devastation of the war{{cite book|last= Service|first= Robert|title= A History of Twentieth-Century Russia|publisher= Harvard University Press|year= 1997|location= Cambridge, MA|pages= 124–125|isbn= 0674403487}}

• In modern Russia, polls measuring the perception of Lenin's legacy show that almost Russian believed Lenin played a positive role in the country's history.{{Cite web |date=April 16, 2024 |title="Ideas about the personality of Vladimir Lenin and his role in the history of the country" |url=https://www.levada.ru/2024/04/16/predstavleniya-o-lichnosti-vladimira-lenina-i-ego-roli-v-istorii-strany/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240502103840/https://www.levada.ru/2024/04/16/predstavleniya-o-lichnosti-vladimira-lenina-i-ego-roli-v-istorii-strany/ |archive-date=May 2, 2024 |website=Levada}}

If nobody oppose this information, i will add to articleMichael Razid (talk) 04:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

::negative-- re ec onomic history please use the major scholarly studies of Lenin and USSR, not offbeat accounts of minor artists. (See the Further Reading section) As for public opinion in the Putin era--Russians know what trouble they will be in if they speak out against the official line. Rjensen (talk) 04:20, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

::::Part 1: I changed this source (A History of Twentieth-Century Russia - Harvard University). Part 2: Your opinion is unreasonable, Putin is not Russia communist party's member. In fact, Russia communist party is a opposition party of PutinMichael Razid (talk) 04:28, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

:::::@Michael Razid, polls and Time magazine mentions are unnecessary in the lead since the lead already emphasizes his significance and influence. Perhaps you should consider suggesting content for the body before making changes to the lead. StephenMacky1 (talk) 10:24, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

{{reflist-talk}}

@Remsense why "tendentious"? all of the cited authors (especially mawdsley and suny) are professional historians; evan mawdsley in the debates between the 'traditionalists' and the 'revisionists' takes a neutral stance and says that he agrees with both directions Opostylov (talk) 14:42, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Here is the article: Caused in part by a drought, the Russian famine of 1921 was the most severe that the country had experienced since that of 1891, resulting in around five million deaths.

Here is the lede of the article on the 1891 famine: The 1891–1892 famine in the Russian Empire, sometimes called the Tsar Famine, Tsar's Famine or Black Earth Famine, began along the Volga River and spread as far as the Urals and Black Sea. During the famine, an epidemic also raged, in total 375,000-400,000 died from hunger and disease, mainly from diseases.

Don't revert my change and tell me I am disruptive. 5 million deaths is worse than 400,000 deaths. The article is wrong and must be changed. Don't fob me off saying the claim is sourced. If an academic source says the Moon is made of cheese, you don't get to write that in the article on the Moon. Switch your brains on for goodness sake people! LastDodo (talk) 10:33, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

:bruh just change it yourself no one's gonna say you a word 2.63.181.166 (talk) 00:30, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

::We are if they try to cite Quora like they did a few years ago. Remsense ‥ 论 00:59, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

:You are fixating on nothing. It is completely clear what the passage is saying, and it is correct. It is not saying that 1921–1922 had a lower body count than 1891, it is referencing the most recent major famine, whose legacy would've been important to actors in this period of Russian history. Your multi-year insistence on the unjustified extrapolation that it must be saying the former is indeed disruptive. Move on. Remsense ‥ 论 00:32, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

::If I say 'this was the worst storm in ten years' I am implying there was a storm ten years ago worse than the current one. If I say 'he was the worst Prime Minister since Lord North' (which became a common thing to say after that man's premiership), I am implying the PM I am referring to is bad, but Lord North was worse. Likewise, if I say a famine is the worst since some earlier one, I am implying the earlier one was worse. It is like writing 'the September 11th 2001 terrorist attack was the worst one since the attack on the World Trade Centre in 1993'. I could not defend such a statement by saying 'It is not saying that 9/11 had a lower body count than 1993, it is referencing the most recent major terrorist attack whose legacy would've been important to actors in this period of American history'. That would be an obvious nonsense. LastDodo (talk) 11:57, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

:::In this case, it says exactly what it says: 1921 was the worst famine since 1891. The latter is relevant because it was a point of comparison for many experiencing 1921. That's why it makes no sense to do what you thought to do and plunge backward into the medieval era. Remsense ‥ 论 17:50, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

::::SO if I said that 9/11 was the worst terrorist attack in the USA since the Oklahoma bombing of 1995, would you agree? LastDodo (talk) 12:51, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

:::::Sure would, yes. That scans to me, and it would even more so in the context of running prose akin to the passage here. Remsense ‥ 论 17:06, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

::::::Well that seems totally mad to me, so all I can say is, I think this dicussion should be left here for a while for other people to read and comment on. I am hoping they will see sense. In the mean time, I suggest you tell people in real life that 9/11 was the worst terrorist attack since the Oklahoma bombing, or that Novak Djokovic is greatest male tennis player since Pete Sampras, or that WWI was the deadliest war since the Crimean War, and see what reaction you get. LastDodo (talk) 11:09, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

::Perhaps it would help if someone could quote the relevant section from the source, which I do not have access to. Is Ryan perchance referring to the harvest failure rather than the famine, or something like that? LastDodo (talk) 12:28, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

:::Managed to access the book through my university’s library. Ryan doesn’t mention the 1891 famine at all; he just states that the death toll of the 1921 famine was 5 million. I would support removing the connection unless another source mentions it. 296cherry (talk) 03:04, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

::::I could've sworn I double-checked BEFORE getting into a fight about this. Well I'll be. Remsense ‥ 论 03:12, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

:::::It’s no problem, we all make mistakes. I wish information was democratized so everyone could access sources easily. 296cherry (talk) 18:08, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

{{Edit semi-protected|Vladimir Lenin|answered=yes}}

Please exchange the painting by Joseph Brodsky for this file: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Brodsky-lenin-1925.jpg

The existing file on the page is a heavily edited AI version of the painting, which removes key details in the work and adds whole new sections and strange details. Scaredhare (talk) 22:42, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

:{{not done}}: Having double-checked, I get why you saw it as AI mangling, but this is the scan of the painting directly provided by the Russian [https://lenin.shm.ru/en/v-i-lenin-against-the-background-of-smolny/ State Historical Museum]. Remsense ‥ 论 23:03, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

His "Jewish grandfather" was actually a different man with the same name. 2A00:23C5:C419:D301:9CC1:1947:9EBA:3035 (talk) 12:24, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Vladimir-Ilich-Lenin-1918 (cropped).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:38, 24 May 2025 (UTC)