Template talk:Soviet Union infobox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Er, how is saying that the Soviet Union was a communist government a POV statement? I suppose the dispute would root from how one would define communism. Even though many historians classify the Soviet system as "Russian communism", I still believe that it was a form communism. Also, it should be noted that the Soviet government openly admitted that it was indeed a communist government when it was in existence. Take for example the seperate anthems of the Soviet republics (e.g. the ones for the Armenian SSR, the Ukrainian SSR, and the Georgian SSR). These all mention the word "communism" at some point. Furthermore, the Wikipedia infobox on communism even classifies the Soviet Union as a "communist state." -- Clevelander 16:29, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Cf. the article on People's Republic of China, it defines PRC as a "Socialist republic". The USSR was defined as a socialist state in its constitution, it never used "communist federation" or "communist state" to describe its government or state structure. So, I believe, naming it a "Communist state" (a term, originated in the West), is a POV. But I don't want to push another - Soviet - POV and define its government as a "socialist state", hence, I'm sticking to long-stood compromise: "Federation of Soviet republics". But if you would like to go into edit war on this, I'll stick to the "socialist state" POV. Cmapm 17:20, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
No worries. I just wasn't exactly sure what the situation was, that's all. I understand your position now and I apologize if I came off as brash. I can assure you that I didn't intend to start an "edit war." -- Clevelander 18:17, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
While I was at it, I decided to replace "communism" in the English translations of the Soviet republic anthems to "socialism" as that was probably how they were to start off with. -- Clevelander 18:20, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What was wrong with the image? Explaining AGAIN

I already explained, what is wrong with this image. That notice was removed and replaced by softened, however. The new sourced svg image, uploaded by me, was removed. I admit, that its quality was not too good, because it was converted from jpg, but it was not wrong.

I have no idea, why the sourced scanned jpg image should be replaced by svg, all the more self-made from unreliable source (Wikipedia). E.g., the American Great Seal is not svg too, but nobody cares. Is usage of SVG justified for State coats of arms at all?

Now, here is what was wrong with Image:Coat_of_arms_of_the_Soviet_Union.svg, a self-made SVG, based on unreliable source (several other images in Wikipedia).

  • Comparison of mottos to ones in the article USSR State motto (they are the same in the GSE and can be also approved by the direct translation) shows, that Image:Coat_of_arms_of_the_Soviet_Union.svg contains at least 20 errors in mottos, namely in mottos in Kyrgyz, Turkmen, Latvian, Lithuanian, Uzbek, Ukrainian, Moldavian, Azerbaijani, Belarusian languages.

Minor points:

  • sickle is without cogs
  • the globe has a thick border in black
  • star needs to be less fatter and the languages are in the wrong order. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 07:10, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I hope, that you are able to compare mottos and find mistakes. If not, ask me for this first, but please don't replace the sourced image with wrong one on the basis, that you cannot or have no time to compare two short pieces of text! I'm ready to explain again and again and revert again and again placing of wrong images, until this people will finally understand all errors. Cmapm 08:50, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I believe the thick black border is due to the stroking element that was added in when this image was created. It can be shrunk. I will try my hand at this image, but it will take me a long time. I have a book of all of the motto's in the correct languages (PSRS gerboni un karogi, 1987, Riga "Avots" with Evlads Strods as the author) but I just need to get the correct text on the computer. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 07:09, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
If you cite reliable sources, used creating the image (the one, cited by you for the mottos seems to be reliable for me at a glance), and argument, why the image, created by you is better, than existing one, then it would be justifiable in my opinion. But still I have no idea, why the scanned jpg image should be replaced by svg. Should scalability of the vector image be preferred over the photographic precision in this case? The only advantage, that I see so far is a better license, as the PD status of pre-1973 Soviet works is disputed. Cmapm 18:20, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
How about this; we keep the SVG image on the Commons and we fix it. Until them, the JPEG image is used on infoboxes, templates and all of that good stuff. I have seen some erroronous images on the Internet, so I will try and do what I can to fix it. While, yes, SVG scales and gives us the transparency some look for, we should begin to use it once all errors are fixed. I'll start on it later, got some school stuff to work on first. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:32, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] IfD per above mentioned errors and new very serious circumstances

New very serious circumstances force me to renominate the image Image:Coat of arms of the Soviet Union.svg for deletion. It contains a lot of grammatical (at least 20!) and other errors mentioned above. Not speaking, that the image is in funny colors and funny general appearance, never encountered by me in any reliable sources. According to its description, it is based only on Wikipedia's sources and looks much like a parody on the official sourced version. But reasons for nominating it for deletion are much more serious, than they were half a year ago: