Talk:Demolition of monuments to Vladimir Lenin in Ukraine

Article title change
I've changed the name of the article to "List of communist monuments damaged during Euromaidan". All of the sources listed have treated the destruction of the Lenin monuments as attacks against communist symbols rather than cultural heritage, so I've changed the title to reflect this. If anyone has problems with the move, please revert and leave a note on this talk page so this issue can be corrected via further discussion. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 05:57, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
 * As a further point regarding the WP:TITLE, the article deals explicitly with statues of Lenin. I suspect that it should be renamed more appropriately. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 21:30, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I have no objections to renaming. I assumed that other communists statues and architecture had also been destroyed, but I've only been able to find coverage of statues of Lenin being destroyed. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 01:26, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Indeed, sources use different wording. Fixed. Informally speaking, this belongs to Decommunization in Ukraine, an important process which is a good thing, not vandalism. My very best wishes (talk) 14:13, 4 June 2016 (UTC)


 * There isn't any Communism in Ukraine. Communism was eliminated in the East along ago, and capitalism was re-introduced. What is happening currently is a fascistization of Ukraine with the rising of the far right. emijrp (talk) 15:29, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
 * All currently quoted sources tell "toppled" or "pulled down". None of them blamed Ukrainian people for vandalism. Hence the title. My very best wishes (talk) 15:57, 4 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Not really. Even the anti-comunist Radio Free Europe called it vandalism. Poetic.


 * Excerpt:




 * Yeah, not vandalism. emijrp (talk) 19:40, 4 June 2016 (UTC)


 * So the removal of swastikas from various places in Eastern Europe after 1945 was vandalism too? These Soviet symbols represent genocide, murder, persecution and dictatorship. Removing them has nothing to do with "vandalism," which is an absurd term to use in this context. --Tataral (talk) 21:40, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
 * One should realize that not every cultural artifact (such as buildings, bridges, swastikas, or ugly monuments of Lenin) is a work of art. Still, removing swastikas (a public or private property) may be seen by certain people or sources as vandalism. But should removing of swastikas after WW II be described as "vandalism" on WP pages? I do not think so. My very best wishes (talk) 22:16, 4 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Your comments only include opinions and more opinions. What do source say? Anyway, here we aren't discussing about Nazi monuments. What do you think about Euromaidans painting swastikas on Lenin statues? Vandalism or culture? emijrp (talk) 08:20, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
 * A typical source, such as that one describes this as a process of decommunization. Such events e.g. destruction of ugly monuments to Stalin during destalinization in the Soviet Union, are normally not described as heritage desctruction. My very best wishes (talk) 12:55, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

"Heritage"
This edit. List of destroyed heritage tells about cultural heritage. Actually, the communist propaganda is a variety of anti-intellectualism, and a lot of actual cultural artifacts have been destroyed by the communist regimes. So, this is actually a removal of "monuments" to vandals, and the quality/art of these particular monuments is highly questionable. My very best wishes (talk) 15:35, 4 June 2016 (UTC)


 * I don't see that even in Wikipedia, the right-wing encyclopedia, Vladimir Lenin is called a vandal or categorized as that. So, it is your mere opinion. Please, open a blog and don't try to push your POV onto Wikipedia articles. emijrp (talk) 16:20, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
 * This is very simple. Here is the source. It does not mention word "heritage" anywhere. It tells about banning communist symbols and propaganda. Calling this "heritage" is WP:OR. So, yes, please do not push your opinion. My very best wishes (talk) 16:56, 4 June 2016 (UTC)


 * They are in government catalogues for monuments (ID in brackets):
 * Statue of Lenin in Berdichev (18-104-0031)
 * Statue of Lenin in Bila Tserkva (32-103-0093)
 * Monument to Lenin in Kramatorsk (14-129-0050)
 * And so on...
 * A reference about the heritage status:


 * Regards. emijrp (talk) 19:21, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Regards. emijrp (talk) 19:21, 4 June 2016 (UTC)


 * I agree that it is inappropriate to refer to 20th century totalitarian symbols (of occupation and dictatorship) as "heritage"; such symbols are not part of the heritage of the countries concerned; at the very best they are part of Russia's heritage in the same sense that Swastikas and other WWII era Nazi symbols on monuments in countries occupied by Germany are part of Germany's heritage. --Tataral (talk) 17:41, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
 * The communists were just as contemptuous of the Christian heritage they were destroying as the Ukrainians are of the communist heritage. And the Christians themselves happily destroyed the old pagan temples and statues before that. For that matter, Akhenaten's successors in Ancient Egypt vandalized most of his cultural monuments. The Romans had the practice of Damnatio memoriae. So this isn't exactly a new thing. Similarly, ISIS and the Taliban believe that they're the good guys by destroying pagan idols. In fact, as I've noted in the other discussion, scholars and journalists do use the word "heritage" when talking about Soviet monuments and such. All destroyers of heritage do it because they think it's morally reprehensible and unworthy of preservation. Nothing new here. As for Ukraine, it was part of the core of the Soviet Union in a way that Nazi Germany's European colonies never were part of Germany. Khrushchev was Ukrainian, and as recently as 1991, 71% of Ukrainians voted to stay part of the Soviet Union (obviously, opinions have changed since then). Esn (talk) 18:29, 4 June 2016 (UTC)


 * A few things:
 * 1) Which of the RS use wording "vandalize"? I did not see any (links above). Given that, using wording like "vandalize" is POV-pushing.
 * OK, I can see that some sources (my link above) do not consider these monuments "heritage", but some sources do consider some of these monuments "heritage". How exactly this should be described is disputable.
 * 1) Given that we have a disagreement here, this should be reverted to initial version and let's discuss per WP:BRD. Make an RfC about it if you wish. My very best wishes (talk) 21:06, 4 June 2016 (UTC)


 * I restored the previous title. I agree that "vandalize" is nothing but (pro-Soviet) POV pushing. "Destroyed" or "toppled" are neutral and encyclopedic terms in this context, that describe the events in question adequately. Any title change should be discussed first. --Tataral (talk) 21:24, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree. Two things (1). Certain incidents that had happen in Ukraine in the past might indeed be described as "vandalism". However, we are talking here about very specific incidents that had happen during and after Euromaidan. Some of that was sanctioned by Ukrainian government, just as removals of monuments to Stalin were santioned in the past by the Soviet government. (2) Indeed, certain communists call it "vandalism" as documented in sources, but we should not user their terminology in WP voice, because the majority of RS describe this as "decommunization", not vandalism.My very best wishes (talk) 21:39, 4 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Radio Free Europe, that pro-Soviet radio... emijrp (talk) 21:45, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Indeed, a lot of people who appear with comments on RFE/RL are communists, rabid nationalists, journalists wit a lot of different opinions and whoever. That's why one should use multiple RS. My very best wishes (talk) 22:26, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I think that the word "vandalism", if used at all, should probably only be used for removals that aren't state-sanctioned. I agree with Tataral, "destroyed"/"toppled" are the simple descriptive terms that should be used in most cases. E.g. "the monument was destroyed/toppled in accordance with the government's decommunization law". Esn (talk) 09:01, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I think some of the recent changes just made by Emijrp can be accepted, after correction (for example a source does not tell that the monuments were actually heritage sites), but others are questionable. One of the problems: this is merely a list, not a page on the subject of monument removals in Ukraine. It suppose to include only very brief info. My very best wishes (talk) 15:07, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
 * For example, this info/edit does not belong to the list because that happened long before Euromaidan. Look, if you have strong opinion about this, that's fine, but please create another page, like Removal of communist monuments in Ukraine or place this info on page Decommunization in Ukraine. Why not? My very best wishes (talk) 20:25, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

List scope
I suggest to redefine the list scope and article title, accordingly. There have been tens thousands of various communist monuments, bearing in mind the following.


 * In wikipedia, lists are usually either for navigation among wikipedia articles or to listify notable things with significant coverage.


 * The monument issue has a clear watershed: before the decommunization law and after the decommunization law. While Euromaidan was also a major event, removal of communist monuments, especially related with Cheka, started well before Euromaidan.

- üser:Altenmann >t 01:12, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
 * A list is a list is a list. While the article may contain a descriptive summary for the content of the list, most of what descriptive in the current article must go into the corresponding section of Decommunization in Ukraine, to avoid all maintenance headaches aasociated with WP:FORK.
 * Yes, I agree. And why this is "during Euromaidan"? How about "after Euromaidan", "during presidentship of Kuchma", etc.? This is not valid subject/list. I think this list/content should be probably deleted or merged to Decommunization in Ukraine. My very best wishes (talk) 02:06, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Compare the Ukrainian Wikipedia - there are four pages describing the removal of Lenin's monuments, the last three being parts of Ленінопад.

Xx236 (talk) 06:37, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, exactly. That is what I talked about in previous thread above. This is valid subject if to change its scope, re-title and make it an article rather than a list - as on ruwiki and in Ukrainian WP. My very best wishes (talk) 12:47, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Also note wording of the title on ruwiki: "demolition" - that's correct/neutral wording. My very best wishes (talk) 13:03, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Actually Ukrainian wikipedia distinguishes cases of demolition and removal. It has an extensive (and surprizingly well referenced) chronology of Leninfall, see uk:Хронологія Ленінопаду (2016) and "see also" in it. - üser:Altenmann >t 02:23, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
 * It was you who drew the pun analogy, if I'm correct. Are you certain that it's meant to be a pun on "snowfall"? I haven't found any sources for the analogy, but it strikes me as being a pun on "листопад" (transliterated as lystopad... also listopad in Polish... also fairly self-evident in Russian) meaning November, but translates literally a "leaf-fall" (so it's more likely to be a play on the fall of leaves from the mighty tree). --Iryna Harpy (talk) 05:07, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Actually the pun is the construction "something"+fall. There are many: listopad, vodopad, snegopad. I picked first best English word for an illustration. And yes listopad was the first word came to my mind as the perfect fit in many ways of analogy. But unfortunately there is no English word leaffall, and besides to explain all there associations would be original research. - üser:Altenmann >t 04:24, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

I noticed that List of communist monuments in Ukraine heavily overlaps with this one. The two should be merged/split: One for Lenin, since it is of special attention, another is for the rest of communism. - üser:Altenmann >t 04:57, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, agreed. Also, given that the other article is far more text based, it is no longer actually congruent with being a 'list' per se. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 05:46, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:21, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Останні хвилини київського Ілліча.jpg

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:37, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Благословення святого отця 2.jpg