Talk:Soviet Union–United States relations

Revision and Expansion
This article needs a major revamp. We must add more to it, I'm surprised such an important topic has received such little attention on here. VmanBG (talk) 00:07, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

The world war 2 section is badly in need of revision. Both the spelling/grammar and content read less like an encyclopedia article and more like a small child's book report. Its heavily laden with POV that is softened only by the author's inability to get his point across. I will rewrite if I have time, but I invite anyone to try to improve what's there now. On Thermonuclear War (talk) 05:35, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

The world war two section could be made much more neutral. There is a quote from 1943's Life magazine that said such things as that Lenin was “perhaps the greatest man of modern times,” that the Russians are “one hell of a people [who] ... to a remarkable degree ... look like Americans, dress like Americans and think like Americans,” Found here:http://www.conservativeforum.org/EssaysForm.asp?ID=6255 And also from "Superpower Rivalry - The Cold War [1945-1991]" by Tony McAleavy (Cambridge). 41.232.205.37 (talk) 06:20, 3 June 2008 (UTC)Crash91

The World War II section is particularly bad, but the entire article is a mess and is in desperate need for attention from an expert on the topic. 72.192.203.13 (talk) 03:34, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Pre-world war II relations is basically an anti-US propaganda piece which leaves out major important events and makes up several events.184.5.120.145 (talk) 17:26, 11 October 2015 (UTC)


 * @184.5.120.145 The whole article is basically an anti-soviet propaganda piece with a mish mash of mostly irrelevant information which have no links to the relations between the USSR and the USA. Events such as the Cuban missiles crisis or Apollo Soyuz are left out while there are repetitive developments about the nature of the Warsaw Pact for example. 93.22.38.108 (talk) 04:42, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Copyright problem
Material added here is an unusably close paraphrase of. Compare the following two article/source examples:

Source:

Article:

Source:

While facts are not copyrightable, creative elements of presentation - including both structure and language - are. Accordingly, the paragraph has been removed. The article Wikipedia Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches, while about plagiarism rather than copyright concerns, also contains some suggestions for reusing material from sources that may be helpful, beginning under "Avoiding plagiarism". Brief excerpts of copyrighted text may be used, if clearly marked and attributed, in accordance with non-free content policy and guideline.

Alternatively, if permission is provided, we can use the original text with proper attribution. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:06, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Country comparison
The "country comparison" table at the top of the article seems overly large and intrusive. It presents a large list of haphazard and sometimes trivial "facts", especially the long lists of country names and flags, that overwhelm the rest of the article's content and readability. The reader must scroll halfway down the article before they can start actually reading. According to WP:USEPROSE, "Embedded lists should be used only when appropriate", and I don't think this one is. Such a "country comparison" is not found in the recommendations of the. I suggest breaking it out to a separate stand-alone list article that can be referenced from this one. --IamNotU (talk) 21:01, 25 September 2019 (UTC)