User:HistoryMike01/sandbox

Article Evaluation
New_Economic_Policy The article appears at face value to be heavily slanted in the pro capitalist position. It takes the stance that communism in all its forms are not good and thusly its tough to see the article as non-biased initially. Statements such as “However, the state only allowed private landholdings because the idea of collectivized farming was met with much opposition,” seem highly opinionated and difficult to substantiate. As a result, the opinions of the writer rather than factual evidence-based facts seem to overshadow the validity of the article. The proposed benefits of the pro-communist party system seem to be absent in the article or grossly understated while the ideals of liberalism appear to be elevated in their importance pertaining to the subject.

All the links I followed did work properly along with the citations. The sources were relevant to the subject matter and seem to be properly used where the are included. However, I found the underdeveloped “disagreements in leadership” section to be a little distracting. This section felt out of place and almost unnecessary given how little it was defined. While Stalin and Trotsky’s differences were pivotal to an article on NEP the way it was included makes it seem trivial. This section should be relocated and further developed to give it the weight necessary for the subject matter.

To my limited knowledge and expertise in the subject I would have to say that the information while appearing a little biased seems to be current and relevant in as far as it can be trusted. Since this is a history subject the events are concrete and don’t lend themselves to being corrected when properly depicted. However, all the sections can be expanded upon, with further detail and additional reference to credible sources.

The most pressing issue appears to be some of the sources used. Clicking on a few of the links take you to some biased information which leads me to believe that the credibility of the article is in question. While what’s written appears to be factual, one would have to question the sources used to gain the information. I would suggest inserting some less biased sources to support the same information and removing the slanted sources entirely. Their use casts a shadow over the entire article and undermines its credibility even though the article seems largely based on fact.

The primary topics I noticed in the talk pages appear to call for my documentation and development of the article itself. While there doesn’t appear to be any actual discussion going on, there are quite a few contrary viewpoints. Some of them are, in my opinion, counterproductive in that they are just as biased as some of the sources used to support the article.

This article is rated as “start class” piece, rightly so I believe. It initiates the subject while leaving quite a bit of room for growth and correction. It is also listed as “relevant” to the following WikiProjects: WikiProject Russia / Economy / History, WikiProject Soviet Union, WikiProject Socialism, WikiProject Economics. As I am new to Wikilinks. I cannot ascertain if this means this article is part of these projects or simply “of interest” to them.

The primary difference I see in this article and the way that our class discusses NEP is the development of Stalin’s importance in the subject. Our class, being a study of Stalin, goes into detail outlining NEP as it relates to Stalin and Trotsky and the future effect it would have on Russian politics. This article almost trivializes the parties were studying and I think that would be my first edit. To expand the section discussing these men and reference it credibly.

Article Selection
Purges of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, 1936 Soviet Constitution, Socialist realism, Neo-Stalinism