Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Communist Party of the Soviet Union General-Secretarial elections


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   Delete. Eluchil404 (talk) 09:31, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Communist Party of the Soviet Union General-Secretarial elections
Half of the page are about events which never happened; for instance, Lenin was never elected to the General Secretaryship or any other formal position - the General Secretaryship did not even exist in 1917..... The same goes with the so-called "elections" in 1920, 1953, 1987 and 1991 (they never happened); the elections in 1964, 1982 and 1984 did happen, but are not notable as stand alone articles. To reiterate, i want these articles to be deleted because half of them cover articles on events which never happened (1917, 1920, 1953, 1987 and 1991) and the other ones are not notable (1964, 1982 and 1984 - the 1982 may be notable, but I'm not sure, and maybe the 1985, but that one currently has no article... Even so, as they stand now they should all be deleted). --TIAYN (talk) 15:52, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Several articles – ( View AfD View log )


 * The following should be deleted


 * Communist Party of the Soviet Union General-Secretarial election, 1917 (never happened)
 * Communist Party of the Soviet Union General-Secretarial election, 1920 ( may be notable, but as it stands it should be deleted, and it can be covered in another article - he was elected in 1922, so again, it never happened)
 * Communist Party of the Soviet Union General-Secretarial election, 1953 (March 5) (the post was vacant since 1934, and was abolished in 1952 (it was reestablished in 1955); how could an election take place in 1953?)
 * Communist Party of the Soviet Union General-Secretarial election, 1964 (not notable)
 * Communist Party of the Soviet Union General-Secretarial election, 1982 (not notable)
 * Communist Party of the Soviet Union General-Secretarial election, 1984 (not notable)
 * Communist Party of the Soviet Union General-Secretarial election, 1987 (never happened)
 * Communist Party of the Soviet Union General-Secretarial election, 1991 (never happened)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions.  --Lambiam 18:12, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  --Lambiam 18:12, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. In particular the ones about elections that were in fact not held should be deleted as being incorrect and misleading. The others may safely be deleted as being uninformative and implausible search terms; if someone should find interesting material about any of them that warrants a stand-alone article, a new article can always be created. --Lambiam 18:15, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment - Okay, we've got three sets of items here. The first are the anachronistic years: 1917, 1920. There was no such thing as a "General Secretary." These are nonsensical and should be speedied out of here. The second are the years in which the Central Committee elected a new head. 1953 tries to do this, material that should be covered vastly in other articles (see Malenkov and Khrushchev for specific bios. Similarly with the selections of Brezhnev, Chernenko, Andropov, Gorbachev. These selections processes ARE encyclopedia-worthy, notable topics, but portraying them as a series of "elections" is farcical. These should be deleted out of the way without prejudice to a specialist doing in-depth articles on each succession properly. The last group are the actual elections. I don't know the specifics of the 1987 vote (I'm a historian of the 1890-1940 period, not contemporary affairs), but that one looks like a clear KEEP, albeit needing major work and probably a new title. The 1991 piece I'm not sure about, but I would tend to KEEP rather than annihilate — for now. Let the content creator work on that a bit, retitle it, and see what we see. Anyway, that's my thinking. Carrite (talk) 19:16, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * But the last two never happened; Zyuganov was never elected CPSU General Secretary, Gorbachev left his office in August 1991, and Vladimir Ivashko became acting CPSU leader.. There was never any elections in 1987 and 1991; listen to me, never. And no there was no election in 1987 either - Zyuganov was not a major figure at the time (i'm not even sure if he had a seat in the central committee, he did not have a seat in the politburo, and Ryzhkov was premier and still an ally of Gorbachev; there was no 1987 and 1991 elections, so why keep?????) --TIAYN (talk) 20:55, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm convinced that no such elections were held and have tagged both of those as hoaxes. They should be speedied out of here. Carrite (talk) 21:46, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep 1987 and 1991, but retitle. Delete All as anachronistic or as content forks or as blatant hoaxes (1987, 1991). Carrite (talk) 19:17, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Bonus Trivia - Joseph Stalin DID actually stand for election twice — in 1937 and 1946. Both of these events are encyclopedia worthy, for what it's worth. Again, a specialist really getting serious on these matters rather than someone intent on doing a fly-by cookie cutter set of stubs can take this on. Carrite (talk) 19:22, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment - I've just now taken a look at the 1917 and 1920 pieces. Those are both utter FABRICATIONS and have been tagged for speedy as blatant hoaxes. No such "elections" in any form. I am also going to upgrade the tagging for 1987 and 1991 to speedy as blatant hoaxes in the wake of this info. Carrite (talk) 22:01, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Of the articles in this AfD that haven't already been deleted, none is more than 2 sentences long. And I don't know whether anyone plans to add information to improve these articles. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:55, 8 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment - It would be good to get a couple more voices and then to snow this crap out of here, somebody went to a lot of work on an elaborate hoax. Having precise vote counts for 1987 and 1991 was pretty tricky, it had me slobbering and nodding my head. Excellent catch by Trust Is. Carrite (talk) 04:42, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment It can be surprising how detailed and well constructed hoaxes can be, (I got into editing by finding an addition to an article that looked convincing - if you didn't have some knowledge of the subject...) I've even known someone create two online newspapers to act as references. (Didn't work - very quickly seen through.) Most hoaxes here are obvious because the perpetrators don't have enough knowledge - or don't realise the extent and knowledge base of our patrollers, or both. They put things up like a 'writer' aged now 14 - who scripted a film that came out in 2008. Oh yeh. I don't have the knowledge about the subject here (but might do some digging when I'm less tired). I am impressed by the way the matter is being dealt with. Peridon (talk) 21:47, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. I noticed the lovely hoax called the 1991 election for general secretary a while ago, but was too busy to nominate such crap myself. The few elections here that are not fake are really not notable. If e.g., Andropov was unanimously elected General Secretary by a small group at the highest level of the Communist Party, that's really not much of a reason for creating a one- or two-sentence article telling us that. It should be in the Andropov article. Zloyvolsheb (talk) 00:42, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete I've just done a little digging - into the author's history. It appears that their account at ru-wiki was in existence through 2011, but was indeffed (including email block) in December for vandalism and (as I read things) is possibly blocked from a Chinese language Wikipedia too. I've looked at one of these articles and at the articles of the 'participants', and it didn't tally. I'll go with the more expert opinions of those who have been doing the main digging here. I am wondering if a block would be in order here, but as they don't seem to have edited here since December, would it be necessary? Peridon (talk) 10:40, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.