"
Well, I am not calling it ""essay"", because at first sight the text seemed quite encyclopedic to me, and the word ""rant"" refers to form, not content. mikka (t) 

Agree with Mikka. I see that someone is making an attempt to salvage portions of the essay. I don't think that that's necessary, since just about all the points brought up in it are already better covered in more specialized articles, particularly collectivisation in the USSR.  

As I said above, I pared down the essay/rant in the ""Rise to Power"" section (Mikka removed the same editor's ""essay"" about Collectivization, quite rightly, as it's well covered in the relevant article). I also said that it's debatable if it needs to be there at all, even in the ""pared-down"" version. I'm reluctant to remove someone's whole contribution, especially when they are a new editor, as I don't want to discourage new editors; but if the consensus feeling is that it should all go, then so be it. Incidentally, regarding ""form"", when I looked at the mark-up behind the ""essay"" it showed that the editor had separated it into paragraphs by indenting the separate paras, rather than leaving blank-lines, so it was just a case of a new-editor not being familiar with the correct way to format paragraphs, and ending up with one long para, hence looking like a ""rant"". Also, new editors tend not to be familiar with the idea of keeping to the salient points and wiki-linking to in-depth articles. talk|contribs "