How can references in an encyclopedia to a generally accepted authority on a subject be irrelevant While you may consider the book POV it is generally accepted among scholars as being authoritative Can you see that is what allows it and material covered in it to be included in a reference work The relevations of Khrushchev and Solzhenitsyn are also generally considered to be significant You seem to feel that simply casting unverified aspersions on a source is sufficient to support exclusion of the material from Wikipedia Dont you see that simply saying bad things doesnt change the underlying general acceptance by scholars of the material As to Conquests representations being exposed it is generally accepted that in the main they were affirmed  Simply labeling something POV does not justify its removal from a referance work which has a NPOV policy which contemplates inclusion of multiple points of view see WikipediaNeutral point of view Cant you see that inclusion of your point of view is dependant on allowing other points of view to also be included  LIkewise describing the point of view of revisionist scholars of communism is simply a description of a tendency of scholars of a certain school of communist scholarship  and is backed up by a specific reference which dicusses the subject at length Could you please look at the book In Denial and verify the reference