Talk:Nikolai Bukharin

message: I think it is essential to write about the letter which Bukharin managed to leave by getting his young wife to memorize it.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:CB08:8BE:AA00:C154:205B:4C62:1EF5 (talk) 15:16, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: This is the key document which cannot be honestly omitted! 2A01:CB08:8BE:AA00:E4A0:B1B5:7FD3:F589 (talk) 11:44, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: letter to a future generation of party leaders

message: I am a french reader of this article on Bukharin and I have seen a misunderstanding in a quotation of a book of Edvard Radzinsky (Stalin, p. 384). Romain Rolland had writen only one letter to Stalin about Bukharin. It was soon after the arrest of NB, on 18 march 1937. The two sentences quoted are in this letter. You can find the letters to Stalin writen  by R. Rolland (about others peoples)in the reviw of the Fondation Gabriel Péri, n°3/4, 2006, p. 273. You can see also the french article on Boukharine (based on the english article, but expanded) where the cotation is corrected. My english, as you can see, is not strong enough to suggest a change in the text. I hope that somebody can do the job.
If it is necessary, I shall try (addition in january 2011)--Maurice Andreu (talk) 22:44, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: A little mistake about a letter of Romain Rolland

message: All the other criticisms are just picking fleas off a rabid dog until this article gets a listing of the guy's writings. That is, after all, what he's famous for.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.237.252.242 (talk) 21:43, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Bibliography??

message: I'm sure this article could be expanded, but is it in any more need of expansion than 90% of articles?  Do we really need an expand tag here? -- Danny Yee 13:26, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: expand

message: "Two days later, Bukharin was shot."
OK, two days after what? That throws the entire point into disarray and confuses the reader.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by SlightlyInsane (talk • contribs) 13:51, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Confusing part. Need rewriting.

message: this article appears to written by a communist.   There were no Kulaks. ie rich peasant farmers. Plus Bukharin appears to have sprung out under a rock. Was he jewish descent ?  orthodox  ,we don't know!!
Poorly written and poorly executed typical crappy pedia  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.175.76.65 (talk) 04:03, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you're way off base with your equivocation of the Bolshevik use of the term kulak with the US use of the word communist (even during the Red Scare). Being labeled a communist in the US was not a death sentence; the same can't be said for being branded a kulak in the USSR. The term kulak originally meant any middle or upper-middle class peasant who could afford to pay others for labor on his land. Lenin's official Bolshevik doctrine turned kulak into a catch-all term for "rich peasants", i.e- anybody who presented even the appearance of undo comfort or material superiority over anybody else. The smallest sign could and did result in condemnation and "liquidation". At one point Lenin actually advised extending the term to anybody who, upon inspection, had evidence of meat in his stew pot or more than one pair of boots. During the height of the Great Purge in the countryside, kulak lost even this semblance of meaning and became another genericized blanket charge, requiring no evidence at all (like wrecking) and used for no other purpose than to facilitate rapid rubber-stamp convictions in order to justify the conviction quotas demanded by Stalin and Yezhov. Bravo Foxtrot (talk) 16:53, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Who were the Kulaks??

message: Just listened to a podcast of an interview with the author of a new book on Bukarhin by a scholar who spent some ten years in the Soviet archives.  Based on the podcast, the (166 page) book sounds fascinating.  The book is Politics, Murder, and Love in Stalin's Kremlin: The Story of Nikolai Bukharin and Anna Larina by Paul R. Gregory.  The podcast totally humanized Bukharin for me, and gave me a fascinating glimpse into that 1920s-1930s period of Soviet life amongst the Bolshevik/Communist elite.  There were some interesting revelations from the archives that don't appear to have been published elsewhere so the book may be a source for some important items that are not in the article today.  I should note that the podcast link has a pretty serious academic-ish written summary of the interview that would point to a few of insights that might be gained.  Cheers.  N2e (talk) 00:05, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This article requests a source for the Genghis Khan characterization. I found this at Wikiquote:  Nikolai Bukharin, At a Secret Meeting (July 1928) , as quoted in Communist Russia Under Lenin and Stalin (2002) by Corin & Fiehn, p. 146  I'm not familiar with the book templates, so I haven't supplied it. Activist (talk) 08:32, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interesting potential source 

message: Bukharin's Imperialism and World Economy is said to have influenced Lenin's Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism, and Lenin is said to have "freely borrowed from it." But Lenin's book was published in 1916, Bukharin's in 1918. This is confusing and needs to be explained.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.51.41.198 (talk) 11:40, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bukharin and Lenin on imperialism 

message: Somebody believed that Bukharin met his third wife (Anna Larina)when he was aged of twenty years. Of course it is a mistake : Anna Larina is born in 1914 and Bukharin in 1888. It is impossible to meet a girl aged of (- 6) years...--Maurice Andreu (talk) 14:21, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusion about the three wifes of N. I. Bukharin 

message: Browsing this article in relation to common understandings about the alternative to Stalinism that Bukharin appeared to represent until his murder, I can't help being struck by the degree to which this article has been debased by supposition, unsubstantiated assertions, and outright falsehoods.  Even some of the dates are questionable.
One must suppose that this is either a deliberate historical revisionism, or the article was someone's last minute high school history project.  In any case, it is appalling that this nonsense is presented to the world as creditable information on Bukharin.
It seems likely that the neckbeard Wikipedia fraternity of paper-shufflers has so alienated creditable historians that such a resource is no longer available to the project.  Nor am I inclined to clean up this doggerel gratis while the Wikipedia elders cry poor at the same time as enjoying an endless round of international junkets.
However, any of you who do actually like to work for nothing, and who think Wikipedia ought to be accurate, might do worse than getting hold of some creditable histories of the Soviet Union to at least straighten out the dates, if not also to remove the ridiculous conjecture.
Good night and good luck. Peter S Strempel | Talk 07:11, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revisionism or unwitting fabrication? 

message: Hi, guys.
It appears that between the falling of Grigory Zinoviev in 1926 and the appointment of Georgi Dimitrov in 1934 the Ecsecutive Committee of Comintern did not have a formal head. Instead a number of political secretaries were formally in charge on rotational basis. See e.g.  or . Bukharin might be in charge of the Comintern but he was not formally its general secretary (at least I cannot find sources for it). Thus, I am reverting the infobox change until the sources are provides Alex Bakharev (talk) 04:15, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, Bukharin's appointment of the post of General Secretary of ECCI is clearly mentioned in Stephen Cohen's  "Bukharin and the Bolshevik Revolution" , in the part about duumvirate. So I recommend adding back. --Aronlee90 (talk) 04:55, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! I have inserted the reference Alex Bakharev (talk) 00:43, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  General Secretary of ECCI 

message: In the box on the right, only one wife is mentioned. In the text, Lukina is also mentioned.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.179.201.218 (talk) 09:37, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wives 

message: The Execution section doesn't actually contain anything about the execution. All it has is people's responses to it. Surely it should feature a few facts of the actual execution - where it took place, who participated, the method, etc.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ianbrettcooper (talk • contribs) 13:17, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Execution 

message: There is an RfC on the question of using "Religion: None" vs. "Religion: None (atheist)" in the infobox on this and other similar pages. 
The RfC is at Template talk:Infobox person#RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion. 
Please help us determine consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 22:05, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Template talk:Infobox person#RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion|Request for Comments]] 

message: Dear Contributors, I have contributed the images to the article and would like to raise the article status to "Featured article". In order to achieve, everything in the main body of the article has to be properly cited. Could we do it? --Armenius vambery (talk) 11:49, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  how to raise the article's status to Featured article 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:09, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: Is a picture of Bukharin's father really relevant to the article? Ivan Bukharin is only mentioned once in passing and doesn't appear to have had any major impact on his son's career. At the very least, it's currently in the wrong place and should be moved to the previous section. Jah77 (talk) 11:25, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo 

message: This book of Jüri Lina and Lars Adelskogh affirms:
 82.50.120.25 (talk) 21:00, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Freemasonry 

message: In Stalins' daughter Svetlana Alliluyevas' biography, Stalin's Daughter: The Extraordinary and Tumultuous Life of Svetlana Alliluyeva Paperback – Abridged, 21 June 2016 by Professor Rosemary Sullivan. It mentions that Svetlana was disappointed by the pointless execution of Bukharin who was widely admired and harmless. 
No page reference for this so can't edit the article. AndrewHart500 (talk) 09:10, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:   Stalins' Daughter, sadness at execution of Bukharin