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