Talk:Mikhail Gorbachev

Featured on MediaWiki:March 11 selected anniversaries (may be in HTML comment)

What about moving this article from Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev to Mikhail Gorbachev? Most articles link to the second title, few to the first one. -- Juan M. Gonzalez 22:39 Sep 9, 2002 (UTC)

Moved. --mav

Thanks, mav. I had a nagging suspicion that just moving the text wasn't enough, but I couldn't remember why (it's the history, of course). --Ed Poor

Ivashko can not be considered as Gorbachev's successor as the leader of the Soviet Union. Andres 01:00, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I don't see how you can put Yeltsin as Gorbachev's successor. Yeltsin become president of the Russian republic in 1990 before Yeltsin resigned. The Soviet Union encompassed more than Russia. This was not a simple name change. A larger entity dissolved and a lower entity became sovereign. --Jia ng 19:48, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

First of all, your change is not just fixing a typo. If there are disagreements in basics, they must be settled in the talk page.

Now, you are saying "the SU dissolved". If it were so easy. There are international treaties, obligations, debts. In many aspects Russian Federation claimed to overtake. There is a historical continuity Imperial Russia -- Soviet Union -- Russian Federation. If you don't like the chain of rulers as it is displayed now, let's discuss something different, to display this chain of succession, rather than simply break it. Mikkalai 21:01, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I never said that my change was fixing a typo. Russia declared its independence in June 12, 1990 and the USSR was not dissolved until a year later. There is no continuity. Are you claiming that Gorbachev ceased to be legitimate in June 1990? The navigation bar states "List of leaders of the Soviet Union". That's all we need to include. It's not a "List of leaders of Russia". The key word in your statement above is "many", not "all". It was not a direct succession and the two are not synonomous. To claim that is to be misleading. --Jia ng 21:30, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

The key word is "don't be too formal" in my comments to edits. You are breaking the actual chain of history of the land under a formal pretext without giving any replacement. Mikkalai 22:07, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

As an encyclopedia, we must do our best to be factual. What's wrong with being formal? I don't see your point. This is not a direct chain of leaders. --Jia ng 22:26, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Wrong with being formal is that history is not mathematics, unfortunately.

For example, I could disagree with inclusion in the list of leaders those temporary ones, from coups, since the were not formally recognized anywhere in the world (and by the people of the country as well). Why is your formalism so selective? Mikkalai 22:48, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Since when has formal recognition by other states determined whether a leader would be a leader, period? --Jia ng 23:01, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

With regard to Gorbachev and Yeltsin - we link from Kerensky to Lenin at one end so we should link from Gorbachev to Yeltsin at the other. PMA 12:33, Mar 3, 2004 (UTC)

Since that one was directly overthrown and replaced it's fine, but it should link to the state replacement, not the person. That navigation bar also links to "Leaders of Russia", not "Leaders of the Soviet Union".--Jia ng

what's wrong with navigation bars mixed? See List of British monarchs, with all these changes and intertwines of lands and rulers. Main goal in historiography is connectedness, otherwise it is impossible to trace through time. Mikkalai 22:48, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

You mean at James I of England? That was a direct succession and the crowns were merged. I don't see the issue or confusion there. It's been the same family since the Norman conquest. --Jia ng 23:01, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Silly things removed until serious confirmation

... and explanations.

Gorbachev won the 2004 Grammy Award for Best Spoken Word Album for Children, called "Prokofiev: Peter and the Wolf/Beintus: Wolf Tracks", along with Bill Clinton and Sophia Loren.

OK. This one seems seems true, but the above text is total confusion. I have no desire to write it correctly. If someone wants, go ahead. Mikkalai 02:29, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

In early 2004, Gorbachev created a copyright of his famous birthmark after a vodka company featured the mark on labels of one of their drinks in order to capitalize on its fame. The company now no longer uses the trademark as Gorbachev takes it very seriously.Gorbachev to Trademark his Forehead

This text may also be true, but the exposition is unencyclopedic, good for a tabloid (what's the company? why did gorbachoff copyright? to get rich or to fight defamation? etc.) Mikkalai 02:29, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)