Can anyone help me with Soviet History? I am looking for all I can on
Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin, and the Romanov dynasty.
Thank you.
Printable View
Can anyone help me with Soviet History? I am looking for all I can on
Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin, and the Romanov dynasty.
Thank you.
Vladimir (John) Lenin was in the beatles and married to Yoko Ono.Quote:
Originally Posted by Asylum
Joseph Stalin had a moustache.
The Romanovs are dead.
Really have you not heard of Wikipedia?
Google is also a very informative source on Soviet History!
Now Stalin has opened up a chain of trendy restaurants in Portugal, where he lives with his poodle, Mr. Paisley.
The Romanovs are now thought by historians to be greatly overrated in terms of the role they played in history. Really, they didn't do much besides die. Their cousins were much more influential: the Stroganovs, of course invented Beef Stroganov in addition to producing the hit show "American Idol." Young socialite Ivana Stroganova has appeared in Playboy a record 37 times. She hopes to gain a job as a hostess at Mr. Stalin's cafes.
You deserved to be mocked. Really. I normally advocate cutting NoObS slack, but this is a ridiculous question. Uhm, would anybody mind going ahead and telling me about nuclear physics or Greco-Roman wrestling real quick? I have never heard of something called a "library," "books," "teh internets," or even "asking a well-thought out question."
What is this Gooooooooooogle of which you speak?
Oh and:
In post-Soviet Russia, stupid question asks YOU!
TATY-you talkin about this? :)
Ленин должен выступать на публике, все собрались...Огромная площадь забита людьми, все телеканалы транслируют...Ну вобшщем выходит Ленин и все начинают орать:
-Ленон, Ленон...ура Ленон!
Ленин говорит:
-ТовариСЧи, я не Ленон, я Ленин...
Все опять:
-Ленон, Ленон, Ленон!!!
Ленин подумал и опять говорит:
-Я не Ленон, я Ленин...
а люди не перестают орать ЛЕНОН, ЛЕНОН...
Ленин ещё подумал, и сказал:
"Ну чёрт с вами. Yesterday...all my troubles seems so far away..."
I thought that this was a Russian forum. I am very sorry to offend anyone, and will leave the forum in search of a Russian one.
Thank you all.
It IS a Russian forum. It also is a place to post reasonable, well-thought out questions. There are some people who are really knowledgable and helpful, but you need to practice some common sense and actually put forth minimal effort. Just asking someone to tell you about 70-some years of (well-documented) history is absurd.
www.google.com - type this into the box where it says http://masterrussian.net/mforum/viewtopic.php?t=8526 near the top of the screen. When the page loads, click on the box in the centre and type in "Soviet History." Move the mouse to the right and click on the button marked "search." Now, you're almost there, just scroll down the list and find a link which appeals to you! It's as simple as that!
Here is another useful link:
http://www.soviethistory.com/
Lenin:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenin
Stalin:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalin
Romanov dynasty:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanov
wikipedia - good site :)
Yes, but not necessarilly accurate.Quote:
wikipedia - good site :)
Well, NOTHING is necessarily accurate; whenver humans are involved something is apt to be screwed up. There HAVE been concerns about it containing inaccurate material -- either unintentional or actually intentional deception. I seem to remember a story, though, about Britannica containing roughly the same amount of erronenous material. Of course, you can debate how severe the errors are, and of course, you can cite Britannica as being professionally researched and editted. But don't knock wikipedia just for the sake of doing so, as is fashionable these days -- you should never really rely on one source for anything anyway. Just my two cents...Quote:
Originally Posted by basurero
Source.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barmaley
Thanks for the source -- I don't think I read the Register's version, but some CNN-caliber thing. As anyone can see by reading it, my post belongs in wikipedia, probably. Perhaps I should readdress the matter. Wikipedia does not = Britanica in terms of suckiness. Britanica is somewhat better. With that being said Britanica still sucks to a fair extent. Thus you should read Wikipedia and Britanica and then reach a decision.
The thing about Wikipedia is, the article wirrten about the Soviet Union in English will probably be written by a Brit, or American. Whereas the same article in Russian will most likely have been written by a Russian. Obviously these two articles are going to vary greatly.
Right. And that's to say nothing of the length/depth of the articles. On numerous occasions, I've seen an article in English that substantially more in depth than its Russian version. But in these regards, I don't really know as this is much different than what Britannica would say about something vs. a Russian encyclopaedia.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barmaley
The reason is Wikipedia is mostly used by English speakers. The number of Russian users is limited and therefore the number of articles, and also the length of them is obviously less. Most long articles are written by numerous people.
It seems to me there are rather enough Russians writing for wikipedia in English. Just look at the histories of the pages mentioned here and you'll find some.
Actaully Friendy is right, I was reading a bit on Peter the great on Wikipedia, and I was noticing that many english articles had been abducted and were missing in the text!
"Abducted?" What, were they part of the mob or something? How about "deleted" or "removed?" :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by kalinka_vinnie
They were missing, it just seemed to boring to write "missing"... :wink:
PS: девушка или молодой человек
Что, девушка не может быть молодым человеком?
Нет. Запретно.Quote:
Originally Posted by kalinka_vinnie
Uh huh. Well, maybe they just ran away from home and weren't really abducted. Ever think about that!? :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by kalinka_vinnie
:lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by kalinka_vinnie
"What, young ladies can't be with young men?". I'm confused. Peter the Great was a lady?Quote:
Originally Posted by kalinka_vinnie
[quote=Seventh-Monkey]"What, young ladies can't be with young men?". I'm confused. Peter the Great was a lady?[/quote:v4051oz5]Quote:
Originally Posted by "kalinka_vinnie":v4051oz5
Transexual. I saw it on Jerry Springer, so it must be true. That whole "My Tsar is a slut" episode... :P
молодой человек - Young person
Women aren't people? =)
What did that say exactly, though? I thought from the use of the instrumental case that it meant "with young men", or does it mean "young ladies can't be young men"?
Eh. I was always just under the impression that you addressed an unknown person by either молодой человек or девушка (as in "hey, <person>, can I order desert?" or "hey, <person>, excuse me, but can you tell me how to find Tverskaya street?"). I assumed that the former was just understood to apply to males in this context (I know that it literally just means "young person"). If I am wrong, please by all means, tell me.
No you are right, you call a unknown young man for молодой человек, but as far as I know, you can techincally call a young woman the same thing, since молодой человек means young person...
Monkey: "young ladies can't be young men", the point is that молодой человек means young person, so it should read "girls can't be young people?"
Ok, so your position would be that calling a female stranger, stewardess, waitress, etc. молодой человек is fine?Quote:
Originally Posted by kalinka_vinnie
Ummm, no :)
It's just that writing "девушка или молодой человек" seems to me to hint that women aren't people :) But I am probably seeing things ;)
No, you can't do that! A girl will think you're a pervert.Quote:
Originally Posted by kalinka_vinnie
But why not?? You may call a girl молодой человек when no girls can hear youQuote:
Originally Posted by Rtyom
You mean when you're alone?! Speaking to oneself?!Quote:
Originally Posted by Rostova
By the way, why's the beaitiful rhomb in your avatar, молодой человек? :)
In my opinion, we call both girls and boys молодые люди only in plural.
If I ever said молодой человек about any girl then I ment only her age regardless to her gender. I mean I regard her and her gender, but said it regardless....well...that's it :D
I can say about any girl - она хороший человек, она умный, обоятельный человек as about a person - she's a good, kind, clever, thoughtful, charming person. I wonder can I say She is a good man? :o Eventually we can say молодой человек too, but rarely and in spetial phrases.
Please somebody explain it!
Well, again, молодой человек, I must agree, can be direct to a girl---but when we don't address to someone, when we speak abstractly.
Она хороший молодой человек.
The sentence above is awkward, however I see what I'm trying to say: She's one fo the young people I know and she is good. That's it.
I could not say it more clear Rtyom
and I'm totally agree
:)