Learn more at Author Central. Previous page. Kindle Edition. Next page. There's a problem loading this menu right now. Learn more about Amazon Prime. Get fast, free delivery with Amazon Prime. Books By Serge Berstein. Usually ships within 2 to 3 weeks. Mass Market Paperback. Only 2 left in stock - order soon. Get it by Wednesday, Jul 03 Only 1 left in stock more on the way. Only 4 left in stock - order soon. Hors Collection French Edition Jun 23, Only 3 left in stock - order soon.
Only 1 left in stock - order soon. Histoire du Parti radical, Vol. More Information. Anything else? Provide feedback about this page. Back to top. Get to Know Us. Amazon Payment Products. The only real grain-producing region that was affected was Ukraine, and possibly the area around the Volga.
- Wood and Woodworking in Late Ottoman Damascus:.
- Périodiques régionaux.
- Derniers numéros.
- Colon and Rectal Surgery: Anorectal Operations (Master Techniques in General Surgery)?
- Il segreto dei ricchi (Italian Edition)?
- Khirros Journey: The Complete Trilogy.
However, please see the first paragraph about inter-connectedness to see how that word does not apply. Library visiting highly reccomended. A famine which was deliberately aimed at Ukrainians is major point of view - your logic that absense of any data in released archives proves nothing. Remember during World War II a lot of material which would be found in the archives was destroyed. Ukraine claims to have released all famine data from archives.
I have not found that Russia has has made a similar statement. Bobanni talk , 7 July UTC. There are very respectable sources that consider the spring-summer famine as a separate famine from the Holodomor a spring-summer famine. Defining the Holodomor as famine in the very first sentence gives an undue weight to this POV. These are just few of the sources by scholars of utmost respectability in the field who consider the There are plenty of other sources. These I just remember from the top of my head. So a short history lesson: Hunger Almost fantastical collection plan for and similar procurement.
Export plan more then in largest ever since soviet times Government too late partially realize the situation too late — so the import and reverting of planned for exported grains started only by mid-end of March. Holodomor Significant loss of winter tillage — not re sewn for summer crops no seeds nor horses nor peoples to do this — most travel for bread. Summer seeding campaign delayed and in fact failed. Rest expect to go somewhere to got bread. Winter tillage provides more yield then summer — so acreage significantly increased — please for seeds rejected. No grain, but the reporting and projection for harvest was optimistic - so were is the grain — 1-st answer - stolen, - so sharp methods got some results — but does not change the facts — peasants and state storage was almost empty for long winter So, in fact fault in agriculture in grain producing areas of Ukraine and Russia was the reason of Soviet Hunger and Ukrainian Holodomor So — does the hunger in USSR was planned or misplaned?
Jo0doe talk , 5 July UTC. The numbers 2. However, none of the references provided actually give any numbers. If there are no actual sources with numbers, I suggest that they be removed. Horlo, your claim that "none of the references provided actually give any numbers" just shows that you have not read the references. Both authors cited in the lead, Vallin et al. Kulchitsky is the leading Ukrainian scholar in the field from the Ukrainian Academy of Science working on the Famine reserach for many years.
They both published extensively in books and peer-reviewed journals of the highest ranking. If you don't have access to the articles in Population Studies , a leading demographic peer-reviewed journal, you may order a copy for a small fee from their web-site, order it through inter-library loan or ask someone with access to provide you with a copy.
From the sources currently used in the article these two are the only scholarly studies of the number of victims specifically in Ukraine made after the opening of the archives allowed to do such studies. If there are other such studies that I am unaware of, please bring them by all means. The lead says further down that higher numbers are sometimes sited by the media and in the political debates.
These numbers, btw, sometimes reach higher than 10 million, preferred by Holro and Bobanni for whatever reason. Viktor Yushchenko indeed used 10 million in his Wall Street Journal article  but he also said 20 million in his speech addressing the US Congress . In yet another speech he said that if not Holodomor there would have been 80 million of Ukrainians.
There are all sorts of inflated numbers and they are given in the politicization section. What you can't do is to cite the scholarly numbers along with the propaganda ones together giving them equal weight and creating some sort of a "range". This is like estimating the age of the Universe giving a range from astrophysical data on one end and from the Bible from another end.
Horlo, let's get this straight. I checked multiple times and assert that the numbers given in the lead cited to these specific references appear in these sources exactly as given in an article. You say they don't. I ask for the last time.
Similar authors to follow
Are you making this assertion having read that sources or you make stuff up without actually looking at them? I will quote from the sources to help those readers who can't read Ukrainian but I want to get this straight now. I want to know whether you are accusing me of lying out of your bad faith that you read the source, saw the info and still make this all up or you say this stuff because you are to lazy to look? That's all. Where are the numbers? Please give me a line number where I can find them.
Horlo, I removed Kuban's comment because it was inappropriate. He did not complain, perhaps having realized his mistake. I do not see how you fit in this matter. Now, let's start clicking together. None of my links above are to Washington Post or to a "Moscow correspondent". I elaborated on their backgrounds above. That you claim I linked to the "Moscow correspondent" and "Washington Post" just shows that you are not truthful in your assertions. From now on I will be extra careful with any source you use but let's get back to the sources I quoted.
On Vallin et al paper and the numbers we click on this link , I gave above. On the right-hand side of the page we see the link Printable version PDF. We click on it and download the pdf file. On page 2 second paragraph from the bottom we read:. Now, let's check the Kulchytsky's refs. Three are given above.
Two of them is to one and the same article in Russian and in Ukrainian. Here is what the article says:. This same number is repeated in the book by Kulchytsky which I also linked where his sources are given in a much greater detail. Kulchytsky is a deputy director. The link to the book was provided above. Let's click together and find a section 4. Click and read page 51 as follows:. As for the last source, while I do not doubt that the citation is exact, I am so interested that I will try to get my hand on this source for more info.
I am not sure how fluent you are with Ukrainian and Russian but if you have a difficulty reading the quotes I gave above, please feel free to ask. I will translate these quotes anyway for the article. But I won't be seriously discussing anything with you if you persist with you tactic of denial of what's in the plain view and filibustering. Hello, oh dear, Irpen, you seem to have misunderstood the reason for this discussion.
The discussion here is about "Sources in the Lead". That means the sources that are at the beginning of the article, not sources that you have. The reason that I showed all of those problems - no numbers, Moscow correspondent, not English, etc - are in the sources mentioned in the lead. Having said that, let's take a look at the only scholarly source that you provide - the one by Vallin. When I looked at it, I was surprised to see that it was by no means a study of the Holodomor, nor did it even mention the Holodomor.
It was, on the other hand, a study in similarities between French and Ukrainian demographics. It was indeed a very interesting read. I was even impressed by the author's optimism following the Orange Revolution, and how Ukraine has decided to resume its relations with Europe. However, there was no mention of the the Holodomor. The entire argument for the number of Sorry, that's not good enough. You need to provide actual scholarly studies in English about the Holodomor to validate your claim that those are what scholars estimate.
That brings us to the issue of removing other editor's comments: why do you think that this comment: Why do it so slowly why not just have a go all at once and rename it to How evil Moskal Russians deflowered the poor helpless virgin Ukraina? Even if you think it is, you have no right to remove it - just the same way that this comment: There are sources with numbers check the rest of the article but they mostly give bigger numbers.
You might want to put correct sources and change numbers in accordance.
Studies by energy source and sector
Two wrongs don't make a right. Do not remove other editors' comments, and either get some real sources for the numbers you claim in the lead, or they will be removed. Please don't change the subject - this is a place to talk about sources in the lead. None of the sources that are currently in the lead actually provide any of the numbers that you claim that they do. That is why they are always removed. I think that if the lowest estimate ie 2.
Horlo, both these sources are off-topic and do not show where they are getting these numbers either. Show one source where 7, 9, 10, etc million is either obtained or referenced to where this is from and preferably, make it about the subject at hand, not an unrelated topic where the matter is touched passingly by a non-specialist on the subject.
The source with 2. While not showing where this number is from in this very paper, it gives a reference to where this data is taken from.
SCI Archives Catalogue - List of files
There are three sources with Two are from Kulchytsky, the top Ukrainian scholar of the subject who works in the institution of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine , the third one is from S. Wheatcroft, the Australian historian and demographer who thoroughly researched and published on the subject of this famine. That Kulchytsky's article is not in English, does not make it less reliable in any way. What matters are the academic standing of the sources and their authors, not the language they use.
Sources you edit are entirely off topic, they are not even about history. The numbers are mentioned passingly as the authors talk about different subjects and the author neither show how they obtain the number, no refer to a work where they found it. You are lying. The source both shows the number on page 2, second paragraph from the bottom and gives a reference to where it is obtained: This is what the source accessible here says:. The latter book is the most detailed demographic study of 20th century Ukraine ever written.
This study, as well as the page number, is referenced in the article. If this book is inaccessible to you because it's French, too expensive and you have no access to libraries, they reproduce a sufficiently detailed summary of their calculation in the work titled: "A New Estimate of Ukrainian Population Losses during the Crises of the s and s" published in Population Studies , Vol. The Population Studies is the world leading scholarly journal on the field of demographics.
The abstract to this article is available here. Again, if you have no access to electronic subscription to Population Studies or library, you can pay a modest fee and download the article from the publisher and read it. Or you may try to find someone who has such access to provide you with a copy as a personal favor. I have read this article and verified the numbers. We discussed it even onwiki with several other Wikipedians who also read it.
You may find the discussion somewhere in the history of the Faustian's talk. The next source is by Kulchytsky, a Deputy Director of the leading academic institution in the country, the Institute of History of the National Academy of Science of Ukraine. His book is wholy dedicated to the subject of Holodomor and entitled "Demographic consequence of Holodomor of in Ukraine", published in Kiev by the Institute of History in This book in Ukrainian is available online here see chapter 4 entitled "The analysis of the demographic statistics".
Notes bibliographiques - Persée
I reproduced a very detailed calculation from this book in the article at the "death toll" section , specifically for the readers who can't read Ukrainian can you? The next source is the work of Stephen G. This collection of the fundamental importance is now being translated into English and the Yale University Press published the first volume: "The War Against the Peasantry, The Tragedy of the Soviet Countryside, Volume one". The article used here as a reference was published in not yet translated volume three p. Do you remember me promissing above to get my hands on it?
Well I did.
Finding it was more difficult than your google booking to fish for any number of victims that is high enough to your taste. Here is the full version of the volume. Now quoting:. Now, these are the sources of the highest quality. Dedicated works on the subject written by top scholars in the field who actually show their sources and calculations " If you have anything to contradict them or even to widen the range of the victims' estimate, your sources better have the same standing.
As I said before, you can neither bring in the Bible to the Wikipedia as a source to argue with the sources used in articles on Cosmology nor synthesize an estimate for Universe' age by putting the results from the Astrophysics books on one end and from the Bible on another end. Now, let's look at what you managed to google-book. Your first source John Gillingham is a book whose subject is post war European integration. The Holodomor is only mentioned passingly and wrongly in the book. The author gives the number as million but not only he does not show a calculation the book is off-topic , he does not even give a reference to where this number is from.
He also means some mysterious ! Holodomor and calls this Holodomor "the worst of Ukraine's catastrophes". The author probably has heard about the WW2, whose death toll for Ukraine was about 2. In any case, whatever knowledge the author has on the topic of Holodomor, we can't figure it out from one passing mention in an off-topic book with such goofs, no visible calculation and no reference.
Neither it is clear from his credentials. Your next "source" Boris Drozdek is a book whose subject is psychology. Its publisher's description says that this work offers "synthesizing insights from psychiatry, social psychology, and anthropology sets out a framework for therapy that is as culturally informed as it is productive. The Holodomor there is also mentioned passingly, off topic and with no reference why would it be in an off-topic book?
Now, Horlo, this is your final warning. Next time you will be caught lying and falsifying sources, you will be reported. I simply did not want to go through the hassle of compiling the evidence of your gross tendentiousness and dishonesty but I notice that it takes even more time for me to debunk your lies and misrepresentations. So, this was the last time I did it.
I point your attention to similar stile of edits in other article  Should we vote about mentioned by Irpen sources -. Hello, thank you for pointing out other situations where some editors simply started reverting changes I made without any effort at discussion. By the way, when you click on link number two here [  ], what do you see? Please everyone, support questionable numbers in article with extensive quotes from sources -- windyhead talk , 9 July UTC. So actually it's incorrect statement - because what agricultural season means here?
If we use a reporting period used until in Soviet economy-such period actually look like agricultural season i. But, if we looked more detailed at this period - July June - we actually can not proved trace any mass end even starvation reports from mid of July till beginning of January so it's explain actually why Holodomor So why we not stick to history?
Or, because, somewhere in Canada erected Holodomor monument which reflect Ukraine in borders — and it was assumed by tiny community as map of Ukraine starved from Holodomor - why we should also reflect this illiteracy in WP? Jo0doe talk , 7 July UTC. Hopefully a few days off has given everybody a chance to cool down. Basically, the lead should provide a synopsis of all of the information in the article. This is, admittedly, a paraphrasing of the guideline.
So, The article provides information about the Holodomor, which was, admittedly arguably, a genocide. Now, a thirty second google scholar search of "Holodomor" has come up with the UN resolution about the Holodomor, which states 7 to 10 million people were starved to death. Here [  ]; and here, in French [  ]. The article itself states that numbers up to 20 million are sometimes used. That statement is referenced. So are there any arguments against including the numbers in the lead?
As far as we deal with number of deaths - the science which deal with mortality called demography - so we must follow the WP policy and use demography reliable source. As for present time we've a highest possibly grade publication -INED which directly deal with demographic crisis in Ukraine in s. Unfortunately no other sources demographical sources publish information which related to Holodomor mass deaths from starvation and desease coused by malnutrition in Ukraine in Jo0doe talk , 12 July UTC. So you oppose to 4 time more then expected mortality in Holodomor?
Note word - demography - so if you can find a reliable demographists estimations - wellcome. How you plan to do so? It will no lead — but article itself. Jo0doe talk , 14 July UTC. Why not include the 7 million figure in the lead but properly label it as a number used by politicians rather than a number agreed upon by demographers? So, for example, in the first paragraph we could use:" Faustian talk , 13 July UTC.
Wouldn't it be better to delete the section Comprehending the famine? Al the information provided there seems to be in the rest of the article and the rest looks like soapboxing to me Mariah-Yulia talk , 13 July UTC. However may be better to remove it into similar quality article — Denial of the Holodomor — together with Elimination of Ukrainian cultural elite section — which information has no relation to Holodomor itself.
Can we limit the article to causes and Holodomor itself? The HOW arguement is covered but the WHY is only partially addressed in the sections that you are proposing to delete. Bobanni talk , 15 July UTC. Outdent Hello, I think the question here is what is this section trying to accomplish? Does this article really need four references stating that the Holodomor was the worst natural catastrophe to happen to Ukraine in the 20th century?
Reference number 5 just mentions the Holodomor in passing, in the second paragraph of the second column in a two page article. These two points hardly represent the "demographers' estimate", or at least any verifiable source. Reference number 6 comes up as unreadable, and the only numbers there are and