This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
In Russia, his publications about its totalitarianism are important enough to be studied and listed in full. Similar troubles may await the US.--
Psychiatrick (
talk)
07:38, 17 December 2015 (UTC)reply
It isn't enough that his works are "important enough to be studied and listed in full". All that matters is if they "[have] been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources" (
WP:LISTN). Show us some sources that discuss his works as a whole.
Finnusertop (
talk |
guestbook |
contribs)
00:04, 18 December 2015 (UTC)reply
A critical review of Shlapentokh's early writings (published up to 1999) as a whole is contained in Markwick, Roger (December 1999). "What kind of state is the Russian state if there is one?". Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics. 15 (4): 111–130.
doi:
10.1080/13523279908415422. Critical reviews of Shlapentokh's more recent writings are contained in various sources. --
Psychiatrick (
talk)
03:53, 18 December 2015 (UTC)reply
You are welcome to read and work Markwick’s article into the lead. I read the article long ago and no longer have it at hand and access to it. --
Psychiatrick (
talk)
12:06, 18 December 2015 (UTC)reply
I do not think there is enough. Every book published has critical responses, and there is no indication that the book mentioned is devoted primarily to him. I'm going to merge, as usual. ``
talk
The material on this page is mostly uncited; it needs specific citations. The detail of his theories must vbe supported not just ffrom his own work, but in comments from 3rd party reliable sources. DGG (
talk )
05:52, 17 December 2015 (UTC)reply