This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
1907 Tiflis bank robbery article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1907 Tiflis bank robbery is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 26, 2012, and on June 26, 2019. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
I saw your talk page comment at Wehwalt (he's my mentor).
At the bottom of the lede, I would take away the comment "with a statue to that bank robber turned revolutionary leader, and also be the site of a monument to and the grave of the head conspirator, Kamo." and change it to "with a statue of Lenin, as well as a monument and grave for head conspirator, Komo."
In terms of just facts and writing, I wonder are the statues together? Next to the grave? When was it named Lenin square, when were the statues (and grave) put there?
The page as is, tells a story. You accomplish your purpose, better by being dispassionate. It's damning enough as is. Also, the kind of parenthetical harumph you had at the end of the lede is just bad writing as it is repetition.
TCO ( talk) 18:57, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
Good point. I won't nit at it then. ;)
It is a cool story and a lot of good info. Reading about bank robberies is kind of fun. ;)
TCO ( talk) 19:14, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
A couple of points.
The (beautiful!) image of Tblisi in the 1910s is going to need evidence it was published pre 1917.
You simply cannot have 40-odd refs to a 16-page block of text. It's going to have to be broken down by page number.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 19:22, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
My first inclination is to do something about the currency markers. I will check the MOS, but I can't believe that wikilinking US dollars is needed, or that both the symbol and the words should be used. Sorry, that this is a nit. It's just my personal style is to flit from small to large issues, and that I find from messing around with small stuff, it at least gets me into the text. TCO ( talk) 19:42, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
I removed the currency conversion section and just relied upon a books estimate of today's US Dollars. Otherwise I thought it was original research. Remember ( talk) 12:57, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Are there any other editors that work in this area (e.g., old Soviet History, bank robberies) that you all think I should get involved in this article before it goes live? I just want to make sure that this the best article it can be. Any thoughts on anyone who could help out in that effort would be most appreciated. Remember ( talk) 20:04, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
I like day month year, since it's easier to read: 27 November 2010. The two numbers are separated by a word.
You could ask for help at military history also. Personally, I would hate to have a bunch of people messing with "my" article! ;)
TCO ( talk) 21:01, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
It seems like a lot of the detail comes from one book. My first concern looking at the article was to wonder if it was some obscure Georgian-Russian conspiracy theory. When I saw the worldwide coverage, I knew different, but just telling you initial reaction.
A. Suggest adding a few sources at least to the intial reporting of the bombing themselves, like NYT, or even just some general biographies of Stalin (or histories of Bolshevism), that at least refer to the robbery and Stalin's role, with a couple sentences. Obviously the bulk of the detial will need to come from that source, you have, but would just be better to make people feel that the event itself occurred. Also, I'm interested if the Bolshevik role is generally accepted or not, was accepted at the time, or at least alleged, etc.
B. Not sure how to do this in the "wiki sense", but encourage you to take a look at that book and evaluate its quality (is it by a journalist or an academic, does it come across as accurate in other areas, etc.) TCO ( talk) 21:31, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
An infobox would be nice. There is a news event infobox that I find very useful under cercumstances like this.
Thank you so much for your comments and your time. I greatly appreciate your help in improving this article and I think you both provided excellent comments, recommendations, and thoughts. Any further input you could provide would be most appreciated, but I would understand if you want to move on to your own interests. I sincerly just want to make this an accurate, reliable, and well-written article on an event that I find fascinating (and under-reported) so any help you provide to further that goal is most appreciated. I will try to work through all of your comments quickly. Unfortunately real life responsiblities keep interceding in my wiki hobby so it may take awhile, but I promise I will get it done. Let me know if you have any further comments, suggestions, or questions regarding this article. Remember ( talk) 16:48, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
The note regarding Stalin is fine. If I'm not picky, someone else will be, there are a lot of smart people on Wikipedia and it helps to think in advance.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 13:59, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Nicolaevsky's essay On the history of the Bolshevist Center (mentioned above) contains a number of important facts. Some of these complement what is currently in the article, and some contradict them. I do not want to start editing the article straight away, because if you are editing certain sections at the same time, it will be a mess. Furthermore, I do not know the tone and strength of the evidence presented by other sources. I will simply present interesting and important facts and findings from Nicolaevsky here, and you can pick and choose what you find useful. Some of these are trivial and well known (but not yet mentioned in the article). Some are well researched by Nicolaevsky, mostly based on primary sources. Some are still a bit merky.
Sounds fascinating. I'm continuing to monitor, once things have settled down a bit, I'll do another run through. Darn, what I wouldn't give for unfettered access to jstor ... best way to send stuff is for Remember to use the email function to send BorisG one, wiki will not support attachments, but in the reply from BorisG to Remember, you can send an attachment.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 10:36, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
A lot of (secondary) sources cite the memoirs of Krupskaya (Lenin's wife and secretary of the Bolshevist center). I have located an English translation here. There are brief accounts of Kamo's visit to Finland in 1907 (with the money) and later in Paris (after his escape from prison). Tiflis expropriation is mentioned without much fuss. Please have a look. It may be a primary source (kind of) but given that so many rumours exist about this event, this authentic information is valuable, I think.
Since this article is coming along well, I thought I would solicit ideas for the DYK. Insert suggestions below. Remember ( talk) 12:34, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Slightly revised suggestion below.
Or
This looks like the finalist based on our discussion. Feel free to revise if you think it could be worded a better way. Remember ( talk) 18:11, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
As for the number of casualties. 40 dead from the attack is mentioned here [4] and it is discussed explicitly in Young Stalin by Sebag-Montefiore on 14. I think that this is good enough to support the assertion that forty people were killed but because the original official reports were much lower I can understand that this would be in dispute. Problem is, I don't know how to resolve this dispute and I'm not sure how to discuss it in the DYK. Thoughts? Remember ( talk) 18:20, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Bachua's motivation in inviting David into the tavern puzzles me. Was it to keep him relatively safe from harm? It could use a brief explanation.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 02:04, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
I have finished my review of the latest version. I have other concerns that I will post here, but we can do all of that in a regular fashion. Please review my changes (not only in boldface sections) and remove the bold fonts. Cheers. - BorisG ( talk) 02:52, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
I have some issues with trying to figure out the exact dollar amount. Check out my analysis below and let me know what you think.
The first question I tried to figure out is how much was 250,000 rubles worth in dollars in 1907?
I did calculations to try to determine what both $125,000 and $175,000 from 1907 is worth in 2009 dollars. And I got the following answers from Measuring Worth
Meanwhile, I have support from two separate sources that the amount stolen was equal to roughly $3.4 Million. See [6] and Young Stalin by Sebag-Montefiore on p. 14.
Maybe the best thing to do is say "worth approximately $3 Million" and then provide a note explaining the issue. What are your thoughts? Do you have any other ideas for attacking the problem? Remember ( talk) 16:21, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
I agree. I think I will just stick to the $3.4 Million cited in Young Stalin for the text of the article and say "over 3 Million" for the DYK just to be on the safe side. Remember ( talk) 18:05, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
The thing was impressive to start with. What a cool topic. People will love this. TCO ( talk) 23:17, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Quick question: You inserted the following into the draft article "Soonafter, Lenin's associates burned all the 500 Ruble notes remaining in their possession." and you cited "'Krupskaya - Years of Reaction - Geneva - 1908" but I could not find any mention of the individuals burning the notes in Krupskaya in this section. Is that what you were citing he book for or was it for another proposition? Can you point to where she says that they were planning to burn the notes? Remember ( talk) 17:37, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
I think Brackman's book is not a serious source. I think it is ok to use it but we need to mention alternative claims. Brackman presents highly controlversial and disputed claims as facts. He also describes details that cannot possibly be known (like emotions of various people etc). He does not present any critical analysis of sources and evidence. This is more of a fictionalised biography than a serious historial study. Obviously, for WP, it is a reliable source, and thus can be used but need to be used with caution, and alternative views presented. Especially when talking about Stalin's involvement with Okrana (the crux of his book). I would like to present these when I have time. But this can be done in the mainspace. Good work! Cheers. - BorisG ( talk) 11:18, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
I have corrected some sentences that I found awkward, but you decided to change some back, and I do not want to be persistent. Instead I will be reporting some problems here:
I acttually don't like the word occurred because this sort of implies something accidental rather than planned. But maybe that's too subtle a point. Or perhaps:
We really don't need to mention Bolsheviks here, because the context is clear. In fact, that would be more adequate, because at the time very few people knew Bolsheviks were involved. I actually think this sentence is not needed at all, but the current version is particularly awkward. - BorisG ( talk) 16:49, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
I've nominated it as a good article. Excellent work.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:27, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
The article says: "Despite the 5th Congress's prohibition on separate committees and expropriations, Bolsheviks had already formed their own governing body, the Bolshevik Center...". I think this is confusing. Nicolaevsky says that although in some form the Centre existed before the 5th congress, it did not have this formal name and was not regarded as an official (if secret) governing body. He further says that nothing is known about it, not even who were members and how many. The Bolshevik Center in the more official sense was formed at a sitting of the Bolshevik fraction during the 5th congress. This is clear from a number of sources. - BorisG ( talk) 03:35, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
The following questions are not immediately clear after reading this:
I encourage everyone to read Trotsky's entire account here. He gives the most detailed background, a very detailed analysis of Stalin's role, and also consequencies. BorisG ( talk) 09:33, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Would anyone object if I were to reformat the references slightly? This is just an opinion, but it seems like it might be better if the "General" section was under the heading "bibliography". Also, what happened with the DYK nomination for this? I didn't see it in the queue, so I guess it wasn't accepted, which seems a shame to me.- RHM22 ( talk) 21:21, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Citations are just, if not more, appropriate in Lede than the body of an article, especially in the presence of contentious character assassination. The specifics of these distancing acts, and that they apply to Lenin as well as Stalin will settle the matter. Substantiation that Lenin was involved in the execution as well as concurring in the planning is also called for. Lycurgus ( talk) 18:01, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Arctic Night 13:01, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I am going to review this article for GA status. I will make some general comments here and provide an adjudication at the end. Arctic Night 13:01, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Lead - All comments have been addressed
Background - All comments have been addressed
Preparation- All comments have been addressed
Security response and investigation- All comments have been addressed
Captures and trials of Kamo- All comments have been addressed
Cashing the marked notes- All comments have been addressed
Referencing- All comments have been addressed
General comments- All comments have been addressed This is a good article, although it needs a little bit of work before it can progress to Good Article status. I am putting this article on hold for seven days, after which this article will be failed. Editors have until February 3, 2011 to fix all of the issues I have raised here. If the article has not been fixed by then, the article will be failed, and editors will need to submit the article through the Good Article nomination process again once they feel that the article is ready. Arctic Night 16:01, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
I think I have gone through and revised everything mentioned above. The only thing that I have not done is remove the over-referencing. I would like to discuss what the rule is before I undertake this task because I don't want to remove a bunch of citation that should be there. Remember ( talk) 13:03, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
Ok. Revised the first two sections. Will try to do the other sections when I can. Let me know if the referencing of the first two sections now works for you. Remember ( talk) 13:09, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
According to Checklinks], source #32 is coming up as a 404. The source listed as "Kamo-the Legendary Old Bolshevik of the Caucasus" is coming up as "Journal subscription required". These should be changed if possible. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 19:54, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
What does everyone think of moving this page to "Tiflis bank robbery"? I checked, and this was the only Tiflis bank robbery I could find any information on. It's no big deal, just a thought.- RHM22 ( talk) 00:18, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Inflation figures are sourced to Simon Sebag Montefiore (2008). using the Weidenfeld & Nicholson London edition at page 10, it reads, "The State Bank itself was unsure if it had lost 250,000 roubles or 341,000, or somewhere between the two figures – but it was certainly an impressive sum worth about £1.7 million (US$3.4 million) in today’s money though its effective buying power was much higher."
I posit that as Montefiore is neither an economist, nor an economic historian, he is not reliable for this claim of time inflated values. Particularly given the internal text features, that he is unable to distinguish worth from effective buying power. His lack of expertise for this claim means we ought to remove it. Opinions? Fifelfoo ( talk) 09:37, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes, and he probably used CPI inflation, which vastly underestimates the economic impact. Inflating capital figures (such as 250,000 roubles) using CPI is bad. Lets look up thread at the calculations for a moment? 1) They converted value from Imperial Russia into value in the Continental US 2) They inflated value in terms of change in the US consumer economy 3) The authors have rather obviously used a GDP_deflator measure due to the remarkable synchronicity of figures, and have obviously used this method.
Except roubles didn't inflate in terms of the US economy's real and nominal GDP. And capital figures don't inflate in terms of prices of goods at market, they inflate in terms of (depending on the labour composition), skilled worker wages (production worker above), nominal GDP per capita, or share of economic GDP.
This isn't a small issue, because the value of 250,000 roubles, as 250,000 roubles was never an expression of repeated consumer purchase of a breadbasket model, nor was it the price of goods at market flattened against time series as with a GDP deflator, but was the theft of government capital. And this capital certainly wasn't tied to US time series productivity. Fifelfoo ( talk) 10:31, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
I agree with BorisG that we should keep the estimate because it is useful to the reader, is substantiated by the sources, and is just an estimate (so it does not imply that it is precise). I would, however, be open to stating in the lead that the amount was only approximately 3.4 million so that the text would read "taking about 341,000 rubles (approximately worth US $3.4 million in 2008)." Remember ( talk) 12:59, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
This page says that Kamo was released during the October Revolution but the page about Kamo says he was released during the February Revolution. Kevinlrosa ( talk) 17:00, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Remember, why did you remove sourced information? - BorisG ( talk) 15:16, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
I've left some comments at the peer review here. Dropping a note off here as I was a bit late and it might be missed otherwise. Carcharoth ( talk) 01:06, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
This is a fairly minor quibble, but the article uses the term " stagecoach" throughout. My understanding is that a "stagecoach" usually means a large coach which runs a particular long-distance route on a regular schedule; the vehicle here was indeed a large closed coach, but it was doing a short and presumably special journey from the post office to the bank. As a result, calling it a stagecoach is a bit confusing for the reader.
The better term might be the generic " coach", but this isn't my speciality and I'm open to correction! Do the sources use any particular term? Shimgray | talk | 18:45, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
I see "per cent" in the Background section of the article. Should this be "percent" or is this spelling/usage also correct? -- Another Believer ( Talk) 16:15, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
WP:NOTFORUM |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
thank you all for a very interesting and well written wikipedia article. I have read Montefiore's book and was amazed by this robbery. Maybe this is the wrong forum for these questions, but you all seem to know so much about the time that it makes sense to me. - why was the money going from the post office to the bank? Was a post office then also kind of a bank? - how did Stalin travel around so much in 1907 (tiflis-berlin-tiflis-london)? - why did you remove the student girls from the robbery in the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.222.222.9 ( talk) 13:21, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for those answers! Well, I liked the part about the girls. Oh, I have another question if you don't mind: the amount of the robbery and the body count - didn't those change? And when did the official internal Okhrana number go public? Sorry, but it is like a historical mystery! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.222.222.9 ( talk) 09:05, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
|
This is a well written and carefully researched article. However the various references to "security forces" do strike an anachronistic note - this a modern concept and not one that would have been understood during the early 1900s, in Russia or elsewhere. Were they police, cossacks, soldiers, private detectives, bank employees or what? Could this be clarified? Otherwise good work! Buistr ( talk) 00:37, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
The article says "number of top-level Bolsheviks" and cite Stalin, but I am pretty sure that Stalin was nothing like a top-level Bolshevik by that time. -Ilhador- ( talk) 19:32, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Just to clarify, the article states that the robbery was organized by a "number of top-level Bolsheviks" that included "Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin, Maxim Litvinov, Leonid Krasin, and Alexander Bogdanov." So there is no doubt that top-level Bolsheviks were involved. Whether Stalin was high enough to be considered a "top-level bolshevik" at the time of the preparation of the robbery is debatable, but I think it is worth including him since he is a very well-known figure and (I believe) was a prominent Bolshevik in the Caucuses at the time. Remember, he already had a reputation as the "Centre's principal financier." Remember ( talk) 12:00, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
Could someone add some citations for the later career of Bogdanov. All of it looks true (so I don't want to remove it) but it needs citations. Remember ( talk) 13:23, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
i think the link to Anarchism in the background subsection "(such as *anarchists* and Socialist Revolutionaries)" should instead link to Anarchism in Russia . 109.246.48.120 ( talk) 02:20, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
The article says that the robbery yielded "341,000 rubles, worth around 3.4 million US dollars as of 2008", whereas the infobox says "241,000 rubles (equivalent to US$341,050 in 2023)". Besides the fact that the two ruble figures do not coincide (by a factor of 1.4), the first estimate puts the conversion rate from USD (2008) to RUB (1907) at about 10 to 1, whereas the second puts the conversion rate from USD (2023) to RUB (1907) at about 1.4 to 1, which seems very odd. Turgidson ( talk) 10:03, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
1907 Tiflis bank robbery article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1907 Tiflis bank robbery is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 26, 2012, and on June 26, 2019. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
I saw your talk page comment at Wehwalt (he's my mentor).
At the bottom of the lede, I would take away the comment "with a statue to that bank robber turned revolutionary leader, and also be the site of a monument to and the grave of the head conspirator, Kamo." and change it to "with a statue of Lenin, as well as a monument and grave for head conspirator, Komo."
In terms of just facts and writing, I wonder are the statues together? Next to the grave? When was it named Lenin square, when were the statues (and grave) put there?
The page as is, tells a story. You accomplish your purpose, better by being dispassionate. It's damning enough as is. Also, the kind of parenthetical harumph you had at the end of the lede is just bad writing as it is repetition.
TCO ( talk) 18:57, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
Good point. I won't nit at it then. ;)
It is a cool story and a lot of good info. Reading about bank robberies is kind of fun. ;)
TCO ( talk) 19:14, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
A couple of points.
The (beautiful!) image of Tblisi in the 1910s is going to need evidence it was published pre 1917.
You simply cannot have 40-odd refs to a 16-page block of text. It's going to have to be broken down by page number.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 19:22, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
My first inclination is to do something about the currency markers. I will check the MOS, but I can't believe that wikilinking US dollars is needed, or that both the symbol and the words should be used. Sorry, that this is a nit. It's just my personal style is to flit from small to large issues, and that I find from messing around with small stuff, it at least gets me into the text. TCO ( talk) 19:42, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
I removed the currency conversion section and just relied upon a books estimate of today's US Dollars. Otherwise I thought it was original research. Remember ( talk) 12:57, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Are there any other editors that work in this area (e.g., old Soviet History, bank robberies) that you all think I should get involved in this article before it goes live? I just want to make sure that this the best article it can be. Any thoughts on anyone who could help out in that effort would be most appreciated. Remember ( talk) 20:04, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
I like day month year, since it's easier to read: 27 November 2010. The two numbers are separated by a word.
You could ask for help at military history also. Personally, I would hate to have a bunch of people messing with "my" article! ;)
TCO ( talk) 21:01, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
It seems like a lot of the detail comes from one book. My first concern looking at the article was to wonder if it was some obscure Georgian-Russian conspiracy theory. When I saw the worldwide coverage, I knew different, but just telling you initial reaction.
A. Suggest adding a few sources at least to the intial reporting of the bombing themselves, like NYT, or even just some general biographies of Stalin (or histories of Bolshevism), that at least refer to the robbery and Stalin's role, with a couple sentences. Obviously the bulk of the detial will need to come from that source, you have, but would just be better to make people feel that the event itself occurred. Also, I'm interested if the Bolshevik role is generally accepted or not, was accepted at the time, or at least alleged, etc.
B. Not sure how to do this in the "wiki sense", but encourage you to take a look at that book and evaluate its quality (is it by a journalist or an academic, does it come across as accurate in other areas, etc.) TCO ( talk) 21:31, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
An infobox would be nice. There is a news event infobox that I find very useful under cercumstances like this.
Thank you so much for your comments and your time. I greatly appreciate your help in improving this article and I think you both provided excellent comments, recommendations, and thoughts. Any further input you could provide would be most appreciated, but I would understand if you want to move on to your own interests. I sincerly just want to make this an accurate, reliable, and well-written article on an event that I find fascinating (and under-reported) so any help you provide to further that goal is most appreciated. I will try to work through all of your comments quickly. Unfortunately real life responsiblities keep interceding in my wiki hobby so it may take awhile, but I promise I will get it done. Let me know if you have any further comments, suggestions, or questions regarding this article. Remember ( talk) 16:48, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
The note regarding Stalin is fine. If I'm not picky, someone else will be, there are a lot of smart people on Wikipedia and it helps to think in advance.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 13:59, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Nicolaevsky's essay On the history of the Bolshevist Center (mentioned above) contains a number of important facts. Some of these complement what is currently in the article, and some contradict them. I do not want to start editing the article straight away, because if you are editing certain sections at the same time, it will be a mess. Furthermore, I do not know the tone and strength of the evidence presented by other sources. I will simply present interesting and important facts and findings from Nicolaevsky here, and you can pick and choose what you find useful. Some of these are trivial and well known (but not yet mentioned in the article). Some are well researched by Nicolaevsky, mostly based on primary sources. Some are still a bit merky.
Sounds fascinating. I'm continuing to monitor, once things have settled down a bit, I'll do another run through. Darn, what I wouldn't give for unfettered access to jstor ... best way to send stuff is for Remember to use the email function to send BorisG one, wiki will not support attachments, but in the reply from BorisG to Remember, you can send an attachment.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 10:36, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
A lot of (secondary) sources cite the memoirs of Krupskaya (Lenin's wife and secretary of the Bolshevist center). I have located an English translation here. There are brief accounts of Kamo's visit to Finland in 1907 (with the money) and later in Paris (after his escape from prison). Tiflis expropriation is mentioned without much fuss. Please have a look. It may be a primary source (kind of) but given that so many rumours exist about this event, this authentic information is valuable, I think.
Since this article is coming along well, I thought I would solicit ideas for the DYK. Insert suggestions below. Remember ( talk) 12:34, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Slightly revised suggestion below.
Or
This looks like the finalist based on our discussion. Feel free to revise if you think it could be worded a better way. Remember ( talk) 18:11, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
As for the number of casualties. 40 dead from the attack is mentioned here [4] and it is discussed explicitly in Young Stalin by Sebag-Montefiore on 14. I think that this is good enough to support the assertion that forty people were killed but because the original official reports were much lower I can understand that this would be in dispute. Problem is, I don't know how to resolve this dispute and I'm not sure how to discuss it in the DYK. Thoughts? Remember ( talk) 18:20, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Bachua's motivation in inviting David into the tavern puzzles me. Was it to keep him relatively safe from harm? It could use a brief explanation.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 02:04, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
I have finished my review of the latest version. I have other concerns that I will post here, but we can do all of that in a regular fashion. Please review my changes (not only in boldface sections) and remove the bold fonts. Cheers. - BorisG ( talk) 02:52, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
I have some issues with trying to figure out the exact dollar amount. Check out my analysis below and let me know what you think.
The first question I tried to figure out is how much was 250,000 rubles worth in dollars in 1907?
I did calculations to try to determine what both $125,000 and $175,000 from 1907 is worth in 2009 dollars. And I got the following answers from Measuring Worth
Meanwhile, I have support from two separate sources that the amount stolen was equal to roughly $3.4 Million. See [6] and Young Stalin by Sebag-Montefiore on p. 14.
Maybe the best thing to do is say "worth approximately $3 Million" and then provide a note explaining the issue. What are your thoughts? Do you have any other ideas for attacking the problem? Remember ( talk) 16:21, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
I agree. I think I will just stick to the $3.4 Million cited in Young Stalin for the text of the article and say "over 3 Million" for the DYK just to be on the safe side. Remember ( talk) 18:05, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
The thing was impressive to start with. What a cool topic. People will love this. TCO ( talk) 23:17, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Quick question: You inserted the following into the draft article "Soonafter, Lenin's associates burned all the 500 Ruble notes remaining in their possession." and you cited "'Krupskaya - Years of Reaction - Geneva - 1908" but I could not find any mention of the individuals burning the notes in Krupskaya in this section. Is that what you were citing he book for or was it for another proposition? Can you point to where she says that they were planning to burn the notes? Remember ( talk) 17:37, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
I think Brackman's book is not a serious source. I think it is ok to use it but we need to mention alternative claims. Brackman presents highly controlversial and disputed claims as facts. He also describes details that cannot possibly be known (like emotions of various people etc). He does not present any critical analysis of sources and evidence. This is more of a fictionalised biography than a serious historial study. Obviously, for WP, it is a reliable source, and thus can be used but need to be used with caution, and alternative views presented. Especially when talking about Stalin's involvement with Okrana (the crux of his book). I would like to present these when I have time. But this can be done in the mainspace. Good work! Cheers. - BorisG ( talk) 11:18, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
I have corrected some sentences that I found awkward, but you decided to change some back, and I do not want to be persistent. Instead I will be reporting some problems here:
I acttually don't like the word occurred because this sort of implies something accidental rather than planned. But maybe that's too subtle a point. Or perhaps:
We really don't need to mention Bolsheviks here, because the context is clear. In fact, that would be more adequate, because at the time very few people knew Bolsheviks were involved. I actually think this sentence is not needed at all, but the current version is particularly awkward. - BorisG ( talk) 16:49, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
I've nominated it as a good article. Excellent work.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:27, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
The article says: "Despite the 5th Congress's prohibition on separate committees and expropriations, Bolsheviks had already formed their own governing body, the Bolshevik Center...". I think this is confusing. Nicolaevsky says that although in some form the Centre existed before the 5th congress, it did not have this formal name and was not regarded as an official (if secret) governing body. He further says that nothing is known about it, not even who were members and how many. The Bolshevik Center in the more official sense was formed at a sitting of the Bolshevik fraction during the 5th congress. This is clear from a number of sources. - BorisG ( talk) 03:35, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
The following questions are not immediately clear after reading this:
I encourage everyone to read Trotsky's entire account here. He gives the most detailed background, a very detailed analysis of Stalin's role, and also consequencies. BorisG ( talk) 09:33, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Would anyone object if I were to reformat the references slightly? This is just an opinion, but it seems like it might be better if the "General" section was under the heading "bibliography". Also, what happened with the DYK nomination for this? I didn't see it in the queue, so I guess it wasn't accepted, which seems a shame to me.- RHM22 ( talk) 21:21, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Citations are just, if not more, appropriate in Lede than the body of an article, especially in the presence of contentious character assassination. The specifics of these distancing acts, and that they apply to Lenin as well as Stalin will settle the matter. Substantiation that Lenin was involved in the execution as well as concurring in the planning is also called for. Lycurgus ( talk) 18:01, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Arctic Night 13:01, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I am going to review this article for GA status. I will make some general comments here and provide an adjudication at the end. Arctic Night 13:01, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Lead - All comments have been addressed
Background - All comments have been addressed
Preparation- All comments have been addressed
Security response and investigation- All comments have been addressed
Captures and trials of Kamo- All comments have been addressed
Cashing the marked notes- All comments have been addressed
Referencing- All comments have been addressed
General comments- All comments have been addressed This is a good article, although it needs a little bit of work before it can progress to Good Article status. I am putting this article on hold for seven days, after which this article will be failed. Editors have until February 3, 2011 to fix all of the issues I have raised here. If the article has not been fixed by then, the article will be failed, and editors will need to submit the article through the Good Article nomination process again once they feel that the article is ready. Arctic Night 16:01, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
I think I have gone through and revised everything mentioned above. The only thing that I have not done is remove the over-referencing. I would like to discuss what the rule is before I undertake this task because I don't want to remove a bunch of citation that should be there. Remember ( talk) 13:03, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
Ok. Revised the first two sections. Will try to do the other sections when I can. Let me know if the referencing of the first two sections now works for you. Remember ( talk) 13:09, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
According to Checklinks], source #32 is coming up as a 404. The source listed as "Kamo-the Legendary Old Bolshevik of the Caucasus" is coming up as "Journal subscription required". These should be changed if possible. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 19:54, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
What does everyone think of moving this page to "Tiflis bank robbery"? I checked, and this was the only Tiflis bank robbery I could find any information on. It's no big deal, just a thought.- RHM22 ( talk) 00:18, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Inflation figures are sourced to Simon Sebag Montefiore (2008). using the Weidenfeld & Nicholson London edition at page 10, it reads, "The State Bank itself was unsure if it had lost 250,000 roubles or 341,000, or somewhere between the two figures – but it was certainly an impressive sum worth about £1.7 million (US$3.4 million) in today’s money though its effective buying power was much higher."
I posit that as Montefiore is neither an economist, nor an economic historian, he is not reliable for this claim of time inflated values. Particularly given the internal text features, that he is unable to distinguish worth from effective buying power. His lack of expertise for this claim means we ought to remove it. Opinions? Fifelfoo ( talk) 09:37, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes, and he probably used CPI inflation, which vastly underestimates the economic impact. Inflating capital figures (such as 250,000 roubles) using CPI is bad. Lets look up thread at the calculations for a moment? 1) They converted value from Imperial Russia into value in the Continental US 2) They inflated value in terms of change in the US consumer economy 3) The authors have rather obviously used a GDP_deflator measure due to the remarkable synchronicity of figures, and have obviously used this method.
Except roubles didn't inflate in terms of the US economy's real and nominal GDP. And capital figures don't inflate in terms of prices of goods at market, they inflate in terms of (depending on the labour composition), skilled worker wages (production worker above), nominal GDP per capita, or share of economic GDP.
This isn't a small issue, because the value of 250,000 roubles, as 250,000 roubles was never an expression of repeated consumer purchase of a breadbasket model, nor was it the price of goods at market flattened against time series as with a GDP deflator, but was the theft of government capital. And this capital certainly wasn't tied to US time series productivity. Fifelfoo ( talk) 10:31, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
I agree with BorisG that we should keep the estimate because it is useful to the reader, is substantiated by the sources, and is just an estimate (so it does not imply that it is precise). I would, however, be open to stating in the lead that the amount was only approximately 3.4 million so that the text would read "taking about 341,000 rubles (approximately worth US $3.4 million in 2008)." Remember ( talk) 12:59, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
This page says that Kamo was released during the October Revolution but the page about Kamo says he was released during the February Revolution. Kevinlrosa ( talk) 17:00, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Remember, why did you remove sourced information? - BorisG ( talk) 15:16, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
I've left some comments at the peer review here. Dropping a note off here as I was a bit late and it might be missed otherwise. Carcharoth ( talk) 01:06, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
This is a fairly minor quibble, but the article uses the term " stagecoach" throughout. My understanding is that a "stagecoach" usually means a large coach which runs a particular long-distance route on a regular schedule; the vehicle here was indeed a large closed coach, but it was doing a short and presumably special journey from the post office to the bank. As a result, calling it a stagecoach is a bit confusing for the reader.
The better term might be the generic " coach", but this isn't my speciality and I'm open to correction! Do the sources use any particular term? Shimgray | talk | 18:45, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
I see "per cent" in the Background section of the article. Should this be "percent" or is this spelling/usage also correct? -- Another Believer ( Talk) 16:15, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
WP:NOTFORUM |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
thank you all for a very interesting and well written wikipedia article. I have read Montefiore's book and was amazed by this robbery. Maybe this is the wrong forum for these questions, but you all seem to know so much about the time that it makes sense to me. - why was the money going from the post office to the bank? Was a post office then also kind of a bank? - how did Stalin travel around so much in 1907 (tiflis-berlin-tiflis-london)? - why did you remove the student girls from the robbery in the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.222.222.9 ( talk) 13:21, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for those answers! Well, I liked the part about the girls. Oh, I have another question if you don't mind: the amount of the robbery and the body count - didn't those change? And when did the official internal Okhrana number go public? Sorry, but it is like a historical mystery! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.222.222.9 ( talk) 09:05, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
|
This is a well written and carefully researched article. However the various references to "security forces" do strike an anachronistic note - this a modern concept and not one that would have been understood during the early 1900s, in Russia or elsewhere. Were they police, cossacks, soldiers, private detectives, bank employees or what? Could this be clarified? Otherwise good work! Buistr ( talk) 00:37, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
The article says "number of top-level Bolsheviks" and cite Stalin, but I am pretty sure that Stalin was nothing like a top-level Bolshevik by that time. -Ilhador- ( talk) 19:32, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Just to clarify, the article states that the robbery was organized by a "number of top-level Bolsheviks" that included "Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin, Maxim Litvinov, Leonid Krasin, and Alexander Bogdanov." So there is no doubt that top-level Bolsheviks were involved. Whether Stalin was high enough to be considered a "top-level bolshevik" at the time of the preparation of the robbery is debatable, but I think it is worth including him since he is a very well-known figure and (I believe) was a prominent Bolshevik in the Caucuses at the time. Remember, he already had a reputation as the "Centre's principal financier." Remember ( talk) 12:00, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
Could someone add some citations for the later career of Bogdanov. All of it looks true (so I don't want to remove it) but it needs citations. Remember ( talk) 13:23, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
i think the link to Anarchism in the background subsection "(such as *anarchists* and Socialist Revolutionaries)" should instead link to Anarchism in Russia . 109.246.48.120 ( talk) 02:20, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
The article says that the robbery yielded "341,000 rubles, worth around 3.4 million US dollars as of 2008", whereas the infobox says "241,000 rubles (equivalent to US$341,050 in 2023)". Besides the fact that the two ruble figures do not coincide (by a factor of 1.4), the first estimate puts the conversion rate from USD (2008) to RUB (1907) at about 10 to 1, whereas the second puts the conversion rate from USD (2023) to RUB (1907) at about 1.4 to 1, which seems very odd. Turgidson ( talk) 10:03, 26 June 2024 (UTC)