This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography 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 Soviet Union Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) 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.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Georgia (country) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Georgia (country), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Georgia and Georgians 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.Georgia (country)Wikipedia:WikiProject Georgia (country)Template:WikiProject Georgia (country)Georgia (country) ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Russia: History Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the history of Russia task force. Socialism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism 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.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Index Archive 1

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 30 days are automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 4.

@Midnightblueowl: This is from Khlevniuk (2015): "According to his official Soviet biography, Stalin was born in 1879. In fact Ioseb Jughashvili (his birth name) was born one year earlier. Stalin knew, of course, when and where he was born: in the small Georgian town of Gori, in a far corner of the vast Russian Empire. A Gori church register (part of Stalin’s personal archive) provides the exact date: 6 December 1878. This date can also be found in other documents, such as his graduation certificate from the Gori Theological School. In a form filled out in 1920, his year of birth is again given as 1878. But the year 1879 began to appear in paperwork completed by his various helpers, and that date was used in all encyclopedias and reference materials. After he had consolidated power, a grand celebration was held in honor of his fiftieth birthday on 21 December 1929. There was confusion over not only the year of his birth, but also the day, given as 9 December (Old Style) instead of 6 December. This inaccuracy came to the attention of historians only in 1990. The reason for it has yet to be determined. One thing is clear: in the 1920s, Stalin decided to become one year younger. And he did."

According to the source cited (Service 2004), Lidia was 14 years old at the time of the relationship, which was not under the age of consent in Tsarist Russia. Since there is therefore nothing notable about the age, it has no place in a Wiki page. Moreover, I've changed the wording from "affair", since neither of the parties were in any kind of relationship (Stalin was a widower at the time and was irrevocably separated from his fiancee over 4 years prior owing to deportation). — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndersLeo (talk • contribs) 14:54, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why would it only be notable (or in this case relevant) if it were below the age of consent? The age adds context and information. The article, for contrast, notes such minor details as the first name, surname and nickname that Stalin gave a pet dog he had for a few years. I think the age of a woman he impregnated (and who would later give birth to one of his children) is relevant enough to make it into the article. --AntediluvianBlue (talk) 12:36, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Correct the age then, the official Russian birthrecord for Alexander is 1917 LenLen499833 (talk) 14:15, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

According to the official Russian birthrecord Davydov was born 1917 LenLen499833 (talk) 14:17, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The official records show that Alexander Davydov was born in 1917

https://pamyat-naroda.ru/heroes/person-hero122901790/

First citation is Suny, who cites Montefiore's "Young Stalin"

Montefiore doesn't have any evidence either, so it's just citing a book without proof

Siberian times is also cited... a tabloid?

The test Burdonsky allegedly took was not handled by legally sanctioned means for a court, so it cannot be confirmed with near certainty

DNA test was done for a sleazy Maury-style tabloid talk show, it was not legally valid or convincing even by BioPapa's own testing standards

What evidence is there they had a child that died? LenLen499833 (talk) 14:13, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LenLen499833: So to summarize: You mass delete sourced content and dismiss the accounts of four Stalin biographers, namely Kotkin, Khlevniuk, Suny, and Montefiore based on your personal viewpoint, despite the fact that Kotkin literally mentions that the police involved itself in the events. You also dismiss DNA tests, again based on your view of the situation (BTW, the The Siberian Times does not appear to be a tabloid, though I'm no expert on Russian media). As far as I can see, you are not willing to consider any evidence in this matter as real proof of anything. I do not think that I can achieve a compromise or reason with you in this matter, and thus would like to ask for the opinions of other editors.
@Nikkimaria:@Midnightblueowl:@Shoshin000:@Tpbradbury:@WikiUser4020: Considering that you have made substantial edits to the Stalin articles in the recent past, may I ask for your opinions on the matter? Applodion (talk) 21:18, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's a big deletion. Much of it's undisputed so don't think that should have been deleted e.g.: "Stalin soon earned a reputation for self-centeredness among the locals when he simply seized the library of a deceased co-exile instead of sharing it in accordance to the "exiles' code".^[1] In the hamlet, Stalin, circa age 35, had a relationship with Lidia Pereprygina, then 13 or 14 years old, who subsequently fell pregnant.." self-centeredness, library, having a relationship with Lidia and getting pregnant aren't disputed; it's more whether the second child was his or not. Also the bit about the police is undisputed and "In his later remembrances of his exile period, he fondly recalled his dog of the time, but never mentioned Lidia" again that's undisputed. so undelete all those to start with. LenLen is saying one biographer, Suny, references another, which i can believe, but it's unclear why Kotkin is deemed unreliable. rather than deleting everything, i'd put everything in that has reliable sources: claims and counter-claim. @LenLen499833 you don't appear to have any reliable sources for you're counter-claim? Surely the fact the records show 1917 is evidence towards the claim? Ironically the picture of Davydov in the link above looks like Stalin! Tom B (talk) 09:20, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe i deleted too much, in that case feel free to add it back

I deleted the parts which claim Stalin had an affair with a child / impregnated her, there's no evidence for this & it should therefore be deleted

Correct, the claim that Stalin had a relationship with Lidia & that Stalin impregnated her aren't disputed, since there's no evidence for this claim, it's clear that it's not true

With "police" you probably mean Serov's statement that supposedly confirms what Montefiore claimes, but there is no actual reference to this document in the bibliography, nor an image of the document in question. The only direct quote from this source is: “J. V. Stalin started living together with her.”, which only confirms what we already knew, not that they had a relationship or that he impregnated her

Suny cites Montefiore & Kotkin cites no one, i can't add pictures here sadly, so you'll have to check yourself in Kotkins book, that's why he's "unreliable"

What record are you talking about? The official birthrecord of Davydov states he was born 06.11.1917, Stalin left in October 1916

I can provide sources for everything i said, feel free to ask & i will provide such LenLen499833 (talk) 12:40, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With "too much" i mean parts which aren't related to the claim that Stalin had an affair with Lidia, there is no problem in adding them back LenLen499833 (talk) 12:52, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I "mass deleted" false claims about Stalin having an affair with a child for which there is no evidence, yes. I read them, none of them show that Stalin impregnated or married a child.

Montefiore has no evidence at all (for Serov you can check my other comment), nothing proves Stalin consummated this relationship, only that Lydia's diaries mention Stalin's dancing & drinking

Suny says in his latest volume on Stalin (published well after that Siberian Times tabloid piece) that there's no way to prove they are his children and that it cannot be confirmed

I don't dismiss them on "my personal viewpoint", i checked their books & NOT A SINGLE ONE HAS ANY EVIDENCE, go & see yourself

Check Siberian Times Wikipedia also

Kotkin has no citation for his claim with Lidia, i checked when an user removed my changes & claimed Kotkin is a source for this claim, sadly i can't attach images here, you'll have to check youreslf

Yes, i dismiss the DNA test since the DNA test wasn't carried out according to court strictures, as is required for a test to be legally valid even by BioPapa's admission, then it isn't clear or convincingly valid test or verifiable according to any acceptable standard as such

Which police reports exactly? Can you show any such claims that don't trace to Serov & Khruschev's desperate attempts to discredit Stalin in the mid-late 1950s?

There quite literally isn't any evidence, it's not that "I am not willing to consider any evidence in this matter as real proof of anything"

There will be no "compromise", yes, since there is no reason this false information should not be deleted LenLen499833 (talk) 12:50, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LenLen499833: If you want to dispute so many reliable sources, you need a counter-source. You may regard the sources lacking, but -like it or not- Kotkin, Montefiore, etc. are treated as perfectly legitimate references for Wikipedia. You say "I can provide sources for everything i said, feel free to ask & i will provide such", then please do so. And no primary sources (per Wikipedia:No original research), but secondary sources such as academic books, journals etc. Otherwise, we have to restore the content. Applodion (talk) 17:46, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again, they are in NO WAY "reliable" since they do NOT have citations for their claims, nor provide any evidence

Kotkin cites NOTHING

Montefiore makes it up from Lidia's memoirs & Serov

I never said their whole book is wrong & nonsense, i'm refering to this particular claim

I told you that i can provide a source for what i said & that you just need to ask for what, you didn't ask for anything

For what do you want a source? Kotkin citing nothing? Montefiore having no evidence? I can show you both books

If you have any other "evidence" go ahead & share it, because you have provided no evidence so far LenLen499833 (talk) 15:44, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LenLen499833: Again: Kotkin, Khlevniuk, Suny, and Montefiore are treated as reliable sources. If you want to disput their claims, provide a counter-source. That's how Wikipedia works. You say "I told you that i can provide a source for what i said & that you just need to ask for what, you didn't ask for anything", then please provide a source for Lidia and Stalin not having children. Otherwise, the deleted content will be restored. Applodion (talk) 21:31, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, and Kotkin does cite a source for the relationship between Stalin and Lidia, as well as the promised marriage due to a pregnancy (in reference 79): Istochnik 2002, no. 4: 74. Khlevniuk also provides a source, Ostrovskii, Kto stoial za spinoi Stalina?, pp. 154-155. Applodion (talk) 21:46, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again, Kotkin cites nothing for the claim that Stalin impregnated her, see my undo of your revision

I don't know what you understand under "counter source", but i don't need one if there is no evidence they had a child in the first place

Suny just cites Montefiore & admits that there is no evidence later

Montefiore just makes it up

I have not checked for Khlevniuk, i will do so now

If you want to claim that they had a child the burden of proof lies upon you, not me

If there is no evidence that they did not have a child then you can't say they had a child

Someone can be as "reliable" as you want, if they claim something without evidence it won't become true just because they are "reliable"

Again, for what do you want a source? Tell me, otherwise i can't give one... I can't attach images here, you will have to look at the books yourself LenLen499833 (talk) 11:04, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"He impregnated one of his

landlord’s daughters, the thirteen-year-old Lidiya Pereprygina, and when the

police intervened he had to vow to marry her, but then betrayed his promise; she

gave birth to a son, who soon died. (Stalin would later recall his dog in Siberia,

Tishka, but not his female companions and bastards.)" no citation in sight LenLen499833 (talk) 11:04, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reference 79 refers to this part, not their relationship?

"During Turukhansk’s

eight months of winter, the future dictator cut holes through the river ice to fish

for sustenance, like the indigenous fur-clad tribesmen around him, and went on

long, solitary hunts in the dark, snowed-in forests. (“If you live among wolves,”

Stalin would later say, “you must behave like a wolf.”)”" LenLen499833 (talk) 11:07, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just checked Khlevnuik

"Stalin, who was

thirty-five, entered into an intimate relationship with the fourteen-year-old Lidiia

Pereprygina. This apparently provoked an argument between Stalin and the man

in charge of guarding him, which escalated into a fistfight. The local police took

Stalin’s side. "

No citation again LenLen499833 (talk) 12:50, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I literally provided both Kotkin's and Khlevniuk's sources (Kotkin's reference 79 is for a larger section; if you look at reference 79's content, Kotkin lists his source for the Stalin-Pereprygina affair; Khlevniuk clearly lists Ostrovskii as his source, no idea why you don't see the reference). Furthermore, your claim "but i don't need one if there is no evidence they had a child in the first place" is wrong - per Wikipedia's rules, that is what you do need. As you seem to not understand how Wikipedia's reference system works, I'm restoring the content. Applodion (talk) 13:18, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Even if Wikipedia allows claims without citations on their page, i've already shown previously that Stalin left Kureika & that Alexander was born 1917...

Khlevniuk cites "Ostrovskii, Kto stoial za spinoi Stalina?, p. 393.", you said, this page does not talk about Lidia LenLen499833 (talk) 15:02, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So let's check their citations then

Khlevniuk: "RGASPI, f. 558, op. 11, d. 1288, ll. 15–16; B. S. Ilizarov, Tainaia zhizn’ Stalina (Moscow, 2002), pp. 289, 291, 294–297; Ostrovskii, Kto stoial za spinoi Stalina?, p. 393."

For Тайная жизнь Сталина (Tainaia zhizn’ Stalina) pp. 289

Serov, the KGB Chairman of the 1950s who was a known liar & backstabber and was latter defamed & stripped of his command and medals?

I think it's you that hasn't actually read about the lies of the Kruschev period

https://www.jstor.org/stable/48609621

Reference 22 in Тайная жизнь Сталина is RGASPI, Serov's document?

Ostrovskii, Kto stoial za spinoi Stalina?, p. 393.

This page does not talk about this topic

Kotkin: 79. This is a quote from October 1938: Istoricheskii arkhiv (1994), no. 5: 13; RGASPI, f. 558, op. 11, d. 1122, 1. 55. On his marriage vow, see Istochnik, 2002, no. 4: 74.

The quote is "“If you live among wolves,” Stalin would later say, “you must behave like a wolf.”)", unrelated to Lidia

For RGASPI see above

Can't seem to find "Istochnik, 2002, no. 4: 74.", if you can please link where i can find it

It says " On his marriage vow, see Istochnik, 2002, no. 4: 74.", so not to the claim they had a child? LenLen499833 (talk) 16:24, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So according to you, i can just cite a book with the most absurd claims & it doesn't need any evidence? lol LenLen499833 (talk) 17:13, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LenLen499833: I will try to explain it again: Kotkin, Khlevniuk, Suny, and Montefiore are respected scholars and their books were edited, vetted and released by respected publisher. Per Wikipedia:Reliable sources, this makes them reliable. These are researchers who spent years or even decades on their subject matters; thus, their views are treated as more valuable than those of random Wikipedia users. If you claim something is "the most absurd claim" (even though it is not absurd) and does not have "any evidence" (even though it has), Wikipedia automatically puts to burden of proof on you. You have to disprove Kotkin, Khlevniuk, Suny, and Montefiore and their respective claims and sources by providing another source which outright says Stalin and Pereprygina had no children. Do you have actual evidence that the claims about Stalin and Pereprygina's relationship were lies? And I do not talk about primary sources like your interpretation of birth registers (for this time period, these are not reliable sources at all) - I'm talking about a scholar disputing the story. Applodion (talk) 07:54, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to explain again: If there is no evidence they had a child, it's quite irrelevant how "respected" they are

So what i said is correct, i can just cite someone & the author doesn't need any evidence, since he is deemed "reliable" lol

I've checked all the sources & it comes back to this one archive, which i luckily found online now

The claim that Stalin had a relationship & impregnated a 13 year old girl is quite absurd, since there is no evidence for both of these claims

No, no evidence was cited.

Kotkin & Khlevniuk cite Serov, which i will address again here

Suny says in his latest volume on Stalin (published well after that Siberian Times tabloid piece) that there's no way to prove they are his children and that it cannot be confirmed

Montefiore is Serov also

I don't need a source saying "they didn't have a child" if it can't be proven in the first place that they had a child

There is no evidence for them having a relationship & child in the first place

Stalin wasn't in Kureika 9 months before, he left to Monastyrkoe by October 1916

The longest recorded pregnancy was only 1 year and 10 days, so unless she somehow broke the record for longest pregnancy term without this being reflected anywhere else, it couldn't be Stalin's son

Stalin arrived AFTER the supposed "first child" Lidia had "We note in brackets that Stalin arrived in Kureika not in 1913, but in March 1914 ..." https://www.sovsekretno.ru/articles/istoriya/nastoyashchaya-istoriya-vnebrachnogo-syna-stalina/ LenLen499833 (talk) 09:20, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

University of Chicago professor Emeritus of history Ronald Suny says it can't actually be proven that Stalin fathered this child...

Suny literally proves none of the other scholars even get their story straight about Lydia lol

https://www.amazon.com/Stalin-Revolution-Ronald-Grigor-Suny/dp/0691182035 LenLen499833 (talk) 09:20, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've addressed Serov already, see previous reply

He also was unscrupulous, having stoel ann this loot in the war & got reprimanded for it

He was a thief and liar & didn't adhere to discipline

What more is there needed to impeach his character? LenLen499833 (talk) 09:23, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll rewrite it in a better form

If there is no evidence they had a child, it's quite irrelevant how "respected" they are. So what i said is correct, i can just cite someone & the author doesn't need any evidence, since he is deemed "reliable"? I've checked all the sources of all the books & it comes back to Serov, which i already addressed. The claim that Stalin had a relationship & impregnated a 13 year old girl is absurd, since there is no evidence outside Serov. I've talked about Serov in my previous messages already, you seem to always ignore what i say & just repeat "they're well trusted authors, it must be true!". Khrushchev begged Serov to dig up falsities & White movement tabloids & rumors from the 1920s that never had any basis in fact, it is know that Serov and Khrushchev lied about Stalin. Kotkin, Montefiroe & Khlevniuk cite Serov, who i've already talked about. Suny says in his latest volume on Stalin (published well after that Siberian Times tabloid piece) that there's no way to prove they are his children and that it cannot be confirmed. Why would i need a source saying the oppsosite if it can't be proven in the first place?

The "first child who died soon after" was born in December 1914, Stalin didn't move in there until around Easter, as he lived with Sverdlov when he first arrived in Kureika, and in 1914 the Orthodox Easter was on April 19 So Stalin arrived AFTER the supposed "first child" Lidia had... "We note in brackets that Stalin arrived in Kureika not in 1913, but in March 1914 ..."

The Russia military archives clearly say Davydov was born in 1917 in November, but Stalin left Kureika in October of 1916 (see Stalin early life Wiki; "In October 1916, Stalin and other exiled Bolsheviks were conscripted, leaving for Monastyrkoe")

The longest recorded pregnancy was only 1 year and 10 days, so unless she somehow broke the record for longest pregnancy term without this being reflected anywhere else, it couldn't be Stalin's son

You really think this woman had a 13 month pregnancy?

Now more to Serov; he also was unscrupulous, having stolen all this loot in the War, and got reprimanded for it. He was a thief and liar & didn't adhere to discripline. What more is there needed to impeach his character? Serov was a toadie of Khrushchev

So now the important part, you saying i need someone saying that they didn't have a child;

Univertsity of Chicago professor Emeritus of history Ronald Suny says it can't actually be proven that talin fathered this child, Suny literally proves none of the other scholars even get their story straight about Lydia

Anything else that i have to address? LenLen499833 (talk) 10:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LenLen499833: Again: there is evidence, you just keep ignoring it. Serov is not the only source. In his second volume, Kotkin mentions that locals also claimed that Stalin had fathered at least one child in the village (he outright quotes a villager on page 67). Furthermore, your birth register claims are also not very reliable; birth registers of the time were often really faulty (I personally know of at least one case in my own family where someone got assigned two different birth dates during this period). What you are doing is WP:Original research. There would be no issue with rewriting the section, as Tom B proposed above, and mention that the incident is not fully confirmed. As numerous scholöars and sources mention it, however, we have to include it. Applodion (talk) 10:57, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again, what evidence is there other than Serov? Can you point it out?

I see no such claim in Kotkin's book on page 67, maybe you got the wrong page?

The birth record fits perfectly with what evidence we have, as Suny points out

You seem to have forgotten to reply what i said, i'm sure it won't happen again!

The section shouldn't just be rewritten, it should be completely removed

I've given you what you asked for, someone saying that it is not Stalin's son; Univertsity of Chicago professor Emeritus of history Ronald Suny says it can't actually be proven that talin fathered this child, Suny literally proves none of the other scholars even get their story straight about Lydia

Why do we have to include something that can't be proven exactly? There is no reason to keep it in, many people do not check citations on Wikipedia & will just take it for granted

You really think this woman had a 13 month pregnancy? LenLen499833 (talk) 12:42, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like you are the one ignoring what i say & just come back to "But Kotkin & Montefiore said so!!!"

Why don't you reply to half the things i said? LenLen499833 (talk) 12:43, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LenLen499833: The villager's quote is on page 67 of Kotkin's second volume on Stalin's life. You also ignore Istochnik, 2002, no. 4: 74. Ronald Suny said it's not fully confirmed, not false - that's why a reworded section would be a ideal solution. Yet, seeing that this dispute is not leading anywhere (with you refusing to compromise), I will raise this issue with the 'higher authorities' (i.e. the noticeboards) tomorrow. Until then. Applodion (talk) 17:35, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you share the quote? Is it not just from Serov? I got all volumes in one, i can just search for the quote then

I haven't actually found "Istochnik, 2002, no. 4: 74.", maybe you can provide it?

It's you who ignores virtually everything i say

Actually Suny says there's no way to prove they are his children and that it CAN NOT be confirmed

I've already provided evidence proving that Stalin clearly was not the father

This dispute is not leading anywhere since you don't want to accept the fact that there is no actual evidence for Stalin having an relationship / impregnating Lidia

Please get "higher authorities", as long as it is capable of actually addressing what i said & not just ignoring it

I am "refusing a compromise" since there is no reason for this "compromise", it is clear that Stalin was not the father

You refused to answer what i asked you, again, TWO TIMES IN A ROW

You ignored what i wrote in my comment, again, TWO TIMES IN A ROW

Why do you keep doing this?

You really think this woman had a 13 month pregnancy? LenLen499833 (talk) 19:08, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One thing i was wrong about is saying there were no citations, but as i've already demonstrated here, it's just Serov & other books who also cite Serov

I've addressed Serov here already, you just ignore virtually everything i said LenLen499833 (talk) 19:10, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Istochnik, 2002, no. 4: 74" doesn't appear to be primary sources LenLen499833 (talk) 05:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here from the WP:OR/N notice. LenLen499833, Applodion is correct. When the source's understanding and an editor's understanding conflict, the source's understanding wins. It doesn't matter if you know for a fact that something is true or untrue. If the sources say it's so, then for our purposes, it's so. We aren't experts, and we can't overrule them with argument. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:09, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Correction: If there is a reasonable doubt, then we have to make an attribution, not to make "a statement of fact". --Altenmann >talk 22:32, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Altenmann: As clarification: Both Tom B and myself supported the idea to just attribute the claims (though no source actually provides evidence against the claims; some sources such as Suny merely attest that the claims are not fully confirmed); LenLen499833 declined this compromise solution. Applodion (talk) 14:21, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As a further clarification:

• There is a good Russian saying for this situation: "He didn't hold a candle over them." Meaning that that we may usage only sources that refer to a reasonably direct evidence, i.e., the attribution must be not to the book author (it is in the footnote anyway), but to the more immediate source, i.e., the text should not say "writer John Random Smith claims...", but "the son of the girl claims that his father is Stalin" or "the residents of the village were sure that Stalin boinked her", you get the idea.
• But the opinions of the writers about the veracity of this information are worth inclusion.
• Finally, surely this minor episode cannot occupy much space, therefore the article must contain a simple claim and the details who said what must be relegate to a footnote (not in {reflist}, but {notelist} ). --Altenmann >talk 16:09, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If the rules of this site are this stupid that as long as it's written in a book it can kept in there since "we aren't experts", it should say something like "Kotkin etc. claim Lidia had 2 children with Stalin, which is wrong, the first child was born before he arrived & he left so the second one couldn't be his child except you believe that she had a 13 month pregnancy"

Maybe a section for Serov too? Just copy paste from my previous messages LenLen499833 (talk) 19:32, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Let me ask you again, do you really think this woman had a 13 month pregnancy? LenLen499833 (talk) 19:32, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Correct, i decline a "compromise" since there is NO REASON for such a thing, if you look at the facts instead of repeating "but kotkin said so!!!"

But since you refuse to look at actual evidence & just ignore what is presented it doesn't surprise me that you don't know

Again, i don't know how often i've already said this, but i do not need a source saying "the opposite" if it CAN NOT BE PROVEN IN THE FIRST PLACE

Suny literally says [https://ibb.co/4j0G7dj IT CAN NOT BE PROVEN, tf you mean?

Suny does not say "it is not fully confirmed", did you even read what i sent?

Tell me, do you really think this woman had a 13 month pregnancy? Third time i have to ask this LenLen499833 (talk) 19:30, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is this supposed to be a bad joke?

"As long as it's written in a book it's true and we can't argue against it" is what you're saying

You don't need to be an expert to realize this claim is nonsense, just read this whole thread

Do you really think this woman had a 13 month pregnancy?

Suny is a expert & said it can't be proven LenLen499833 (talk) 19:23, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LenLen499833:I refuse to read your N-th repetition. Please follow the advise I outlined below. --Altenmann >talk 19:46, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You refuse to reply, you mean? Because you replying to my question would prove the claim wrong LenLen499833 (talk) 20:13, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody will read and analyze the wall of text above. LenLen499833: please structure the information, e.g.,:

==Source1===
Source  1 says "quote"

 Source reliability:

 Source contradiction:
==Source2===
Source  2 says "quote"
....

And do not mix these. Otherwise any uninvolved person would have waste plenty of time. --Altenmann >talk 22:32, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, i'll do this & then we can finish this discussion, since none of you seem to have any evidence & just rely on false claims which i have already addressed

@LenLen499833: Can you please address the problems with your arguments mentioned below? Applodion (talk) 18:30, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LenLen499833: Contrary to your edit summary claim, you still have not responded. Can you please do so? Applodion (talk) 16:47, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I made a reply as asked LenLen499833 (talk) 18:34, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LenLen499833: No, you didn't. Can't you see all the new responses and additions below? Applodion (talk) 18:51, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw the new responses, will reply now LenLen499833 (talk) 18:32, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Altenmann: LenLen499833 appears unwilling to engage in any real discussion of the matter; they dismiss any opinion other than their own as lies/false, the opinions of major scholars as worthless, and assume sources are unreliable just because they cannot access them. Furthermore, they seem to be unwilling to engage with the existence of criticism of their viewpoint or the possibility that not all of Serov's claims were false (which is possible, seeing as many Stalin biographers cite him). I feel like any discussion with LenLen499833 is leading nowhere, as they deny any possibility of a compromise. Frankly, I'm tired of searching for even more sources, as these would surely be dismissed just as all the others. How should I proceed? Applodion (talk) 13:15, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I am willing to engage in a "real" discussion, and i've seen now that the page has been edited, but there's still things to add

No, i'm just going with the facts here. If you want to claim that was Stalin's child, then you'd have to claim Lidia also had the longest ever recorded pregnancy on the world, do you really believe / want to claim that?

The DNA test can be dismissed, the results are flawed. No such "DNA test" alleged to have been administered showed this since the strictures required for a legally binding result were not followed in this. The company that is purported to have administered this test is known for faking such results in these kinds of highly publicized tabloid/salacious cases

If it's not a legally valid DNA test with a court order, it doesn't have reliable chain of custody & can be dismissed. If you can't corroborate these results, they can't be relied upon. Pretty simple

Official post-Secret Speech propaganda against Stalin by Serov, a known liar, definitely isn't something you want to rely on. The documents do not even spell her name correctly

I don't mind a "compromise" if it clearly mentions what is wrong about this "story" & that it's not possible that Stalin is the father

If you can bring up any evidence that engages with what i said feel free to do so! LenLen499833 (talk) 08:44, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kotkin says "He impregnated one of his landlord’s daughters, the thirteen-year-old Lidiya Pereprygina, and when the

police intervened he had to vow to marry her, but then betrayed his promise; she gave birth to a son, who soon died."

Source reliability: Source is Serov, so not reliable at all. Serov was a liar, backstabber & [https://pdffox.com/near-and-distant-neighbours-a-new-history-of-soviet-intelligence-pdf-free.html Khrushchev’s lapdog.He was also unscrupulous, having stolen all this loot in the war and got reprimanded for it. He wa a thief and liar & didn't adhere to discipline, what more is there needed to impeach his character?] I don't think i have to introduce anyone to Khrushchev's lies against Stalin

Actually, where do you get that Kotkin's statement is based on Serov? Kotkin does not mention Serov as a source for this claim. I think you confuse this part with Khlevniuk who did indirectly cite Serov. Either way, Kotkin is still a respected scholar, so this opinion should at least be mentioned. Applodion (talk) 16:58, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He cites RGASPI f 558 op 11

It is quite irrelevant how "respected" he is, it is about what evidence he can provide

Give Blood Lies by Grover Furr a read, Snyder does the exact same thing for Stalin - "taken as granted" LenLen499833 (talk) 18:34, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kotkin also cites "Istochnik, 2002, no. 4: 74" for marriage vow, doesn't appear to be primary sources

Doesn't appear - then where is your evidence that this source is unreliable? Applodion (talk) 16:58, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't appear to be a primary source

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_source LenLen499833 (talk) 18:35, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Montefiore says "The affair might have remained tolerable, but there was worse to come: Lidia fell pregnant with Stalin’s child"

Source reliability: Serov, see previous message. Montefiore says that she had Stalin's child which can be disproven. Stalin arrived AFTER the supposed "first child" Lidia had: "We note in brackets that Stalin arrived in Kureika not in 1913, but in March 1914..." Stalin didn't move in there until around Easter, as he lived with Sverdlov when he first arrived in Kureika, and in 1914 the Orthodox Easter was on April 19... so how could a Pereprygina's child born in 1914 be Stalin's if he was only there 6 months prior?

As stated below, birth registers are not reliable sources. Furthermore, Montefiore is a respected scholar; his opinion on the matter should at least be mentioned. Applodion (talk) 11:03, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Birth records are primary sources, but i don't think i mentioned his birth record in this response

It is quite irrelevant how "respected" he is, it is about what evidence he can provide

Give Blood Lies by Grover Furr a read, Snyder does the exact same thing for Stalin - "taken as granted" LenLen499833 (talk) 18:37, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Montefiore says "During the summer, the Georgian lodger impregnated Lidia for the second time—and then typically made himself scarce. "

Source reliability: None, since there doesn't seem to be any citation on the whole page. This claim can still be disproven; The Russian archives clearly say Alexander Davydov (Lidia's second child) was born in November 1917, but Stalin left Kureika in October 1916. The longest recorded pregnancy was only 1 year and 10 days. This would make Lydia's child born in November 1917 the longest pregnancy term in recorded history, even if Stalin was still in Kureika in late October 1916, which it's proven he wasn't. So let me ask you again, do you really think this woman had a 13 month pregnancy?

Per WP:Original research, the birth register cannot be used to disprove this. As I pointed out above, birth registers of the time were often faulty. Applodion (talk) 17:00, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Birth registers are primary sources & definitely can

Stalin didn't move in there until around Easter, as he lived with Sverdlov when he first arrived in Kureika, and in 1914 the Orthodox Easter was on April 19

It would be nearly impossible for Stalin to have been the father, and we can't forget that this lidya person was also betrothed to another man before Stalin ever arrived LenLen499833 (talk) 18:41, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DNA test apparently proves they're related

Source reliability: None, since the test wasn't carried out according to court strictures, as is required for a test to be legally valid even by BioPapa's admission, it isn't clear or convincingly valid test or verifiable according to any acceptable standard as such [1] [2] [3] It was a media stunt

It's about chain of custody&legal standard operating procedure with regard to the results. If they swabbed Burdosnky twice or conversely, if both swabs are put in the same envelope as it looks like they are, why would this not cross contaminate? The chain of custody for this thest is the most important thing

"Maury"-style tabloid& daytime TV shows are not scientific or legal, and these tests are prone to error when steps aren't followed & the results can not be trusted LenLen499833 (talk) 20:12, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure about LenLen499833's claims regarding the Siberian Times being unreliable. The description of the Siberian Times in its Wikipedia article's sources actually portray it as a fairly reliable, so unless the cited sources are utterly wrong, it is not a tabloid. If one actually reads the Siberian Times article on the affair states that a) there was actually a police investigation on the issue by official named "P. Sirotenko" before Stalin assumed power, b) that Pereprygina's own family was rather certain that Alexander was Stalin's son, and c) that Stalin's grandson, Alexander Burdonsky, cooperated with Alexander for the DNA test. I'm not sure where LenLen499833 got their evidence about the test possibly being cross-contaminated, but the Siberian Times report is actually fairly down-to-earth and not at all sensational. Applodion (talk) 10:42, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot to reply to this one.

"Siberian Times" is a tabloied & is known as "clickbait", see (here)[1]

To Sirotenko, Sirotenko was sent to investigate the claims but very little proof was actually gathered, since it was just a claim rather than verifiable evidence. That's what the Soviet Documents say

Now to the DNA test, (here)[2] is the exact screenshot from the show. Both of the samples are being placed into an envelope exposed without any protection literally touching in the envelope

Also if i ever forget to attach any evidence for what i said please let me know in the reply so i can attach it LenLen499833 (talk) 08:54, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If i forgot to address anything please let me know LenLen499833 (talk) 20:13, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Besides the already mentioned sources questioned by LenLen499833, there are several others. I will include them below. Applodion (talk) 10:42, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On page 67 of Stalin: Waiting for Hitler, 1929–1941, Kotkin writes about an appeal of Pereprygina's brothers to Stalin in 1930. In their letter, "the brothers did not mention the son (Alexander) whom Stalin had allegedly fathered with Pereprygina and abandoned, but it is possible that one of Pereprygina's sons was Stalin's". He then quotes a villager of Kureika, Anfisa Taraseyeva, who spoke fondly of Stalin's time in the region and recalled that he had fathered at least one son with "one of my relatives". In the references for this section (page 922), Kotkin cites Ilizarov, Tainaia zhizn' Stalina, p. 310. He also questions the birth register of Alexander, noting that it may "have been delayed by remoteness or falsely reported"; he also actually states that Serov's reports on the matter were unreliable. So Kotkin does not take Serov as his only source or even the most reliable one, but regards Stalin's paternity as a possibility based on available evidence. Applodion (talk) 10:42, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A very interesting source for the affair is Stalinism: Russian and Western Views at the Turn of the Millennium (2005) by Alter L. Litvin and John L. H. Keep. On page 36, the authors also describe the relationship as factual, and even state, regarding Alxander (the second son), "The child's name was registered as Dzuhgashvili but he later took that of his stepfather, Davydov". As sources, Litvin and Keep provide: Ostrovskii, Kto stoial za spinoi Stalina?, pages 253, 325-334, 355-357, 406-408; Torchinov and Leontiuk, Vokrug Stalina, pages 173, 420-423; Filippov, Vologodskii roman Stalina, Izvestiia, 17 October 1998. Applodion (talk) 10:42, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I addressed "Ostrovskii, Kto stoial za spinoi Stalina?" in my previous message (which is now archived i think)

To "Vokrug Stalina"

Page 173-174

"Popular rumors", same thing i said this lie is based off

Let's check the citations

Колесник А. Хроника ж изни семьи Сталина. Харьков, 1990. С. б

Does not seem to mention Lidia

Бастарды красного вождя: документальный рассказ о двух неизвестных сыновьях Сталина — Константине Куза-

кове и Александре Дж угаш вили-Давы дове/ / Час пик. 1995. 21 окт .

I don't find this "Bastards of the Red Son", only that it is cited in an article i previously used to prove my point

I can't seem to find "Filippov, Vologodskii roman Stalina, Izvestiia, 17 October 1998." either, do you have something i can refer to? LenLen499833 (talk) 19:56, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In his book Stalin: Passage to Revolution (2022), Ronald Grigor Suny also reports the affair of Stalin and Pereprygina (page 560); he too seems to consider the matter believable. Sadly, I cannot access his reference page - if anyone can, please add what his sources are. Applodion (talk) 10:42, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Suny later admits it can't be proven as i already showed LenLen499833 (talk) 18:43, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In Rayfield's Stalin and His Hangmen: The Tyrant and Those Who Killed for Him, the story of Stalin's relationship with Pereprygina (including pregnancies) is also reported on pages 42-43. Conversely, Rayfield seems to use GASPI 558 as source, i.e. Serov. Applodion (talk) 10:42, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RGASPI 558 is Serov, see previous message LenLen499833 (talk) 18:42, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Simon Sebag Montefiore’s works are known for their sloppiness regarding sources/citations and dramatizing events with his own fictional dialogue/details. The historical validity of some events, such as Stalin robbing a steamship or his intrusion into a New Years Eve party, are suspect since they rely heavily/solely on Montefiore.

I suggest events/details should have a corroborating source apart from Montefiore, and perhaps the sensationalist Montefiore-derived events/details should be removed. Bagabondo (talk) 23:34, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You should check what comments Montefiore makes about "Siberian Girls" & how he names the Chapter he makes this claim in

Considering Montefiore was on (Epstein's list)[3], we can come to a conclusion here LenLen499833 (talk) 08:56, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Applodion: The source used in the article to claim that Stalin and Lidia Pereprygina had two children is Kotkin's Stalin: Paradoxes of Power, not his Waiting for Hitler. There is nothing in Paradoxes of Power suggesting that the sources about this relationship are Serov, Taraseyeva, or Pereprygina herself. We don't know if the sources that he used in the first book is the same that he used to discuss another subject also involving Pereprygina and Stalin's son with her. Saying otherwise is ither wp:or or wp:synth. TheShadowRising (talk) 15:49, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@TheShadowRising: Kotkin literally discusses this topic in Waiting for Hitler in the context of people of Stalin's early life contacting him after his rise to power - as I demonstrated by expanding the quote. I do not know why Kotkin did not discuss Serov in detail in his first book, but he does so in his second; it's completely irrelevant either way, because Kotkin's second book is still valid and reliable as his first. I have to assume that you did not read Waiting for Hitler? Either way, you do not appear to not understand (or refuse to understand) either wp:or or wp:synth. So I'm going to request a third-party intervention. Applodion (talk) 16:21, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Thebiguglyalien:, you helped to resolve a previous dispute regarding this article. May I ask for your opinion again? To summarize: TheShadowRising is deleting a sourced part of the article (concering Serov's investigation of Stalin's children with Pereprygina), referenced to Kotkin's Waiting for Hitler. TheShadowRising accuses this part of the article of being "wp:or or wp:synth" because Kotkin did not discuss the subject in question in his previous book Stalin: Paradoxes of Power. I tried to point out that quoting Waiting for Hitler is not WP:OR or WP:SYNTH as well as expanded the quote to demonstrate what exactly Kotkin stated. Yet TheShadowRising keeps deleting this part. I'm not even sure how I should argue with them in this case. Applodion (talk) 16:29, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In disputes like this, I suggest making a post at WP:OR/N to get a fair spread of opinions. That's the capacity in which I participated on this talk page before. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 17:01, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Thebiguglyalien: Thank you, I will do so. Applodion (talk) 17:08, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is, the article uses Paradox of Power not Waiting for Hitler to discuss the relationship between Stalin and Pereprygina. Do you have any evidence that Kotkin used these sources on the first book as well? TheShadowRising (talk) 17:03, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@TheShadowRising: No, the article references Waiting for Hitler, as I repeatedly stated. Again: It does not matter what Kotkin used as a source in the first book; he discussed Servov in the second book. Applodion (talk) 17:08, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This is getting tiresome. The article says:

This is discussed in Paradoxes of Power. Waiting for Hitler does not mention, for instance, Pereprygina's age. Then it comes the part that was removed. Aftter that, we have:

Only the last phrase is on Waiting for Hitler. There is nothing suggesting that he used Serov's report as evidence for any other part of his research other than Alexander's paternity. TheShadowRising (talk) 17:33, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please, just read the sources... I literally quoted Kotkin in the parts you deleted. In Waiting for Hitler, Kotkin literally says "In 1956, Ivan Serov of the KGB would send a report to Khrushev based on an interview with Pereprygina-Davydova, attributing paternity to Stalin; it contains obvious errors and reflects lazy police work" when discussing the sources for the Stalin-Pereprygina affair, obviously talking about entire relationship including the resulting children - I could quote even more, where Kotkin discusses the rest of the Pereprygina family and Alexander Davydov's fate in Waiting for Hitler. You cannot claim that Waiting for Hitler does not discuss the relationship, because the book does discuss the relationship. I literally quoted part of the text! Applodion (talk) 18:24, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Stop pretending that you read the book more than me. You clearly didn't. The problem is, you're assuming that Kotkin used Serov, Taraseyeva and Lidia herself as a source for Stalin's relatinship with Lidia in Paradoxes of Power, and we have no evidence of that Waiting for Hitler is only used as a source after the removed part of the text. If you want to rephrase the text, I won't mind, but the way it is it looks like the text is suggesting that Kotkin's evidence is weak according to himself. TheShadowRising (talk) 18:30, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Here from WP:NORN.) First, ShadowRising, what you are describing (if it's true) is source fabrication, not WP:OR. Secondly, I think you're mistaken somewhere, because I found the exact passage, right were it was said to be, in note 358 on p. 922 via this Google books link. Whatever you're looking at, it's at the very least not the same edition of the book as Applodion or I. EducatedRedneck (talk) 19:13, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying that the passage doesn't exist. It does. But it is not the source Kotkin uses to discuss anything that our paragraph on Pereprygina (again, their affair is discussed in detail on another book, Stalin: Paradoxes of Power). The note is from a paragraph where Kotkin discusses an episode from 1930, when two of Pereprygina's siblins were arrested, and Stalin was already 50. It does say that Serov's research on Stalin's paternity of Alexander is "lazy police work", but it does not say anything about what is said prior in our own paragraph about their affair. Again, I don't mind if you guys really think that it should be on the article. I don't see the point, but the way it reads, it suggests that Kotkin used it as evidence for the whole affair, which is not the case since Paradoxes of Power, the main source on the subject, does not list Serov, Taraseyeva or Lidia sources. TheShadowRising (talk) 19:44, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@TheShadowRising: I think I'm finally starting to understand what you even want. That said, Kotkin does discuss the entire relationship in the 2017 book. For instance, on page 67, Kotkin directly quotes a villager who talks about Stalin having a son with one of her relatives, namely Lidia Pereprygina, whom Kotkin describes on the same page as "scandalously young teenager". This reference was also deleted by you. Applodion (talk) 21:26, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have the book here with me right now, but isn't this the passage referenced in footnote 358? TheShadowRising (talk) 22:23, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No, the passage has several citations. The part I just talked about is cited to notes 356 and 357. Anyway, how does this even matter? It's evident that there is no problem with this source. Applodion (talk) 08:33, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I'm still not understanding. From what I can see, the citation is in an appropriate place, and the text it supports is relevant. I don't understand why this particular citation should say anything about the statements in the previous paragraph, or what you would expect it to say. I also don't understand what the statements in one book have to do with the statements made in another; it sounds like you're asserting that the 2017 volume is not a reliable source? EducatedRedneck (talk) 03:02, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@EducatedRedneck: As far as I understand, you are actually quite close to one of TheShadowRising's issues. They appear to think that the removed section impacts the sentences before and afterward which are cited to the older book. Why they think so, though, I'm not sure about. Applodion (talk) 08:35, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No, not at all. What I'm saying is that there is nothing suggesting that Kotkin used Serov, Taraseyeva or Lidia as sources for most of the information in our paragraph. The exception is Alexander's birth, which is already referenced (ref 273). We are basically saying that Kotkin used these three sources to claim that Stalin had two children with Pereprygina, when this is not the case. TheShadowRising (talk) 13:43, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I can't understand how you think this reference would have to say something about the other references in the paragraph. Feel free to keep trying to articulate your objection more clearly if you like, but for now I'm reinserting the removed passage and citation, because it is entirely true and supported by a verified source. EducatedRedneck (talk) 17:47, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]