Talk:Informbiro period

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I removed the link to hungary in the sentence:

"Considering Stalin's brutal repression of other satellites' independent moves (e.g. Hungary), it remains unclear what prevented him from miltary intervention. "

since i think refers to the invasion in 1956 and Stalin was dead by then.

[edit] Mrge proposal

• The Tito-soviet split article should remain separate as they are separate issues to some degree. one deals with the emerging rift between the two nations and the other discusses the split until Yugoslavia was readmitted into the Cominform. user:81.107.130.137

• Disagree with merging. "Informbiro" topic should cover mainly internal issues. "Tito-Stalin split" should be a more global view. Titoism article, close to the two, covers yet another aspect. All of them do their own job. I'd rather consider careful separating of the content, to avoid duplication, in the context of the overall History of Yugoslavia. `'mikka (t) 21:08, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

But is there any reason why the two cannot be distinct sections of the same article? I mean, they "attack" the very same topic, and you cannot avoid duplication forever. Plus, one of them looks destined to remain small forever. "Titoism" might be referenced here, IMO, since it is the only one that goes beyond certain events. Dahn 23:05, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] From Informbiro to Informbiro period

I have moved the article from Informbiro to Informbiro period, because Informbiro is synonim for Cominform, not for Informbiro period. Maybe there are better options for title of this article, but definitely the title Informbiro period is more appropriate than the title Informbiro. (Zdravko mk 16:38, 25 December 2006 (UTC))