`'s rule (1924-1953) - 40-60 million (but at least 20) million dead.``  Some editors find this number highly exagerated (the original text simply said ``20 million or more dead``). The proponents of the higher numbers cite this quote in their support: * ``According to Roy Medvedev, Stalin's victims numbered forty million. Solzhenitsyn says the number is far greater-perhaps sixty million. The debate continues even now.``  From the book: Lenin's Tomb  The Last Days of the Soviet Empire by DAVID REMNICK (p. 129).  My question is. Are the numbers cited above (40-60 million dead) reasonable or do these numbers include Gulag prisoners who survived? I know that it is difficult to estimate the death toll, but what are the most authorative sources on this subject? Can you help me find a reasonable range for estimation and the best sources to support it?  I appreciate your help.    :Most mainstream western historians give a figure of 10-20 million; that is itself probably a considerable overestimate.    == Info box inaccuracies ==  I think there something wrong with the infobox (the top one with the picture) and the succession boxes at the bottom. First the infobox says his term of office was from 1922-1953 (I assume we are talking about the General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, here, so I added that in). But if we are talking about the office of General Secretary, how can we say Lenin was the successor, as Stalin was the first General Secretary? Also, I'm not as sure about this, but I believe all Soviet leaders following Stalin were known as ``First Secretaries``, so Malenkov doesn't technically work as a successor either, I don't think. Also, the successor box on the bottom for General Secretary is definitely wrong, as Stalin was the first and Lenin never held that position, he was the Chairman, and indeed granted Stalin his position. Didn't want to make changes without consensus.   :The ``secretary`` position was that of the top boss of the Soviet Communist Party. There is no reason to play technicalities about a particular ``office`` with a specific title. The issue is pretty confusing and there is no reason to put these intricacies in an infobox. At the same time, I agree that the formal details about party leadership must be addressed more carefully in the Communist Party of the Soviet Union article.   ::It's just that I assumed, with such specific info there, dealing with de facto leadership is tricky. Perhaps if the infobox said it was only leader, that would help. But that's not the common convention. For George Washington, to use an example of a first officeholder, we don't say preceded by George III, or whomever, just because that is the leader. Well... on second thought that's not the best example, because it's a different country. But what I'm trying to say there's got to be a better way to do it without implying that Stalin and his predecessor and his successor all held the same title.    == Modern opinion ==  What about people's opinion of Stalin in modern Russia? It could be quite interesting.  == Certain segments of the population == removed:  :, and by providing certain segments of the population benefits so as to win their support or co-opt them into the regime. What the heck these ``certain segments`` are? If bureaucracy is in mind, then this is of no special note: at all times in every state a bureaucrat lives better than a peasant. Apart of these (with a special subclass of apparatchiks), there were no benefitted segments.    ==Moscow==  Minor quibble, but shouldn't the article at least mention, and possibly elaborate on Stalin's decision to stay in Moscow as German forces approached in December of 1941? As I understand it, practically every government official evacuated, but Stalin was adamant in his decision to remain. Seems a significant enough event to include here.    == Deportation of Romanians==  I removed the following addition by an anon, about deportations of nationalities : Romanians (from Moldova),   I have a very vague memories on the issue. If this took place, then it must be covered in  Population transfer in the Soviet Union in the first place. There certainly were deportations during the annexation of Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina, but these  were of class character, rather th