Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Hodja Nasreddin (talk | contribs) at 12:28, 13 September 2011 (→Articles?: explain). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Articles?

So which articles did you have in mind which you feel may be of interest to me? The Last Angry Man (talk) 19:24, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

I have three suggestions.

1. Obviously, you can navigate articles using categories, such as Category:Communism. Based on your interests, you might wish to focus on Category:Communist repression (surprisingly, it does not even exist). It should include such subcats as Category:Political repression in the Soviet Union, for example.
2. I noticed that you edited Comparison of Nazism and Stalinism. A more academic approach would be editing Totalitarianism instead.
3. With regard to editing Communist terrorism, you may wish to look at these two sections of an older version. Restoring these materials in the same article is hardly realistic, but perhaps they belong to other articles. Biophys (talk) 19:48, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Strangely not shocked by this content removal, given the trouble I am having just getting an historian called an historian beggars belief. I do not know how to create catagorys, is there a how to? Totalitarianism would be worth a read, is it also a warzone? The Last Angry Man (talk) 19:56, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Surprisingly, it was not war zone, but you must check any disputes at the article talk page, as usual. If there are any disputes, you may contribute to discussion or simply edit the article and find a compromise version. But remember, the most important factor are sources: find a couple of good books (reliable secondary WP:RS) on the subject and use them. Biophys (talk) 20:22, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Who wrote this? "The dominant version of totalitarianism was created in the late 1940s and 1950s by anti-communist Cold Warriors, who sought to emphasize the supposedly "evil" nature of the Soviet Union and its alleged similarity to Nazi Germany, for propaganda purposes." how can anyone state that communism was not totalitarian? This needs a major rewrite. The Last Angry Man (talk) 20:46, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Well creating the catagory was easy enough, but it requires a main article, I have used Political repression in the Soviet Union for that, I am now trying to work out how to add a subcat to it. The Last Angry Man (talk) 20:08, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to butt in, but after looking at the Totalitarianism article, I just can't help but agree that yes, it's an idiotic piece of work. And not just because of the over-the-top very obvious POV slant of the article but also things like the "Totalitarianism in Architecture" section - which is true enough but handled horribly in the article. In my experience though, articles like that are ALWAYS going to suck, and they're always going to be completely ridiculous because no matter what happens there's always some strange person just waiting to replace all the other strange people that usually end up getting themselves banned from editing on these things. It's a loosing battle - honestly, the best thing to do in these cases is to put a POV tag on it, articulate all the reasons for it, stick with it through the dispute resolution process (because the strange people will try to remove it) and then just leave the piece of junk alone; at least it will be labeled as junky. Volunteer Marek  21:52, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to disagree with you, but this has nothing to do with subject of the article. This is all about personal relations of people. There was no any serious editorial conflicts in this article for a couple of years. But as soon as The Last Angry Man started editing and discussing the subject, two people (who almost never edited this article before) came to aggressively revert, and FPS came to resolve yet another fresh (but actually old!) conflict. There is only possible explanation: people stalk each others edits. Solution: try to edit yet another article. Biophys (talk) 00:28, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

P.S. I'd like to help with editing Totalitarianism or any other subjects, but unfortunately I must really focus on my work. Sorry. Biophys (talk) 00:43, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Work always comes first, you have to pay the ills after all :o) I have stalkers? This does not surprise me, certain editors seem to still be of the opinion that I am a sock. It would explain TFD`s peculiar posts. I shall hopefully be able to improve the article, but as I am being followed more than likely all I do will be reverted. The Last Angry Man (talk) 11:05, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

If you edit different articles 1,2,3,4, ... and someone reverts you in all these articles, then stalking is obvious, and you can complain about this. But you must be sure that all your reverted edits are legitimate edits, which means: (a) they are sourced to secondary RS, (b) they provide new important information that deserve to be included in encyclopedia; (c) can not be regarded as obvious POV-pushing. Let's consider three diffs by Cavalry about your problematic editing:

1. diff 1 - you remove sourced information. Yes, he is right. If this is a propaganda version (as you tell), you should find sources telling this is a propaganda version and leave this text in article, but describe it as a propaganda version per sources.
2. diff2. Yes, you should never edit war over tags or minor issues, such as describing someone as "historian".
3. diff3. Yes, you must stay cool and be prepared that people do not read the threads because they do not care (and do not be surprised if someone even wants to provoke you). I am speaking in general here. I did not read this SPI case becasue I do not care too. Biophys (talk) 12:28, 13 September 2011 (UTC)