Talk:Anarchism

Disambiguation instead of division
After having been an anarchist for 40 years, I personally think that the entire article on anarchism is rubbish. One example: I do not see myself as left-wing. That would mean that I would be part of their parliament. We are anti-political, so which idiot describes us as a left-wing political current? The article should have a short - extremely - general paragraph describing the general idea of anarchism and then it should sum up the different currents of anarchism as they are divided in internationals: individualists, anarcho-syndicalists, platformists. The articles on these currents should also be short and general and should just sum up the different versions of individualism etc. That way - at least - there would be a general definition that every anarchist could live with and it would keep all philosophical discussions to a minimum. Underneath every current, there could be further disambiguation until all currents are happy with the description of what they think anarchism should be. Jan De Neys (talk) 18:05, 9 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Well, unfortunately Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia based on reliable sources (in theory, anyways), not the self-opinions of the people being written about. Start a Fandom site or something. Yue 🌙 07:13, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
 * You may try outline of anarchism and contemporary anarchism. ときさき   くるみ not because they are easy, but because they are hard 15:07, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Additions to section on Russia and Ukraine
Previously this article's history section had two sentences covering the entire history of the anarchist movement in Russia and Ukraine during the revolution and civil war. Recently, a user has repeatedly added in information about a single (relatively minor) event in this history that I personally think gives undue weight to it. As I don't want this to become an edit war, would anyone else here care to provide a third opinion on the matter? --Grnrchst (talk) 13:28, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

splng
I still think the last ‹v› in kontrrazvednivks implausible. —Tamfang (talk) 19:48, 15 June 2024 (UTC)


 * @Tamfang: It was a typo, thanks for pointing out. Fixed in the original article. --Grnrchst (talk) 08:25, 16 June 2024 (UTC)