Talk:Dorothy Kuya

Untitled
I agree with the consensus that we don't need to include information about the controversial actions of the Soviet Union in any article about people who were members of communist organizations subject to the USSR. In this case though, I think it is relevant to do so, specifically because of the renaming of the "Gladstone" building, due to his fathers's association with slavery, to a new character who can also be charged with morally questionable connections. I am no fan of American Conservatism, but this article https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/william-gladstone-maria-wittner-dorothy-kuya-communism/, gives an opinion about the contradiction of the renaming. Though clearly politically motivated, it is a well recognized magazine. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_American_Conservative. I have seen many Wikipedia articles using sources from other clearly ideologically motivated media, it is specially common in small articles of Stalinist apologists, Domenico Losurdo being the prime example. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knoterification (talk • contribs)


 * What if we were to write a long sentence explaining that many conservatives oppose the name change due to Dorothy belonging to a political party that had close ties with the USSR, but we excluse the link to "The American Conservative" magazine? I don't think anybody is going to challenge or disagree with the fact that many American conservatives (especially over twitter) have gone into a rage, but that specific article barely had anything to do with Dorothy Kuya and didn't make a coherant argument. So for example "Many American conservatives have opposed the naming of the housing block after Dorothy Kuya due to her membership of the Communist Party of Great Britain." I think that's accurate, straight to the point, and avoids any tenuous links to the finer details of Soviet politics which I can't find any information on regarding Dorothy Kuya. Does this sound like a plan? BulgeUwU (talk) 09:30, 7 May 2021 (UTC)