Talk:Todor Angelov

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Todor Angelov. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080928112509/http://www.duma.bg:80/2005/0105/100105/obshtestvo/ob-5.html to http://www.duma.bg/2005/0105/100105/obshtestvo/ob-5.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 10:09, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Anarcho-communist?
The article previously stated that he was an anarcho-communist but from what I could glean from the sources and other Wikipedias, it looks more likely that he associated with anarchists when he was younger and then became a Communist. Either way, it needs better sourcing. czar 17:13, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Unsourced content
@Brigade Piron, do you have citations for the content you're restoring or not? You're an established editor so you should know the burden of verifiability is on the person restoring the content. It's been tagged for cleanup for over a decade so the argument that the content should be preserved is unconvincing. Please revert your edit. czar 04:43, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Considering the rather snappy tone here, I hope you will forgive me for saying that I think your comment is rather disingenuous and smacks of wikilawyering. Please do review WP:PRESERVE. You have already implemented a major content deletion on a previous drive past and the now-contentious content was clearly acceptable to you back in 2023. Part of the text you proposed to delete was, in fact, already cited in the following paragraph.
 * We have WP:V for a reason. Unsourced content deletion is clearly justifiable where unsourced material is clearly biased, tendentious, or potentially defamatory. What it is not intended to do, however, is to act as a flamethrower to burn through Wiki's many millions of imperfectly cited stubs. We have a system of banners and warnings to flag content issues. On a low traffic article like this, it is true that such issues may often not be addressed for many years but this is okay because Wikipedia is WP:NOTFINISHED and there is no time limit. Moreover, I cannot help but note that you appear to have made no attempt at any point to fix the very real issues you have identified. —Brigade Piron (talk) 22:49, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Not my intended tone so apologies if it came off as brusque. The policy you suggest for reading says to excise content that cannot be fixed, which is exactly what happened to content that has been tagged for cleanup for over a decade. (The burden of verifiability trumps that.) I see you've been following this article for that amount of time so I'm glad this spurred you to improve it rather than let unsourced claims sit for another decade. The article is better for it. czar  13:55, 19 July 2024 (UTC)