User talk:The Four Deuces/Archives/2017/January

Left-Wing Politics
Terrorism is been a part of history since the beginning of humanity, some worse than other. It is equally important that We The People use transparency and be neutral when we add or delete a portion of history. If the left-wing politics history had no terrorism than I would agree that it should not be part of the equation, however, in order to be transparent and unbiased history should be told regardless if is positive or negative.

It seems that you don't want the left to be tainted as terrorist, but it did happen in the past and it is everyone's right to know the truth. If you look at the Right-Wing Politics it had terrorism as well and it is mentioned. Why do you want dismiss left wing terrorism? As the creators and improvers of Wikipedia we should make this place a neutral and unbiased. If left wing terrorism just like the right are part of an ugly past it should be not be omitted or censored. Many aristocrats in the past tried so many times to destroy history this is why the world keep repeating the same old mistakes.

In good conscience we should expose the truth whether we like it or not. Wikipedia should not be a biased instrument

AttentiontoDetails (talk) 22:22, 15 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Please do not presume what my motives are. Indeed terrorism has been used by the Left as it has been for every other ideology.  In fact more terrorist actions were carried out by the Patriots in the American Revolution, yet I do not see you trying to add it to that article.  But the issue is weight.  Why do you think we should have an entire section about a few dozen people in 1960s American, while Maoism, Trotskyism, and Stalinism get a sentence or two at most?  The world does not begin or end in the land of We the People.  Also, your writing does not explain the connection between terrorism and left-wing ideology of these U.S. groups.  That's tendentious because the assumption is that it is a normal part of left-wing activity.  We are discussing the issue on the talk page and I suggest you continue the discussion there since inclusion or exclusion of material is a matter for all editors to determine.  TFD (talk) 22:52, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Do you mean that we should erase and forget that part of history because of a few terrorist in the 1960s has no value in history. Let's say that we add the others that you mentioned, would you be able to come to an agreement You are mentioning the Patriots in the American History and why I am not saying anything about terrorism there. I can't believe you mentioning that, the simple answer is that I am not involved with that topic at this time. Let's stay the course. If you are imminent about living that portion off so be it. The left wins again. If you feel the Patriots of the American Revolution are terrorist as you said, why don't you try to write that in.73.225.205.20 (talk) 01:23, 16 January 2017 (UTC)


 * It is not "erasing" history. We have an article about Left-wing terrorism which I created by the way.  The issue is how much emphasis we give to any issue in articles, which is governed by "Balancing aspects", which says, "An article should not give undue weight to minor aspects of its subject, but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight proportional to its treatment in the body of reliable, published material on the subject."  This issue is routinely ignored in the literature as for example, The Left In History: Revolution and Reform in Twentieth-Century Politics, which does not mention terrorism.  As such, it would be tendentious to have an entire section.
 * And no, I do not feel the Patriots were terrorist, but that reliable sources have described some actions carried out by them as terrorism, such as attacking government property, officials and supporters and their property other than as normal actions in a war. Literature on terrorism mentions it, but it generally is not described as terrorism in literature about the Revolution, which is why we do not have it there.
 * TFD (talk) 02:07, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Seth Rich BLPN
Hello. I want to let you know I moved "up" one of your comments underneath mine, where I believe it was originally situated. If there is a problem with this, then please move it back. Thanks. Steve Quinn (talk) 06:39, 19 January 2017 (UTC)