User talk:Trust Is All You Need/Archive 7

Ba'athism article
In response, I made changes to the Marxism-Leninism article in response to your earlier criticisms and removed much of the individual examples of Marxist-Leninist governments and it is now largely focused on ideology. I like the layout in the Marxism-Leninism article because it is rational, organized, easy to read, and can be applied to any ideology. I don't like the way that all the ideology articles are at present - they are very idiosyncratic, long-winded on certain issues, short on others, and difficult for readers to find a general overview of the ideology. As for your issue on Marxism-Leninism, Joseph Stalin's government created the term "Marxism-Leninism" and it was originally strongly connected to Stalinism, it was Khruschev who dissassociated Marxism-Leninism from Stalinism. Kim Il-Sung was a Stalinist and Stalinism is a major form of Marxism-Leninism. Stalinism in my view is a sociopathic version of communism - based on the Machiavellian idea that the ends justify the means - it creates a socialist society where the economy is "publicly controlled" by a totalitarian state, it develops the economy on Marxist historical-determinist lines - focusing on developing a socialist society through rapid industrialization, but ultimately Stalinism has no moral conscience because it was developed by a sociopathic man.--R-41 (talk) 01:46, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * As I said, it was Khruschev who was the first to move Marxism-Leninism away from its original totalitarian form as under Stalinism - the ideology of Marxism-Leninism was originally proclaimed during the Stalin regime in the Soviet Union. Under Khruschev debate and dissent to Communist Party policies was made permissible, but this was reversed under the neo-Stalinist policies of Brezhnev that again pursued a totalitarian course, and finally the Khruschev policy was restored and vastly expanded upon by Gorbachev. There were many Marxist-Leninist regimes strongly influenced by Stalin, including Mao's regime that was similarly totalitarian and, in my view, followed the Stalinist tradition of sociopathic pursuit of communism - such as the Cultural Revolution that resulted in massive deaths. As I said, I have been removing material from the Marxism-Leninism components that you objected to. I will remove totalitarianism as a trait of Marxism-Leninism as a whole, though it should be mentioned in the history section that it was a major part of Stalinism. Still, the components section as I have proposed is very rationally organized and easy to read.--R-41 (talk) 12:14, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

What happened?
I went to (finally) look at Featured list candidates/List of members of the Politburo of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in the 1960s/archive, but it's gone now. What happened? Did my oppose kill off the whole article? Or what? &mdash; JohnFromPinckney (talk) 15:34, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I found Featured list candidates/List of members of the Politburo of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in the 1960s/archive1, so I don't know what's wrong with that link (I copied it from your post on my Talk page, but it's now a redlink). And I see the List of members of the Politburo of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in the 1960s article iself is still intact, so I don't know what happened . And in any case, I've left a few more comments on the FLC page. Regards, &mdash; JohnFromPinckney (talk) 16:41, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah, there needs to be a "1" at the end. &mdash; JohnFromPinckney (talk) 16:42, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Era of Stagnation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Demokratizatsiya (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:08, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Constantin Stanislavski
The article Constantin Stanislavski has been edited by Illyukhina who changed name Maria Lilina on line 41 to incorrect name Maria Liliana. There was no valid reference to this change. Google search shows that the name Maria Lilina is correct, also there is a Russian article in Wikipedia with the proper name: http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Лилина,_Мария_Петровна I undid Illyukhina's edit but my change was reverted again leaving the article with incorrect name. Petrukhina (talk) 17:21, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Liberalism
Hi. I see you started the Liberalism project, now at WikiProject_Politics/Liberalism. The pages seem to be in a bit of a muddle. I wonder if you can help me straighten them out? Also do you think Liberalism should be a task force of the Politics project? Thanks and regards. -- Klein zach  01:18, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Zaki al-Arsuzi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Attorney (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:06, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

The Soviet Union supported non-communist states to weaken Western influence
I have provided two reliable sources to back that up. I had thought that Iraq was a US client state in the Iran-Iraq War, but the sources state it was a Soviet client state, your issue is with these authors, not me. Provide sources that challenge this, not personal opinion - it can be wrong as I have stated.--R-41 (talk) 21:58, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Read the notes I made in the reference tags - I have found more scholarly sources that say the same thing, each of the sources specifically says that Iraq was a client state of the Soviet Union Please provide sources that challenge these claims.--R-41 (talk) 22:07, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
 * It specifically states that Iraq was a client state of the Soviet Union "during the Cold War" and not after. Stop swearing at me and being combative on my talk page, either present sources to me and the article that refute these claims, or stop harassing me on my talk page! I will report you for personal attacks if you persist to harass me and swear at me.--R-41 (talk) 22:18, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Provide sources to back up your claim, stop harassing me with swearing and insults, or get off my talk page!--R-41 (talk) 22:23, 8 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Either give sources to disprove the multiple sources I added, or stop posting harassing statements on my talk page. I will report you for harassment if you so much as write one more. 

Stop harassing me on my talk page, either present sources that disprove what I have added, or don't continue rhetorically arguing, swearing at me, and harassing me on my talk page. I am dead serious, I will report you for harassment if you place one more harassing comment on my talk page. STOP NOW!!!--R-41 (talk) 22:37, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Just prove your point with sources and show all of them. I told you I thought that Iraq was a US client state in the Cold War, but sources showed me otherwise - but you are aggressively rejecting what I have proposed on a very personal level, saying that it's all about "me" and that it's "my" view - it's not - its the view of a massive number of sources. If you continue to swear at me, or behave in a combative condescending manner as you just did with your most recent reply, I will be sure to report you for harassment, that I probably should have already done with your most recent post with the condescending and patronizing "shall I continue" remark. One more condescending harassing remark, and I report.--R-41 (talk) 00:13, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Very well I will remove it. I am going through a lot of personal stress right now and I don't need to listen people swearing at me in discussions.--R-41 (talk) 13:33, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Look no further than India. a non-communist, non-client state. played off vs. us support for Pak (who now play off the usa vs. china)Lihaas (talk) 05:49, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Why are you interpreting the Republic of Cuba (1902-1959) article as insinuating support for an exiled government?
As per the question above, how is the article insinuating support for the exiled Cuban government? It doesn't even talk about post-1959 issues beyond mentioning the act of the Cuban Revolution. If it is an issue of continuity of the Cuban state, you should know that France has the following articles: French First Republic, French Second Republic, French Third Republic, French Fourth Republic, and French Fifth Republic.--R-41 (talk) 18:31, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Captaincy General of Cuba is not "History of the Capitancy General of Cuba", it is specifically about the state at that time. Why not just title the article Cuba (1902–1959)?--R-41 (talk) 23:09, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Thank you very much Yazan - while I don't know if I deserve, its always nice that someone like the work that I've done. --TIAYN (talk) 15:22, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Factionalism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:06, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

January 2012 Newsletter for WikiProject United States and supported projects
--Kumi-Taskbot (talk) 19:50, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

TIAYN, the term "Ba'athist Iraq -wikipedia" has over 150,000 search hits, "History of Iraq (1968-2003)" has 7, WP policy is to use the most common name.
I specifically added in the talk page of that article that the name "Ba'athist Iraq" is far more commonly used than the present title. Wikipedia policy is to use the most common name. The only instances were a common name should not be used is if the common name is a common pejorative or vulgar name used over a less commonly used official name - "Ba'athist Iraq" doesn't sound vulgar to me, it simply acknowledges that the period was defined by rule by the Ba'ath Party. Note that I explicitly excluded Wikipedia by "-wikipedia" so that only non-Wikipedia uses would come up.--R-41 (talk) 13:46, 19 January 2012 (UTC) --R-41 (talk) 13:49, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
 * "Ba'athist Iraq -wikipedia" on Google search results in over 150,000 search hits, while
 * "History of Iraq (1968-2003) -wikipedia" on Google search results in 7 search hits.
 * "Who cares?" - Wikipedia cares, see: WP:COMMON NAME. it makes it more difficult for people to find the topic online if it is using an uncommon name. The reason why it is "History of the United States ..." is because there has been no massive change in the government system or constitution that could be identified as being a historically distinct state. Yes, you are being extremely rude, now please look at COMMON NAME policy and change it back to "Ba'athist Iraq".--R-41 (talk) 13:52, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
 * No, WP:COMMON NAME applies to that article, as I just said above, re-read it. The "History of the United States..." does not apply to this because there was no distinct historical state during those years, it was still the United States with the same constitution and government structure it has today. Now please stop being rude with your responses or I will report you for violating WP:CIVIL.--R-41 (talk) 13:59, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
 * "Nothing radically changes under the Ba'ath"!!! Everything radically changed under the Ba'ath - the former civic nationalist regime promoting non-ethnic Iraqi identity to unite Arabs and Kurds was replaced by the pan-Arabist Ba'ath party that under Saddam persecuted Kurds, a Ba'athist single-party state was established. Saying it was just the same as before is like saying that Nazi Germany was the same state as the Weimar Republic because it formally never abolished the Weimar Republic's constitution.--R-41 (talk) 14:03, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
 * You are blaming me for an earlier mistake I made that is completely unrelated to this and saying "come on!" give up essentially. I will not tolerate this uncivil behaviour in even one more post - either politely discuss your disagreement or I will report you for violation of WP:CIVIL immediately upon another rude post.--R-41 (talk) 14:06, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

You should be aware that the government prior to the Ba'ath for the most part sought to ease Arab-Kurdish strife, it may have acted militarily against Kurdish separatists - but the state adopted state symbolism that explicitly included Kurdish symbolism and allowed use of the Kurdish language. Kurds today who remain willing to remain in Iraq - provided that it makes amends to them - see this regime as the last legitimate Iraqi state for the Kurds - these Kurds fly the flag from this era while refusing to fly the Ba'ath era and post-Ba'ath era flags. Again, heed my warning, do not post another rude response, or I will report you for violating WP:CIVIL.--R-41 (talk) 14:11, 19 January 2012 (UTC)


 * These weren't just concessions, Abd al-Karim Qasim was an Iraqi nationalist who recognized Arabs and Kurds as being the two nations of Iraq - the monarchy before only saw Iraq as an Arab kingdom. Qassim only responded with violence when Kurdish separatists themselves were threatening all out independence.--R-41 (talk) 14:25, 19 January 2012 (UTC)


 * That flag was adopted by the Ba'ath, I have no idea why the restored government did not remove it. Serbia retained its communist coat of arms until 2004, long after communism was abolished in Serbia, to suggest that Iraq was committed to Ba'athism under Arif in 1963-1968 because it had that flag is the same as ridiculous as saying that Serbia was committed to communism under capitalist conservative Vojislav Koštunica in 2003 because it stil had the communist coat of arms. Nevertheless, the government systems were totally different - one was a military-led government committed to Iraqi civic nationalism, the other was a single party state led by a specific party, the Ba'ath Party that was committed to pan-Arab nationalism.--R-41 (talk) 14:32, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
 * If Qassim didn't care about the Kurds then why did he recognize the Kurds as one of the two nations of Iraq; why did he advocate Kurdish autonomy?; why did he adopt a flag and a coat of arms in 1959 that used pan-Iraqi imagery, including a big Kurdish star in the centre of the flag; why did he allow the Kurdish language in Iraq? If you say "oh this was nothing, just political diplomacy" - remember that this was far different than the Arab monarchy before or Ba'ath regime after that rejected the idea of Kurdish autonomy completely, ended acceptance of the Kurdish language, and identified Iraq as an Arab state.--R-41 (talk) 14:41, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
 * "It was still a repressive dictatorship" - that is an extremely poor argument: Nazi Germany was a repressive dictatorship that was succeeded in the East by the DDR that was also a repressive dictatorship, but a completely different state. The same can be said for the replacement of the Khmer Rouge - a genocidal repressive dictatorship replaced by an anti-Khmer Rouge Marxist-Leninist government affiliated with Vietnam that was also a repressive dictatorship (though not genocidal).--R-41 (talk) 14:46, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Ba'ath-led Iraq was different than the former military government because the Ba'ath Party was an extremely powerful institution in the state, it created paramilitary forces such as the "Republican Guard" and Popular Army, and the Fedayeen Saddam as means to prevent a military coup amongst other possible coups. Ba'athist Iraq was a single-party state above all, Ba'athist Iraq oversaw a massive change in the country's domestic cultural policy from a civic nationalist orientation to a pan-Arab nationalist orientation, it also saw a massive change in its foreign policy, Iraq under the previous government isolated itself from pan-Arabist governments, while the Ba'ath openly sought alliance with pan-Arabists. As I said, cultural leftovers from the 1963 Ba'ath coup - including the flag and coat of arms, do not validate an association of the government as being the same as that of the Ba'ath, because as I said, Serbia maintained its communist coat of arms up until 2004, long after communist rule was officially ended.--R-41 (talk) 18:06, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Well regardless of Arif's position, his government was not a Ba'athist single party state that was dominated by the ideology of the Ba'ath unlike its successor. They are two separate states. Moreover this seems to indicate that History of Iraq (1958-1968) is a complete misnomer, because as you have said yourself, Arif was pursuing pan-Arabism that Qassim explicitly rejected as he promoted Iraqi civic nationalism. Thus I suggest that History of Iraq (1958–1968) be broken up into Iraq under Qassim and Iraq under Arif or if you insist History of Iraq (1958–1963) and then History of Iraq (1963–1968). Both Qassim and Arif led military governments that were related to each other but were distinct from the Ba'athist single party state led by party confidantes and under Saddam - basically a family and Tikriti Sunni Arab clique. The Ba'athists didn't trust the Iraqi military and created paramilitaries like the Republican Guard and Popular Army/Fedayeen Saddam to offset its power, just as the Nazis didn't trust the German military and created the Waffen SS to offset its power. So regardless of whether the Ba'ath and Arif held some similarities, the two governments were massively different in structure - one a military government and the other a single-party state pursuing party-decided ideological political objectives, and the Ba'ath overthrew Arif and dismantled his military government, thus they are two different states.--R-41 (talk) 18:38, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Are you suggesting that we create some massive article titled History of Iraq (1958–2003), I mean after all, if according to you "they're all the same", then the only logical assumption would be to create such an article. It doesn't account for the fact that the Ba'athists hated the Qassim regime and as I have said repeatedly, a single-party state is not like a military junta. So what you are saying is that it is History of Iraq (1958–2003) then, isn't it?--R-41 (talk) 19:11, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
 * It is not the same government - a military junta and a single-party state are two completely different forms of government, that is why we have infoboxes in those articles that say they are independent states, we do not have infoboxes in "History of the United States (year-year)" because it is the same state. Look, what you are saying means that it all needs to be put into History of Iraq (1958–2003), after all if it is a minor change of a party taking power, how does that make it different from Britain going from the Labour Party under Gordon Brown to the Conservative Party under David Cameron? I don't agree with this, but creating History of Iraq (1958–2003) seems to be the implication and inevitable outcome of your statements saying that these governments were almost the same.--R-41 (talk) 19:27, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

The only solution to the naming dispute over Iraq under Ba'ath rule is an RfC vote on whether it should be moved
We are in deadlock with neither of us seeming to be able to come to an agreement with each other. I am going to put this issue up as an RfC, asking users the following: "Do you support this article being renamed "Ba'athist Iraq"?" I will put my position of WP:COMMON NAME for the Support side, and you can put your position for the Oppose side.--R-41 (talk) 01:47, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * "Either give me facts, or give up". I am under no subservience or compulsion to give you facts or anything, I give facts to the Wikipedia community, such as that "Ba'athist Iraq" excluding Wikipedia sites, received over 150,000 Google search hits, while "History of Iraq (1968-2003)" excluding Wikipedia sites received only 7 Google search hits, and I stated that WP:COMMON NAME applied. You rejected that and started this argument, I suggested that what you argued about how similar the government means that the articles should be merged into History of Iraq (1958-2003) but you rejected that too. Plus I regard this last statement by you as a clear violation of WP:CIVIL that I warned you earlier to adhere to, but have now violated, you aggressively forced an ultimatum on me by saying "Either give me facts, or give up" to which I do not owe you out of subservience to provide you with anything, but I do owe the Wikipedia community as a whole to provide such material. I am reporting you for WP:CIVIL violation.--R-41 (talk) 17:12, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

You have been reported for incivility to Wikiquette assistance
You are free and welcome to disagree with me about the name and discuss the issue, however you have repeatedly violated WP:CIVIL towards me, after I specifically told you to cease doing so and warned you that I would not tolerate further incivil behaviour towards me. You did not respect by warning, so I have reported you to Wikiquette assistance for violation of WP:CIVIL.--R-41 (talk) 17:29, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

I am not overruning other users, I said that an RfC should be started on that Iraq page to bring in many users to discuss the name
I brought up RfC so that many Wikipedia users could be brought in to discuss the name and determine whether based on WP:COMMON NAME as claimed by be it should be changed to "Ba'athist Iraq" as I support or whether by other policies it should remain "History of Iraq (1968-2003)" as supported by you. That is fair - it is not overruning anyone, it makes it no longer an stalemate argument between two users, and allows many people to add their views to allow a greater perspective on the issue.--R-41 (talk) 17:56, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Qassim was of Arabo-Kurdish descent, his supporters supported a multi-ethnic Iraqi culture
Now aside from the dispute that has been brought up at the Wikquette page where you can address it there, I just have found sources that state that Qassim was Arabo-Kurdish born of a Sunni Muslim Arab father and a Shia Muslim Kurdish mother, plus Qassim and his supporters stressed "Iraqiness" and stated that "Iraq is not only an Arab state, but an Arabo-Kurdish state...[T]he recognition of Kurdish nationalism by Arabs proves clearly that we are associated in the country, that we are Irakians first, Arabs and Kurds later". The Qassim government sought to make Iraq bilingual, learning the Kurdish language was mandatory in Iraq's teachers colleges under Qassim in 1961 - in the midst of Kurdish revolts as noted in this article - for him to pass such a law under these circumstances reveals he was not as hardline against the Kurds as you suggest he was. So claims that Qassim and his supporters were "anti-Kurdish" or deliberately sought to persecute the Kurds, other than suppression of separatism that threatened to break up Iraq, are false. Not all of the rebels in the Free Officer Movement agreed with Qassim's approach - a number were Arab officers who didn't care about Kurdish demands, but Qassim and his supporters on this issue pressed for ameliorating Kurdish concerns in Iraq.--R-41 (talk) 18:31, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * That's why I believe that the article History of Iraq (1958–1968) needs to be split into two articles on Qassim-led civic nationalist Iraq before the Ba'ath coup of 1963, and then Arif-led Nasserist Iraq after the Ba'ath coup of 1963. Qassim would probably be turning in his grave seeing his project of a united Arabo-Kurdish Iraqi state being associated as being the same thing as Arif's Nasserist pan-Arab Iraqi state. Qassim could certainly initially be seen as a Gorbachev for the Kurds, he dismantled the Arab-dominated institutions of the Hashimite Arab monarchy that disregarded Kurds, I regard his actions not like Gorbachev but being very Titoist in attempting to have Arabo-Kurdish fraternity while opposing the kind of sectarian ethnic nationalism that was promoted by the Ba'ath.--R-41 (talk) 18:59, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Sometimes states in a short period of time radically change course and are suddenly changed but warrant articles on them because of their unique character - take the Russian Provisional Government for example, it replaced the autocratic Tsarist Russia, brought in Socialist Revolutionary deputies who sought to hold the first fully democratic election in Russia's history, but then it was opposed and overthrown by the Bolsheviks.--R-41 (talk) 19:07, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I should point out to you that the articles French Fourth Republic and French Fifth Republic are about states that were both called the "French Republic" and the Fifth Republic was the immediate successor of the Fourth Republic, both are deemed distinct and unique, warranting their own articles.--R-41 (talk) 19:14, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Remember that Arif's government is not even linearly connected with Qassim's government, Qassim's government was overthrown by a Ba'athist coup, and then Arif's government came in, with a Nasserist pan-Arabist agenda as you have pointed out, not the Iraqi civic nationalism of Qassim. So the two regimes are not linearly connected. Also STOP removing the infoboxes. You have no consensus in favour of making such radical changes - other users contributed to creating them and they have been there for some time and as the user currently supporting those contributions I oppose your removal of them, you need to get a consensus from other users before making radical changes like removing the infoboxes.--R-41 (talk) 19:30, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Here is the reason why a separate article should be for Iraq under Qassim (1958-1963) and Iraq under Arif (1963-1968)
I have found very strong evidence that the article History of Iraq (1958–1968) should be split into articles on 1958-1963 under Qassim's Iraqi civic nationalist regime and one on 1963-1968 under Arif's Nasserist pan-Arabist regime. The following is from the article on Qassim:
 * On September 30 Qasim removed Arif’s status as Deputy Prime Minister and as Minister of the Interior. Qasim attempted to remove Arif’s disruptive influence by offering him a role as Iraqi ambassador to West Germany in Bonn. Arif refused, and in a confrontation with Qasim on October 11, Arif is reported to have drawn his pistol in the presence of Qasim; although whether it was to assassinate Qasim or commit suicide is a source of debate. No blood was shed, and Arif agreed to depart for Bonn. However his time in Germany was brief, as he attempted to return to Baghdad on November 4 amid rumours of an attempted coup against Qasim. He was promptly arrested, and charged on November 5 with attempted assassination of Qasim and attempts to overthrow the regime/. He was brought to trial for treason and condemned to death in January 1959; but was subsequently pardoned in December 1962 and was sentenced to life imprisonment.

And then after Qassim was overthrown by the Ba'ath in 1963 and then the Ba'ath was overthrown later in 1963 and Arif rose to power. As you can see from the text above, Arif's government was not a restoration of Qassim's government, as Qassim's government had sentenced Arif to life in prison, but a new regime altogether. Thus with this, I support the splitting of the article.--R-41 (talk) 02:31, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
 * It's a different regime because, as I said earlier, Arif was an outlaw by the Qasim regime - Arif was sentenced to life in prison for treason. Plus, as you have said earlier, the basis of the regimes was different - one was based on a Arabo-Kurdish fraternity and outspoken anti-Nasserism, the other was outspokenly pro-Nasserist and pan-Arabist. The two regimes were separated by a coup, Qassim's government fell in 1963, the Ba'ath rose and then fell that year, and then Arif's government was formed in 1963. Therefore the Qasim regime and Arif regime cannot be seen as one. Also as I said the French Republic includes the linearly succeeding French Fourth Republic and French Fifth Republic.--R-41 (talk) 14:59, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Hitler's Nazi regime never formally abrogated the Weimar Republic's constitution - the constitution formally remained the constitution of Germany under Nazi rule. Hitler's regime has its own article Nazi Germany, so articles on regimes can be made.--R-41 (talk) 15:11, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
 * First off, the French Fourth and Fifth Republic articles - which you say are about constitutional differences and not separate countries - have infoboxes in them. Second of all - is Qasim insigificant - he enfranchised Kurds and gave them cultural rights after years of repression by the Arab monarchy; is Arif insignificant - he was promoting unification of Iraq into a pan-Arab state. As I said, Qasim's supporters would not accept Arif's regime as a successor because he was under arrest for life in prison for treason.--R-41 (talk) 15:18, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
 * No, I think they are fundamentally different regimes led by two leaders who opposed each other and whom had completely different objectives - Qasim an anti-Nasserist and vigorous opponent of the United Arab Republic versus Arif, a Nasserist supporter of pan-Arab unification. Arif was under arrest for life for treason by Qasim, the Ba'ath coup happened, then Arif's coup happened and established a new regime.--R-41 (talk) 15:25, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
 * They don't need to be stub articles when more material is added to them.--R-41 (talk) 15:26, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I am expanding the History of Iraq (1958-1968) article as we speak.--R-41 (talk) 15:32, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited History of Iraq (1968–2003), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Donum (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:23, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Is this some kind of attempt of vandalism?!
What is this supposed to have been? . The administrator Kudpung reverted it and restored the article to protected status. You just poured "space bar" on it! It looked absurd, were you committing an act vandalism or what?! Because the page has been shut down again because of what you did, if it wasn't vandalism you need to explain what you were trying to do to Kudpung.--R-41 (talk) 02:25, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * All you did was pour spaces into it. How does that make it look better? Why did it need to have spaces poured into it?--R-41 (talk) 15:31, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

East Germany
I have simply  re-protected the page until  the dispute is resolved, but I will not protect it again. The moment the current  protection  expired, it  was being  edited again. I took no  notice of who had last  edited it. Please see the disclaimer on the article page. And please note that I  have now withdrawn from  Wikipedia and will  not  be responding  to  new messages. If you would like any  action, please consider the still  unresolved ANI, and make a request  for unprotection or for page edits through  the recommended procedures. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:31, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Zaki al-Arsuzi
I'm afraid I have had to fail the article while further work is carried out (see also the nomination page). It's a great article otherwise so it does pain me to do so, but I think it's work that does need to be carried out. Regards, - Jarry1250 [Deliberation needed] 18:20, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * If you have a look at my edit, there are quite a few little differences there. Then there was our previous discussion about whether he was a member of the new party, and whether that was anything to do with his mental state. - Jarry1250 [Deliberation needed] 18:29, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Your GOCE Requests
Hello TIAYN. You currently have six requests in the GOCE Requests page. We only allow three concurrently (see the blue box, under "Instructions for making a request"). Please could you decide which three you want to be listed and remove the other three. Thanks. --Stfg (talk) 11:21, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Politburo of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union
Please resolve your dispute with the IP on the article talk page, instead of continuing to revert. You are both already at 4RR. - Morinao (talk) 21:11, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Template:Brezhnev Era
I just did some heavy editing to it due to the fact that post 1982 events and people were in the template. The template you created is the Breznev era, 1964-1982. Korean Air 007, the 1984 Summer Olympics boycott, and even listing Chernenko as a Soviet premier don't fit the parameters of what the template is supposed to be covering. They being put in a template covering 1983 to the fall of the USSR would be appropriate.

Think of this way, A template on John F Kennedy wouldn't have the Gulf of Tonkin incident in it which happened when Johnson was President.- William 02:46, 30 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I saw what you did with the template, that's fine. Now I got to fix articles that you put the template into. There are two points I want to make


 * 1- What is considered the end for the stagnation era? Is it the end of 1985 or when Gorbachev comes to power? I think a note of this should be either a invisible note in the template or noted on the talk page to avoid confusing other editors who come across it. Personally I think Gorbachev coming to power should mark the end. A Soviet template perestroika/Fall of the USSR or something like that would appear to be the logical next step.


 * 2- Templates are meant to navigate between articles but you have several red links in stagnation era. Are these subjects likely to be a basis of an article? If they aren't, they shouldn't be on the template.


 * Please write back here. I will check back in to see what you have to say. Do svidaniya- William 15:58, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Babrak Karmal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Dari language


 * Hafizullah Amin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Pashtun

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Fazal Haq Khaliqyar, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Shahbaz and Zakim Shah (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:07, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Marxism-Socialism
All Marxism is socialist but not all socialism is Marxist. I do not think the UK Labor Party was ever Marxist; it certainly was not so at any time from the leadership of Ramsay MacDonald on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.35.94.85 (talk) 22:58, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

You are a great user
Hi! I have seen your work on Wikipedia and I think is very good and neutral (although the English Wikipedia is not very respectful neutrality). Greeting and congratulations from Argentina.--Trevor Goodchild (talk) 21:42, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Democratic Republic of Afghanistan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to MI-8, L-39, IL-18, IL-28 and MI-4

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:34, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

soviet wage reform article
Hello! Thanks for your nice comments about the article Wage reform in the Soviet Union, 1956–1962. I thought I'd let you know that I'm having another go at getting that magic shiny star and the article is at FAC again. The FAC is at Featured article candidates/Wage reform in the Soviet Union, 1956–1962/archive2 and I would really appreciate any comments. cya! Coolug (talk) 13:39, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Help
Hello! Could you check my article "Libyan Communist Party"? I do not write very good English.--Trevor Goodchild (talk) 06:58, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Ba'ath Party, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Karak (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:40, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Signpost Interview
I was thinking of interviewing you for the Signpost (one of Wikipedia's newspapers) about your work with Soviet Union-related lists for our ongoing series of interviews with people who work against systemic bias. However, these interviews are normally done via email to ensure that the contents aren't disseminated before publication. If you are interested, could you send me an email using the "email this user" link on my page so that I can reply with my questions? Thanks. Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:29, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Civil
Hello TIAYN,

Please be WP:CIVIL. Shouting and edit summaries like this are inacceptable. Moreover, you are not a newbie and should know WP:NPOV and reliable sources. They are also applicable to parties ideologies. We don't describe them from the parties' POV, but (like everything here) from a NPOV, as established in neutral, third-party sources. Removing sourced content unilaterally, beacause you personally do not agree with it, is not acceptable either. Kind regards. --RJFF (talk) 18:25, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party – Iraq Region, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Custody (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:50, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

CPCCCP
You may well be correct about those articles on the General Secretary elections, but this cannot be decided via speedy deletion. I marked the articles with the "disputed" tag; I suggest you discuss on the talk p. of the main article. I think the question is whether the selection of a person to play the role that at one time Stalin played in the role of General Secretary should or should not be called an election to the post. I'm taking no position on that.  DGG ( talk ) 23:18, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I seem not to have made myself clear, so let me explain in more detail. Speedy deletion is limited to the reasons at WP:CSD; error is not among them. No Wikipedia admin by himself is qualified or permitted to determine what is correct article content--this is something that must be done by the community, which needs an opportunity to comment. How can you expect me to be qualified to decide what positions count as equivalent? it's a subject question, and I have no right to say whether or not you are correct. I have no right to say whether or not the community wants to interpret this position narrowly or broadly--most of the other language WPS seem to interpret it fairly narrowly, so you might be correct. But no admin can decide on content--it is, quite properly . outside  our jurisdiction.  If you start a discussion of the subject, and people give their views, then an admin can specify what the community consensus is, but the community must first form a consensus.
 * there are several different places you can do this. One of them is discuss on the general page of the office what people and elections should be included. Another is to do an AfD on the articles in question. In either case, you will help your case if you can refer to some generally accepted sources for the period. But what you can not do is replace a speedy someone else has removed.  DGG ( talk ) 09:47, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 5
Hi. When you recently edited List of socialist countries, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Socialist Unity Party (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:20, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

DGG
You might want to rethink this. I don't think it will end well. AIR corn (talk) 11:55, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * no concern. I don't get angry at things like this, & I hope nobody else gets angry on my behalf. I'll archive them at some point. DGG ( talk ) 16:21, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Huh?
Hello TIAYN,

I don't understand your post on my talk page. It is not related to anything that I have ever edited. I think you must have mistaken me for someone else... Kind regards --RJFF (talk) 12:16, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Blanking
Those articles might well be a load of bollocks, but you aren't giving a reason that's valid under the CSD rules. CSD doesn't cover everything - it's very limited. The best way is to take the lot to an AfD for a consensus to be reached. Please do not blank the pages in the meantime - that could be regarded as vandalism no matter how well intentioned. Blanking is only for copyvio, attack and requesting deletion of a page that you have created. (Sometimes used on userpages for bad spam, but I doubt that's strictly within the guidelines.) These articles are not in those areas. You could try 'hoax', but I doubt they would be regarded as blatant hoaxes - the CSD hoax is supposed to be a stand-up-and-hit-you thing, like a 10 year old winning the Nobel Prize for Physics. AfD is the best course. I'm not defending the articles, just trying to avoid you possibly getting blocked for vandalism. Keep cool and things will work better. Peridon (talk) 14:40, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Just adding that at AfD you'll have the chance to give your reasons in full, and more people will see them. AfD is a much bigger billboard than CSD. Peridon (talk) 14:44, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * good advice.  DGG ( talk ) 16:26, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay.... --TIAYN (talk) 21:13, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Not to pile on, but the same logic applies to templates like Soviet elections. Removing the articles from the template isn't an appropriate way of expressing your disapproval. If the articles are deleted at AFD, then they should be removed from the template. Until then, they should remain. - Eureka Lott 04:22, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Correct answer to the above mystery: CSD#3 - blatant hoax or misinformation. Carrite (talk) 04:52, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Soviet elections
I just saw vote totals showing in the piece running into the tens of millions. If there was no election, it should be SPEEDY DELETE AS HOAX. Are you saying there were no elections??? Carrite (talk) 21:15, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * And.... if those ARE hoaxes, they should have been tagged for speedy without hauling them to AfD as part of a group nomination. Carrite (talk)


 * I just saw DGG's talk page. If there was no election, I believe there is a template like { {hoax} } that could be used to speedy them out. I speak of the last two mentioned, which list vote totals in the 10s of millions. The earlier pieces need to go through AfD. Carrite (talk) 21:21, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Nicely done!

 * Thanks. --TIAYN (talk) 05:56, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party – Syria Region
Hello! Your submission of Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party – Syria Region at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Just wanted to let you know there are issues. I can't do the review, but did have a quick look at the article. The "under construction" flag on top of your article will bring an automatic rejection for DYK. When you're ready (and you should do this sooner rather than later), write a short post and begin it with the red arrow icon, which will inform others that it's ready for review. Marrante (talk) 08:04, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Communist Party of the Soviet Union General-Secretarial election, 1953 (March 5)
Hi. I've reverted your edits to this page as it removed an AfD template from it while discussion was in place. If you need to restore the CSD tag, please do so without removing the AfD template. Thank you. -- B  music  ian  12:35, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Liberal party of Canada article
Hello:

While reading the article on the LIberal party of Canada I noticed some inconsistencies that put into doubt the credibility of the article as well as a number of grammar mistakes.

The first paragraph second sentence reads: "In the conventional political spectrum, the party sits between the centre and the centre-left".[2] This is simply incorrect. The Liberal party policy fluctuates between centre-right and centre-left: support for the monarchy, Senate downloading costs onto provinces during the 1990's; centre-right. Support for Kyoto and medicare; centre-left.

What troubles me is the citation used to justify the centre-centre-left argument. The article by Susan Delacourt of the Toronto Star (a traditional Liberal newspaper), quotes then Liberal leader Ignatieff, who called the party: "the coalition at the centre of Canadian life" and goes on to say “We have to stand in the centre, drawing people from both sides of the political spectrum.”

The interpretation used in the wikipedia article clearly is a misreading of the article by Ms. Delacourt. Either the citation should be removed or a broader definition of where the Liberals rest on the traditional politcal spectrum (that has limited application in Canada where division traiditionally cleave along constitutional lines) should be used.

Regards, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.191.89.72 (talk) 19:04, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Trust All You Need:

I found some inconsistencies with the Liberal Party of Canada article. In the first paragraph second sentence; "In the conventional political spectrum, the party sits between the centre and the centre-left".[2]However, the cited article by Susan Delacourt contradicts this interpretation of Liberal policy positioning. In the article then Liberal leader Ignatieff states: "We’re the coalition at the centre of Canadian life" then, "We have to stand in the centre, drawing people from both sides of the political spectrum". Clearly indicating the Liberal party is on the centre-right to centre-left of Canadian politics or more generally in the centre.

The Liberal party's ideology fluctuates between centre-right and centre-left. The Liberal party supports the monarchy, Senate, unloading services onto provinces during the 1990's through the cutting of monies to social transfers and services, "regressive" consumption taxes such as the HST/GST while dropping "progressive" taxes such as income tax. These are rightwing-centre-right policies. On the other hand the Liberals support; Kyoto, millenium scholarship fund, constitutional patriation, medicare, old age pensions, encroaching on provincial responsibilities. Generally centre-left in nature.

So for Wikipedia to state the Liberal party sits between the centre to centre-left of the conventional political spectrum (that has limited application in Canada where political cleavages are traditionally based upon constitutional or linguistic policy) is at best a misinterpretation of the Delacourt article and at worst biased. Either the position of the Liberal party should be broadened to include centre-right or the cited article by Delacourt should be removed.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.191.89.72 (talk) 00:45, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

TIAYN:

You are listed as: "(Liberalism)Project founder, interested in social liberalism and the Liberal Party of Canada". I assume that gives you some ability to change mistakes within the article.

Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.191.89.72 (talk) 00:54, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Braincricket (talk) 20:32, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Hafizullah Amin - copyedit for GA complete
Hi, just to let you know the requested copyedit of Hafizullah Amin is now complete. The exceptions are a couple of additional clarifications requested in the final parts of the article, which I would like your feedback on, and also a query on the article's talkpage about the Tajbeg Palace's ability to withstand artillery bombardment.

If time and timing allows, I will also assist with any further issues or prose changes that are brought up in the impending GA review. I should also mention that, if in the future you go on to nominate the article for FAC, it will need yet further substantial work on the prose first; WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests/Potential Featured Articles is a good place to ask for this, although it can be even slower than the ordinary requests page.

It was very interesting to learn more about the background to this period of Afghanistan's history. Congratulations on your hard work in improving the coverage of these important topics. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 04:02, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

ISBN
Just to let you know I've fixed some ISBN errors at Ba'ath Party (Iraqi-led faction). When you made this edit, I think you got hold of some 10-digit book numbers from somewhere and tacked "978-" on the front of each one. That doesn't work, as 13-digit book numbers use a different checksum method. It's fine to use the 10-digit number if you don't have the correct 13-digut number handy. -- John of Reading (talk) 18:33, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

File:ServethePeople (Norway).jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:ServethePeople (Norway).jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Cloudbound (talk) 22:51, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party – Syria Region
Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:59, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party – Syria Region
Hello! Your submission of Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party – Syria Region at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Ishtar456 (talk) 06:45, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Please see additional comment on the template.Italic text--Ishtar456 (talk) 17:25, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

History of Iraq (1968-2003)
I'm assuming good faith, but don't understand this edit; I went beyond my copyediting mandate and added a link to an empty section. I do not edit-war; if my edits in accordance with policy and the Manual of Style are reverted, I will notify the Guild of Copy Editors and the editor who listed the article on the requests page. Thanks for letting me do my job and all the best,  Miniapolis  ( talk ) 13:40, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi again. I didn't know that you had also requested the copyedit, but it's done. It's a very good article; I made a few edit comments about things I didn't understand, so you may want to tweak those before the GAN. If you have any questions, please ask! Good luck and all the best,  Miniapolis  ( talk ) 01:22, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Image tagging for File:Picture of Le Duan.jpeg
Thanks for uploading File:Picture of Le Duan.jpeg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 09:05, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Democratic Republic of Afghanistan
You are not allowing improvement or constructive edits to take place on this page. You did not respond to my comments about the changes and you refuse to give any explanation. What is your justification for using a flag that was used by the Republic of Afghanistan when the article is called DRA, using the wrong names for its leaders and by deleting the native names which it took me a great deal of effort to locate? 91.125.249.103 (talk) 12:28, 3 April 2012 (UTC) (this is 87.114.122.138, on a different machine).

WP The X-Files in the Signpost
The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject The X-Files for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 23:23, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 5
Hi. When you recently edited Le Duan, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Orthodox and President of China (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:06, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Georgy Malenkov changes
Hi, I was reviewing the edits made to Georgy Malenkov by IP 12.147.22.105. It looks like a lot of NPOV and uncited material was added. He/she made quite a hash of the carefully written Joseph Brodsky article, (NPOV, false facts, duff English) which it has taken a long time to clean up. Would you mind having a look at the changes to Malenkov since January? The article has grown by a quarter (despite your reverts and re-reverts). I appreciate your eyes on this, if you have a moment. Thanks and all best wishes Span (talk) 18:44, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I've replied on my page. Span (talk) 21:27, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

calling for discussion
I called for a discussion on the redirec you created at Abdul Qasim. Geo Swan (talk) 00:16, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

How many NKP MPs in 1973?
Hi. Any idea on a reference that answers this question? --Soman (talk) 14:17, 15 April 2012 (UTC) --Soman (talk) 16:00, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Removing references
Hi, please don't remove refs with an edit summary like "can't just remove refs". Thanks. Zloyvolsheb (talk) 14:56, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

GAC sections
I am betting that the bot will reverse your change. The change that you made should be made in the GA nominee template subsection parameter.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:50, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I did that. --TIAYN (talk) 04:53, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

GOCE request for Era of Stagnation
Hi, I responded to your request for a copy edit for this article. There's still a ways to go but feedback is always welcome. Blackmane (talk) 13:11, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi I'd really appreciate it if you could have a look at the article. I've copyedited the main sections of the article (lede, analysis, causes and summary) but have left the last two. I'm of the thought that those two sections need to be substantially expanded before I can do any c/e on them. As they are, I don't think they add much to the article. Blackmane (talk) 15:42, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Dead link in article 'Ingeborg Steinholt'
Hi. The article 'Ingeborg Steinholt' has a dead link that could not be repaired automatically. Can you help fix it?

Dead: http://www.hblad.no/nyheter/article311342.ece This link is marked with Dead link in the article. Please take a look at that article and fix what you can. Thank you!
 * You added this in November 2009.
 * The bot tested this link on 9 April, 11 April, 13 April, 17 April and yesterday, but it never worked.
 * The bot checked The Wayback Machine and WebCite but couldn't find a suitable replacement.

PS- you can opt-out of these notifications by adding to your user page or user talk page. BlevintronBot (talk) 18:19, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

GOCE requests
Hello TIAYN. It's OK to remove one request and replace it with another occasionally, but it's not OK to remove a request once a copy editor has started work, as this wastes the copy editor's time. I have removed Democratic Republic of Afghanistan for the time being. You're welcome to add it once Era of Stagnation has been completed. --Stfg (talk) 11:09, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Word-for-word copying material from Marxism-Leninism article for use in Ba'athism article with no references to back it up
TIAYN, I added this to the Marxism-Leninism article this: "Through the policy of democratic centralism, the communist party is the supreme political institution of the Marxist-Leninist state." - with a reference, you later deliberately copied word-for-word what I wrote, and made this: "Through the policy of democratic centralism, the Ba'ath party is the supreme political institution of a Ba'athist state" - the bolded part are the words you copied from the Marxism-Leninism article and used for the Ba'athism article - the only original words in it are "Ba'ath" and "a Ba'athist" - and the sentence has no reference to support it.--R-41 (talk) 02:34, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Stop swearing on my talk page at once or I will report you for disruptive behaviour. No you have to reference every claim and argument, you cannot claim that it is in the body and is thus referenced, if it is referenced in the article then you can simply take those references and add them into the intro. You have failed to respond to my point that the statement you added on Ba'athism's connection with democratic centralism is completely plagiarized from what I added to the Marxism-Leninism article. The statement later in the main body of the article that you added that says "Aflaq supported the idea of democratic centralism and a committed activist revolutionary party based on the Leninist model." has no reference at the end of the sentence. I took into possibility that the final reference at the end of the paragraph may have had the material - I checked it on Google books - first of all page 67 that you used is not speaking about democratic centralism - it is speaking about Aflaq's conception of liberty that the author claims is related to Marxism's conception, also I made three variants of searches through the book to search for the connection of the Ba'ath with democratic centralism - it says nothing about Ba'athism's connection to democratic centralism.,, .--R-41 (talk) 14:16, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Mentioning other Wikipedia articles is not valid - that falls under WP:OTHERSTUFF. I did look at the bottom of the "Arab nation" section of the Wikipedia article - it has no reference that states that Ba'athism supported democratic centralism - I checked the reference at the end of the paragraph and it does not mention democratic centralism anywhere in it. You have thus far failed to verify that Ba'athism adheres to democratic centralism and have merely plagiarized part of the Marxism-Leninism article to make an unverified statement about Ba'athism.
 * It says (see under)
 * Aflaq supported the idea of democratic centralism and a committed activist revolutionary party based on the Leninist model. The revolutionary party would seize political power and from there on, transform society for the greater good. While the revolutionary party was numerically a minority, it was an all powerful institution, which had the right to initiate a policy even if the majority of the population were against it. As with the Leninist model, the Ba'ath party knew what was right and what was wrong; the population as a whole did not know this yet, they were still influenced by the old value and moral system.[21]
 * --TIAYN (talk) 14:36, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
 * And as I mentioned above, nowhere in the reference you included at the end of the paragraph does it mention "democratic centralism" in connection with Ba'athism at all - neither on the page you referenced nor anywhere in the book.--R-41 (talk) 14:38, 28 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you, that's all that I was asking for - references. Next time, please don't be so stubborn, we could have resolved this much sooner by you just accepting that I noted that there was no mention of democratic centralism in the reference you provided. Now please add those references, and please revise the intro sentence so that it is not a deliberate plagiarism of the Marxism-Leninism article.--R-41 (talk) 14:45, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Seamus (dog)
Seamus (dog), an article which is part of WikiProject presidential elections has been proposed for deletion. Feel free to join the discussion. Articles for deletion/Seamus (dog) (2nd nomination) HHIAdm (talk) 00:05, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Babrak Karmal
Your editing of this article has caused me to lose some edits. Can't you respect the GOCEinuse tag at the top of the article? Isn't it you who requested the copyediting of this article anyway? I intended to finish editing in about 30 minutes. --Greenmaven (talk) 08:09, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
 * OK. Your apology received. Finishing now for several hours. Regards --Greenmaven (talk) 08:25, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
 * My CE work on this one is finished now. --Greenmaven (talk) 05:30, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/Legacy of Leonid Brezhnev/archive1
I made some comments at Peer review/Legacy of Leonid Brezhnev/archive1 Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 15:44, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

GOCE Requests (2)
TIAYN, please don't remove requests from the GOCE Requests page when they are completed. Leave it to me. I use the done markers and the entries for archiving, and by deleting them, you increase my workload. Getting your next request in a day or two earlier won't really make all that much difference anyway, since requests are picked up from interest, not in strict order. --Stfg (talk) 09:17, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Your Copyedit Request for Leonid Brezhnev
Hey - thought I would take a crack at this one for you. I tend to tweak things more than most, but if you don't like what I do, feel free to roll me back, no hard feelings! Best regards: Cliff (a/k/a &#34;Uploadvirus&#34;) (talk) 05:32, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay. :) --TIAYN (talk) 16:48, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit warring
Your recent editing history at List of left and far left parties in Europe shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. --RJFF (talk) 09:28, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

General Secretary of the Communist Party of Vietnam at WP:FLC
You have comments outstanding here. Are you going to resolve them or would you prefer me to archive the nomination? The Rambling Man (talk) 07:23, 24 May 2012 (UTC)