User talk:Trust Is All You Need/Archive 6

Hello, Trust Is All You Need/Archive 6! WikiProject United States, an outreach effort supporting development of United States related articles in Wikipedia, has recently been restarted after a long period of inactivity. As a user who has shown an interest in United States related topics we wanted to invite you to join us in developing content relating to the United States. If you are interested please add your Username and area of interest to the members page here. Thank you!!!

--Kumioko (talk) 21:01, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Please consider using edit summaries. Thank you and happy editing, happy new year, and happy everything. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:52, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article Vitaly Vorotnikov has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Mhiji 03:26, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Senterpartiet.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 04:04, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article Vladimir Dolgikh has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Mhiji 02:36, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well I can if you can guarantee me that ther will be no edit wars soon or something similiar. That's the reason I wanted to wait few days more... but if your edits were approved by other users who contributed to this article, then it's fine, I'll promote article to good article status.--Wustefuchs (talk) 18:46, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I also saw that you expanded article too... Ok, if ther will be no edit wars, then ther are no more obstacles. But this doesn't mean that you can't expand article in future, moreover, it would be good if you would do that. Regards. --Wustefuchs (talk) 18:57, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Thanks a lot for your edits and fixes on the article on Anastas Mikoyan. I have a question to ask you: what do you think of S.S. Montefiore's book, Stalin: Court of the Red Tsar? I've completed reading the entire book but I'm unsure if I should keep it in the future for reference purposes, considering that it seems too much like a mish-mash of anecdotes during different periods of Stalin's rule, rather than a straight narrative of his life. Is Robert Service's recent biography on Stalin a more better, standard reference to go by? Cheers, --Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 20:19, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I actually do have a copy of Service's book and it works as a generally good narrative for modern Russia (although it's regrettably short and too concise). The problem I have with Montefiore's book is that it's too difficult to tell the woods from the trees. I expected it to have much greater coverage on the Purges and the Terror as a whole but it's too much of a top-down look at the subject. Perhaps references to those topics deserve their own monographs and we might be forced to look to Robert Conquest's and Anne Applebaum's works. Thanks a lot.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 02:06, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Nikolai Tikhonov you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 10 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Lord Roem (talk) 03:24, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Initial review has been posted. Cheers, Lord Roem (talk) 18:03, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Decided to promote. Regards, Lord Roem (talk) 18:30, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll wait a few days to see if someone at GOCE gets to it. If not, I'll take a look myself at the article again and most likely pass it. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 02:29, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So you reverted my edit, rstoring a badly written sentence that includes a point that is neither germane to the topic nor supported by a citation. Yeah, that really helped, didn't it? Totnesmartin (talk) 13:33, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There, i fixed it for you. Does it meet with your unstated standards, or do you want to roll it back again without offering an explanation? Totnesmartin (talk) 18:54, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No probs. It's a very good article, well worth the effort. Here's some stuff for you to think about:

1. Fixed In the lead, I don't really like the fragment "as well as post-war negotiations" which does not mesh well with the formation rest of the sentence it's in.

Molotov was the principal Soviet signatory of the Nazi-Soviet non-aggression pact of 1939 (also known as the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact) as well as post-war negotiations, and a signatory of the Politburo resolution authorizing the Katyn massacre.

Maybe try

Molotov was the principal Soviet signatory of the Nazi-Soviet non-aggression pact of 1939 (also known as the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact), was involved in post-war negotiations, and was a signatory of the Politburo resolution authorizing the Katyn massacre.

2. Working (may take some time) The lead says "However, after Stalin's death in 1953 Molotov was staunchly opposed to Khrushchev's de-Stalinization policy", but I don't see that thought developed or even covered in the body of the article. In the Post-war career (1949–1976) section we learn that M opposed K because of a K speech which spelled doom for M, but that's about all. We don't hear specifically about de-Stalinization. You could extend the sentence " Consequently, he became the leader of an old guard which tried to overthrow Khrushchev" with another clause along the lines of "...which opposed K's de-stalinisation policies and tried to overthrow him."

3. Removed Do we need to know "It was not only Molotov's position which was in decline; at the same time, Anastas Mikoyan lost his post as Minister of Foreign Trade." I think we can assume that the fortunes of most people at the top of the slippery pole waxes and wanes. Does it add anything to our understanding of M to know that in this instance of trouble, he was not the only one of a downwards curve?

4. Fixed "Although the purges were carried out by Stalin's successive police chiefs,[21] Nikolai Yezhov was the chief organiser". Why the word "Although"? What are you trying to convey? What's special about Yezhov? He was the chief of the NKVD, yes? Does that make him something other than a police chief. Are you trying to draw a distinction between the police & the NKVD?

5. "Andrey Vyshinsky, the Procurator General, even told Molotov personally of incidents involving mothers eating their newly-born children." I'm sure he did, and its a grizzly detail. But I'm unconvinced it's necessary. What do we learn of M by knowing that someone said this to him?

• • We don't learn anything of him, but seeing that he was Premier when this happened, and it was he and S who pushed through the collectivization of agriculture we should include, at least I believe, some of the consequences of early collectivization. Of course this is only an opinion. --TIAYN (talk) 22:44, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

6. Fixed "Great Patriotic War". Are you happy that this is the best term? Clearly, it's the Russian name for the war, but this is en.wikipedia,where the readers are familiar with the event under the title WW2. 7. I suspect there's over-linkage going on, such as multiple linkage of Great Patriotic War. (We really should have a tool which takes care of duplicated links.

8. Fixed In the para starting "At first, Hitler rebuffed Soviet diplomatic hints that", I'm not sure which year we're in. 1940? 1939? Presumably 1939. The thing which throws is is the On 5 March 1940 in the preceding para ... we're jumping forwards and backwards in time and when going backwards into the "At first, Hitler" paragraph are given no cue. Part of the solution might be to amend the dates in the para to "18 August, and on 22 August 1939". Additionally, consider moving the "On 5 March 1940 " sentence down to form its own paragraph above the "In November 1940 " para.

9. Fixed We say at one point "as well as the part of Poland east of the Curzon Line" and later in the same para "authorised to occupy two-thirds of Western Poland" which leaves me wondering. Did the agreement change in this respect? Or are we tellig the same thing twice in two different ways?

10. Fixed There are two versions of the same sentence in different parts of the article. We say "Molotov and Ribbentrop acted only as agents for their masters, Stalin and Hitler." and "In this he was carrying out Stalin's wishes". I'm not sure what to make either of the duplication of the concept (that M was doing S's bidding), nor the concept itself. M shows himself to be much the same sort of character as S, and absent S, it doesn't seem likely to me that the pact or the negotiations would be that different. Why are we making excuses for him?

11. Moved to Wikiquote I'm not sure I understand what point the quote "The fact that atomic war may break " is trying to make. The first part is well enough - he's a scary old geezer, but I'm not getting much of anything from the part starting "After all, we have been holding on for some time, "

12. Fixed We say "The rehabilitation of Molotov began in 1973, during Leonid Brezhnev's rule, when information about him was again allowed inclusion in Soviet encyclopaedias. His connection, support and work in the Anti-Party Group was mentioned in encyclopaedias published in 1973 and 1974, but eventually disappeared altogether by the mid-to-late-1970s". I'm minded to think we need another word or two for what seems to be a very weak rehab which fizzled out after a couple of years. We might start the sentence "The first signs of a rehabilitation were seen during LB's rule..."

13. The sentence & quote starting "As Molotov once said "One should listen to them,"" does not seem to be to connect or explain the previous sentence "". Rather, it does not connect with the ""and because of it, much crucial information disappeared" clause, bur rather with the preceding clause "was pathologically mistrustful ". I don't come away understanding the link between his mistrust and the loss of information.

14. " It is important to note that Molotov divided the capitalist countries into two groups, the "smart and dangerous imperialists" and the "fools". Why is it important? That sentence has no real link to any other sentence, and on its own does not explain the importance of the distinction M makes.

15. Fixed M's name is best known, I submit, in relation to the Molotov cocktail. I know that's linked as a See also, but you've missing the opportunity to say, per the {{}} article, "The name "Molotov cocktail" was coined by the Finns during Winter War to mock Vyacheslav Mikhailovich Molotov, the Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars of the Soviet Union (i.e. Soviet Prime Minister) and the People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs at the time." I grant you that sentence has a citation needed on it, but I think his connection with the cocktail's name should be covered in the article; and probably as a sentence in the lead.

The Winston quote - nice end sentence!

Have fun! --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:05, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have performed the copyedit of this article that you requested. --Slon02 (talk) 23:20, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have completed a Good Article review of this article. Congratulations on the hard work you have put into it so far, but it will need significant further improvements to reach GA. Please visit the review page and consider my concerns. The review will remain open for seven days, in case you feel you can address the identified issues within that time. - DustFormsWords (talk) 04:13, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi, thanks for your work on the article. I have addressed your changes on the review page. They are fantastic! But there is still work to be done. Don't get hung up on the Reference/Notes layout issue - I think it's a small point and you have an arguable case, so there may be value in dealing with that one last and reconsidering whether my concerns are really sufficient to deny a GA pass. I'm more concerned about the remaining sourcing issues. Let me know when you're ready for me to take another pass over it. - DustFormsWords (talk) 00:48, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi, have looked over your most recent batch of changes. There is still more work to do. I have scuttled the Notes/References thing - it seemed like a petty point. The image licensing problems and the statements sourced to Time Magazine are your biggest remaining problems, along with the "nonperson" issue (for which I have proposed a solution). - DustFormsWords (talk) 23:56, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thank you for your patience with this long review process! All your recent edits are excellent. There is now only one remaining problem with the article, which is a small sourcing issue relating to the "second most powerful man" statement. Please revisit the review for a full explanation (a summary of it appears in the Overview section). (I would at this stage just fix it myself and be done but sadly I'm going to need your familiarity with the sources to solve it.) - DustFormsWords (talk) 23:33, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thank you again for your patience - I was kept away from Wikipedia over the weekend. My last concern has been addressed and I have accordingly now passed the article as a Good Article. Congratulations! - DustFormsWords (talk) 21:05, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

Please, accept my apologies because I wasn't able to return message to you, I had some work to do.

Let's get to the point, now, problem is this sentence:

"It is believed that Kulakov was able to greatly impress Leonid Brezhnev due to his achievements in agriculture and politics."

Now, I need informations who bealives in this, more correctly, I need you to show me the source for that sentence, book or something. Can you show me the source for that?

All in all, article is good writen, but I can't promote the article to good article status while we have sentence "it is bealived", no, GA status need sourced informations, I know you understand that.--Wustefuchs (talk) 17:41, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good, then you just add that source next to this sentence, and I'll promote the article...--Wustefuchs (talk) 17:49, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I saw your edits at DYK and clicked over to your user page and was impressed. Have you considering applying to become a Wikipedia:Online Ambassadors? It is a great way to help college students become more familiar with Wikipedia, and make them good long term contributers! Sadads (talk) 19:40, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re this summary: Whether there's a primary topic or not, lists of surname holders aren't disambiguation pages, they're anthroponymy list articles. -- JHunterJ (talk) 17:40, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't rush me, this isn't a popularity vote where the most wins. So there's no need for you to request my vote of support, I'll speed up my review if its any consolation. Afro (Talk) 09:24, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On 12 February 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Legacy of Leonid Brezhnev, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Leonid Brezhnev's legacy was described by Mikhail Gorbachev as "an Era of Stagnation"? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Orlady (talk) 06:03, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are not suppose to add the nomination to the WP:GAN page any longer. A bot does so now once you format the article talk page correctly.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:27, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you created a list of recent changes being logged over at Wikipedia:WikiProject Liberalism. Do you think you could share how you did this or create one for Wikipedia:WikiProject Albemarle County? I would greatly appreciate it. _WM^O _{Please leave me a wb if you reply} 06:39, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're giving me far more credit than it is due. While I may have made the most edits on to that article, I never attached too much importance to it and was always hoping that an editor with greater expertise would come in and handle the more difficult to verify information. I always strive to cite my added information and any unreferenced statements would have to be attributed to the editors themselves who added the information. I think those articles look great and will lend my voice as co-nominator, if you like. Best, --Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 06:34, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. There's a discussion here about the possibility of getting featured lists their own section on the main page. The discussion has turned to presenting a few lists that would represent the quality and diversity of topics that we cover, and a list that you were involved with has been mentioned specifically. It'd be great to get your thoughts. Regards, —WFC— 10:13, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you can prepare a blurb for the list mentioned there at User:The Rambling Man/Main page FL candidates before February 22, that would be awesome! Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:54, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've been told that every statement should have citation after it, for the most part much of this article only has one citation after many sentences. If you don't like my review I can delete and you can wait another four months for someone more experienced to review it. I gave my honest opinion that this article's quality is not up to GA standards if you don't like that sorry. Newfoundlander&Labradorian (talk) 16:06, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fine you can reference how you like I was just doing what someone else had said to me. Newfoundlander&Labradorian (talk) 16:12, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On 20 February 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 1973 Soviet economic reform, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the 1973 Soviet economic reform initiated by Alexei Kosygin (pictured), the Premier of the Soviet Union, tried to reduce the powers of the central Ministries? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 06:02, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have a question and a comment since you work with communist and socialist articles. Do you think the Fidel Castro article is close to GA quality? Also should Brezhnev assassination attempt be added to Template:LeonidBrezhnevSegmentsUnderInfoBox(since I saw you work with Brezhnev articles)? Spongie555 (talk) 23:11, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now looking more at Castro article does need more work. Also another questions. I don't undesrtand this article, List of leaders of the Russian SFSR, Isn't leader of Russian SFSR the same as leader of soviet union?(sorry it's just I'm not that fimiliar with the soviet government) Spongie555 (talk) 08:29, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. You have a new message at WikiManOne's talk page. Hello. You have a new message at WikiManOne's talk page.

Hello! You really have improved this list. Where do you get all this information from? I have made a similar list concerning Deputy Chairmen of the State Duma. I would be much grateful if you could improve that article too, for instance by adding dates when they took and left office. Have a nice day. Best wishes! Mbakkel2 10:13, 22 February 2011 (CET)

P.S. If you're interested, I have also made a List of Chairmen of the State Council of Imperial Russia.

Hello again! I see that you have ommited the St. Petersburg representative Sergey Mironov from the list, although several sources claim that he was a Deputy Speaker from October to December 2010. You have listed Valery Goledyad as a St. Petersburg reperesentive when he was a Deputy Speaker December 2001-January 2002, while you have listed him as a Sakhalin representative when he was First Deputy Speaker. Did he change constituency or is it an error? Best wishes! Mbakkel2 10:49,, 22 February 2011 (CET)

• I am sorry, but I have misread some information. Earlier today I told you that several sources claimed that Mironov was Deputy Chairman prior to his appointment as permanent Chairman in December 2001. In fact, Mironov was Deputy Chairman of one of the Federation Council committies. No sources seem to confirm that he was Deputy Speaker. I have noticed that you have added him. Since I don't know if you have included him based on my incorrect information, I have omitted him from the list. But if you have sources that can confirm that he was a Deputy Chairman, please include him again. I'm sorry once again. Best wishes! Mbakkel2 14:59, 22 Februar 2011 (CET)

Thanks for joining Russian History task force! I was planning to invite you later, when the infrastructure of task forces is a bit more developed, but that's very nice that you've joined before that time. Cheers! GreyHood ^Talk 09:21, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think so. See how Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Russian and Soviet military history task force is implemented into Template:WikiProject Russia. You just need to link the task force and its category in the template, and add some parameter for them, such as "hist". GreyHood ^Talk 10:10, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've added Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Russian and Soviet military history task force and Wikipedia:WikiProject Russia/History of Russia task force to the Template:WikiProject Soviet Union. Feel free to fix the images and parameters in the way you find appropriate. GreyHood ^Talk 10:19, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that there is certain logic in assessing Molotov and other Soviet-related articles only with WP:Soviet Union, but for the technical reasons and for the reasons of personal convinience it is better to have such articles assessed by both WikiProjects, and anyway in most cases it is very hard to define how to make a boundary between the two projects (Molotov, for example, was ethnic Russian, a Russian revolutionary in the Russian Empire etc). I'm doing much assessment job right now, and I am putting WP:SU template in addition to existing WP:RUSSIA template in WP:RUSSIA articles, and I hope that you act in similar way. Cheers! GreyHood ^Talk 23:20, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just so that you know: I've assessed more of the Soviet articles with WP:RUSSIA. Inclusion of the Soviet articles in the scope of WP:RUSSIA is needed for compiling WP:RUSSIA/PP, the list of popular pages related to Russia, and for the full compiling of statistics of Russia-related pages on Wikipedia. These are very helpful tools, and that's why we need to place both templates on most of Soviet articles (except those related more to non-RSFSR Soviet Republics).

Also, I've looked through your best articles, and was quite impressesed. So let me award you:

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For the scope and quality of your work in the area of the USSR-related articles. GreyHood Talk 01:10, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again! It seems I've find a simple and suitable technical solution of how to have WP:SOVIET UNION as the main banner, while still having Soviet articles in the Category:WikiProject Russia articles. See how I've modified Template:WikiProject Soviet Union and Talk:Vyacheslav Molotov. I've just included WP:RUSSIA to the Soviet template, in a similar way as task forces. Silly me, I should have done this yesterday. GreyHood ^Talk 10:23, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's good! I'll fix assessment of the articles I've reassessed recently. However, in cases when there are Russian task forces unsupported by WP:SOVIET UNION (such as Economy of Russia task force), the Russian template has to stay. GreyHood ^Talk 10:34, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, me and few other people thought that it is handy to have more topic-specific workgroups within WP:RUSSIA, to share common to-do lists. Also, eventually it should give us a number of useful tools, such as separate lists of popular pages for Russian economy, politics, etc. GreyHood ^Talk 10:35, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK. But as far as I know, the number of task forces supported by the project is limited to 15, and perhaps there is more sense in adding WikiProjects of other post-Soviet countries. GreyHood ^Talk 10:42, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again! There is one important thing that should be added to WP:Soviet Union template when it is used for Russian articles: parameter "rus-importance=" with value (alongside "rus=yes"). Otherwise, transcluded Russian articles would have no assessment by importance within WP:RUSSIA. Hope you could help me fix those articless that we have assessed today. Cheers!GreyHood ^Talk 00:23, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! The article is written. Best wishes. Mbakkel2 12:19, 23 February 2011 (CET)

Hello! Thank you very much for your improvements. Stephasin was First Deputy Prime Minister in Yevgeny Primakov's cabinet. Primakov resigned on May 12, 1999 and was succeeded by Stepashin. Stepashin resigned as First Deputy Prime Minister on the same day. You have written that Stepashin served as First Deputy Prime Minister in his own cabinet. If that is correct, he must have served in that position for only a few hours. Best wishes! Mbakkel2 18:49, 23 February 2011 (CET)

I nearly made an ass out of myself just there lol

I was going to say "No worries TIAYN, 'Trust is all you need' is working on it and I am sure you and him can sort it out between yourselves", then I realised I need more coffee, TIAYN? Trust Is All You Need? lol, it took me a few moments to realise you are the same person and how daft that would have been if I had actually said it there lmao!

Anyway, coffee, then I shall attempt one or two of those Russian Departments off the copyedit request list. I am sure they will be a little easier as they are slightly shorter than the last Russian one I did.

Chaosdruid (talk) 22:29, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

hahahahahahahaha! :D --TIAYN (talk) 22:33, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

PS - we have a Guild Copy Edit Drive starting on 1 March, so if there are any that need doing urgently after we start make sure to let some of us know personally if the requests page is not getting done quickly enough. Dianna, SMasters and The Utahraptor are co-ordinators and you can always pester me :¬) Chaosdruid (talk) 22:34, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks alot for telling me this, I have to articles which are waiting for a copyedit (but I haven't posted them seeing that I don't want to "strangle" the GCE!) Anyhow, thanks for letting me know; I might take you up on that pestering part! ;p --TIAYN (talk) 22:40, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of First Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Federation 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! Yazan (talk) 10:50, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear TIAYN, please don't revert the improvement tags. The article is stylistically unclear and could use improvement.

E.g.:

"Collective leadership... was considered an ideal form of governance in the Soviet Union"

This uses the passive voice (generally discouraged in scholarly writing and on Wikipedia), so it's unclear who considered it "ideal". Lenin? Stalin, Khrushchev, Brezhnev? Every Soviet leader? The party as a whole? Whoever it was, what is the evidence? Moreover, who is the author making this claim?

"Collective leadership is characterised by undermining the power of the General Secretary and the Chairman of the Council of Ministers as related to other offices by enhancing the powers of collective bodies, such as the Politburo."

Again, can we provide a direct reference for this? "Undermine" actually has extremely negative connotations -- to undermine is to "to injure or destroy by insidious activity or imperceptible stages, sometimes tending toward a sudden dramatic effect"; "to attack by indirect, secret, or underhand means; attempt to subvert by stealth"; "to weaken or cause to collapse by removing underlying support, as by digging away or eroding the foundation". This is probably a poor wording choice: why would the party want to "undermine" (or wreck) its own most important functionary? I would personally select a more applicable wording, but I can't do this if some author actually states that somebody or some group (it is unclear who) was explicitly looking to undermine the power of the CPSU General Secretary. That's why I added a citation tag.

Those are just some examples. This, actually, also goes for the lead if applicable. Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (lead section):

The lead must conform to verifiability and other policies. The verifiability policy advises that material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, and quotations, should be cited. Because the lead will usually repeat information also in the body, editors should balance the desire to avoid redundant citations in the lead with the desire to aid readers in locating sources for challengeable material. Leads are usually written at a greater level of generality than the body, and information in the lead section of non-controversial subjects is less likely to be challenged and less likely to require a source; there is not, however, an exception to citation requirements specific to leads.

In general, the point of adding tags is to improve the article whenever the content or the author cited is unclear. Per Wikipedia policy, these tags - especially the cn tags - should stay until the necessary clarifications or sources are submitted in their stead.

Such aforementioned ambiguities might make fine sense to you as the author of the article, but they are not so lucid for someone like myself, who is just an interested reader of the content you create.

I would be happy to work together with you on such articles to produce more lucid content, but I can't do that when I can't see which specific sources are being used through inline citations. Let's not revert any of the good-faith edits made to facilitate this work.

Zloyvolsheb (talk) 18:00, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are not getting the whole point. It doesn't matter if there are few or many problems; we include inline reference tags to point them out and clear them up. That's why we have them.

Per WP:Removing tags,

If the person placing the tag has explained his or her concerns on the talk page, then anyone who disagrees should join the discussion and explain why the tag seems inappropriate. If there is no reply within a reasonable amount of time (a few days), the tag can be removed. If there is disagreement, then normal talk page discussion should proceed, per consensus-building.

Please listen: I would be happy to work with you to improve the content, but I can't do that when I can't see which specific sources are being used through inline citations.

I have only added a few tags that I felt were self-explanatory, but right here I have just explicitly explained to you why those tags where added and what the specific ambiguities warranting those tags are. You can remove those tags by fixing the missing incline citations in the text or restore the tags until the necessary citations are found by other editors. But simply reverting to remove those tags is disruptive to consensus-building.

Zloyvolsheb (talk) 18:44, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, I'm not offended, just trying to improve the article.

Lenin obviously did talk about collective leadership. But did Stalin, as the next sentence notes, ruled autocratically? The opening of the lede should probably tell us whether the Soviet leadership actually followed the concept, paid lip service to it, or ignored it completely ignored it, right after telling us about what it was. If Stalin and Khrushchev ignored it (as we are later told), the lede should state so instead of using the passive voice.

As far as word choice, "undermine" has connotations very different from "weaken." Unless some author you are citing refers to "undermining" (which isn't really clear), might I suggest something like "limit" or "balance" the powers of the Gen Sec? What do you mean by "Mikhail Gorbachev's reforms weakened the discipline amongst members of the collective leadership"? No concept of discipline among the nomenklatura is never explained in the lede beforehand, and could be clarified. If what you mean that Gorbachev's period produced disagreements, you might want to replace discipline with "unity".

Incidentally, the fact that

"at the 22nd Party Congress, Khrushchev declared an end to the dictatorship of the proletariat and the establishment of the All-People's Government"

doesn't seem to have anything to do with collective leadership, since in Marxist terms, dictatorship of the proletariat refers to the dictatorship of a class, and not to one-man rule (neither Marx nor Lenin ever suggested that).

Furthermore, if any post-Stalin leader attempted to cultivate something relating to a cult of personality, most observers agree that it was Brezhnev, and not Khrushchev. (However, one article subsection states that "The Presidium, which had grown to resent Khrushchev's leadership style and fear Mao Zedong's growing cult of personality in the People's Republic of China, began an aggressive campaign against Khrushchev in 1963.)

It's great that you have started this article, but it could be much more refined.

Zloyvolsheb (talk) 19:30, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's all good. You're right, the banner tag I added was probably excessive. I don't have enough time to do much editing myself over there right now - maybe after some time later. Zloyvolsheb (talk) 20:11, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's a very good proposal, and I support such a change, sure. Those are two quite different periods. GreyHood ^Talk 15:50, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know that I have completed the GA review on Andrei Kirilenko (politician) and placed it on hold pending a few issues that need to be addressed. Details are at Talk:Andrei Kirilenko (politician)/GA2. Thank you, –MuZemike 21:09, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and passed it. In the future, I believe User:GA bot automatically adds the GA icon on the article (which should be at the bottom) as well as remove the entry at WP:GAN and make a more detailed update on the talk page. –MuZemike 22:05, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Petar Stambolić.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 06:19, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And my thanks to you for creating this and several other interesting, not to say vital, articles on Soviet history :)! Aside from a few requests for clarifications I added here and there in the article, it's very good. I've only major nitpick to make, that the "policy" section is dominated too much by Brezhnev, so that sometimes it reads as if it was written for the Brezhnev article rather than a more general overview article. I know this is the "Brezhnev Era", but the focus should be what happened in the Soviet Union, not what Brezhnev specifically did or did not do. Best regards, and keep up the good work! Constantine ✍ 16:28, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Will give this one my attention over the next few days. A working draft will be at user:Peterstrempel/Soviet-Brezhnev-draft, with as many comments on editing decisions as I think might be useful (in the talk page of the draft). I will alert you when I think it's ready for your further review. Regards --Peter S Strempel (talk) 19:35, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What is your preference for stylistic grounding? US or British English? Regards. --Peter S Strempel (talk) 05:13, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You've been reported here: [1]. 24.184.232.19 (talk) 22:23, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This sort of thing is not acceptable. You've been around long enough to know better. Here, have some kittens, and try to keep your cool. Danger (talk) 00:29, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back :¬) Chaosdruid (talk) 14:53, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This move discussion FDSU

Why can you not just create a page "First Deputy of the Soviet Union" and move the text over there, leaving a little summary on the list page ?

You could make that a fairly interesting article! Chaosdruid (talk) 17:01, 5 March 2011 (UTC

Lol - forgotten about already :¬)

Anyway, I thought you might say that so here are a few references in English. Some may be suitable, some not and a lot will be more recent. THe ones towards the end are full views, not snippets or partials.

I am on a mission with a new user that I upset a little, and will get back to you later if you want to collaborate a little on finding sources for that article. Chaosdruid (talk) 22:41, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, it seems like I have missed something along the way here. Give me a little while and I will get back to you. Chaosdruid (talk) 23:18, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First Deputy Chairman of the Council of Ministers (books)

• [2] p. 243 Kosygin - top industrial administrator (non specific) p. 250 Mazurov - Heavy Industry, transportation education p. 440 p. 540
• [3] p. 229-230 Aleksandra Biryyukova p. 320
• [4] p. 1000
• [5] p. 121 Detail on the powers
• [6] p. 189-190

Maybe these will help? Chaosdruid (talk) 00:27, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seems fine, unfortunately I am going to be very busy at work this week and may not be able to do much until next weekend. Chaosdruid (talk) 22:34, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please, stop making useless edits[7][8] unless you are able to explain that "Council of Ministers of the USSR" is (potentially) a topic slightly different from "Council of Ministers (Soviet Union)". Incnis Mrsi (talk) 14:15, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of History of the Soviet Union (1964–1982) 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! Yoninah (talk) 19:06, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello TIAYN, I reverted this edit of yours. Prep2 had already been moved to Queue 5, and was cleared properly (as far as I can tell). Regards. Yazan (talk) 06:04, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On 9 March 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Collective leadership, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that collective leadership was seen as the ideal form of governance by Soviet ideologists during the rules of Georgy Malenkov, Nikita Khrushchev and Leonid Brezhnev? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:34, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On 10 March 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article History of the Soviet Union (1964–1982), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Brezhnev Era in the Soviet Union began with high economic growth and soaring prosperity, but ended with social, political, and economic stagnation? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:03, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I have started a copy-edit on the article. If you have any questions, let me know. I am going to try and get through most of it tonight, but some of it may be left for tomorrow... -Pax85 (talk) 01:06, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the punctuation addition--good find, especially since the list is currently at FLC! Feel free to leave comments, if interested. --Another Believer _(Talk) 17:13, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

Can you please help me in article Đuro Pucar? The problem is I don't know what do this titles mean, wich of this titles are notable and wich of them should be included in the article. Knowing that you are familiar with those subjects, I think you can help here, and if you would provide any information more if you have it would be great. But, even if you can't help, no big problem.

Thx. --Wustenfuchs 18:29, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, thanks for solving my problem. Second, how did I tracked you down, it seams you don't remember I promoted some of your articles, Kulakov and Molotov as I remember, and I noticed your activity on WikiProjects about Communism, Soviet Union etc, so I remembered you. I hope you will help me with other similiar problems when I ask you, because I'm planing to expand Communist history of Bosnia and Herzegovina so... I'm not very familiar with Communist phrases, titles and what did those phrases and titles ment, so I hope I can account on you... :)

Once again, thenx for help.

Regards,

--Wustenfuchs 20:35, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem friend, I'm glad you agreed for help ;) --Wustenfuchs 20:44, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewed it. Going to have to help me here. You've got sourced quotes, other bits in paragraphs seem unsourced. But are they mentioned as well within the sources. If they are then, just a couple of stylistic points needed. KnowIG (talk) 22:47, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Going to have to assume good faith on the things you've argued against. But it will have to wait until tomorrow, nuts couple of days. Sorry. KnowIG (talk) 18:17, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, since it looks like you are intorested in politological topic, I would like to suggest you to write an article on theories of convergence of capitalism and communism [9]. Lovok Sovok (talk) 22:01, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again,

Can you check those articles and see is ther any errors ther?--Wustenfuchs 13:18, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing your speedy deletion request on First Deputy Premier of the Soviet Union, I'm looking for some clarification on what you want done. The way I see it, you intend to:

A) Move First Deputy Chairman of the Soviet Union onto the First Deputy Premier of the Soviet Union title, and thus need administrator assistance to clear a redirect out of the way.

B) Change the redirect that currently exists at First Deputy Premier of the Soviet Union to point to First Deputy Chairman of the Soviet Union or some other article. This can be done without administrator assistance since no deletion is involved.

Could you please clarify? Either move seems non-controversial and so it's just a matter of boom-boom-done, but I just want to be absolutely certain before I potentially delete anything. SchuminWeb (Talk) 16:13, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:40, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again.

First, thx for adding Ante Pavelić on Guild of Copy Editors request page, because I need critics so I can promote this article to GA status, and I hope it will get better before April 10.

Second, can you please find image of Hasan Brkić? I saw you did that on earlier articles of mine... can you do it for this one?--Wustenfuchs 13:19, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea about redirect page... I should do that. I hope I'll soon add them to Copy Editors request page. But first, I'll write articles about my dear commies from Bosnia and Herzegovina :D Chears!

--Wustenfuchs 13:38, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

haha :) --TIAYN (talk) 13:56, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to let you know that the article is copyedited. Nice job! All the best,--Wi2g (talk) 23:54, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi，I'm ready to start the copyedit on Nikolai Ryzhkov but I see you've tagged it as in use. Please let me know when you're done. Best, ► Philg88 ◄ ^talk 21:20, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

SchuminWeb (Talk) 15:13, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Since you're a member of Wikiproject Socialism, I thought this might be of interest... There are twenty (20) pages relating to the history of small Trotskyist political parties up for deletion at AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2011 March 31. You are invited to take a moment to share your opinion about the inclusion-worthiness of each. Carrite (talk) 17:16, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, TIAYN. Why did you move Council of People's Commissars of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic to Government of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic? The Council of People's Commissars was not the government of the Russian SFSR - it was the cabinet of the republic's government. Zloyvolsheb (talk) 21:33, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Which constitution are you referring to? The USSR in fact had various constitutions. (Do you also have a link to that, please?) Zloyvolsheb (talk) 21:35, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that looks formally right: it was described as the government in official documents. But it's usually described as the executive organ of the government - the Supreme Soviet was obviously a part of the government as well. It would probably be a good idea to have a separate article for the institution also. Zloyvolsheb (talk) 21:48, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I'll probably see if I can fill in some of those gaps without completely duplicating article content later on. Zloyvolsheb (talk)

Hi, TIAYN. I apologise for the delayed review. My wireless connection went down about three days ago. It's now been restored, for now at least, and I'm catching up on an ever increasing backlog of wiki-work. For the Mikhail Suslov GAN, I've done as much of a review as possible offline (I saved a copy of the article to my hard drive, thank goodness), so all that's left is to review the citations. I'll post this review shortly, and leave you to address the points raised while I continue with the refcheck. The concerns I've raised are mostly minor, so hopefully they shouldn't take long to address. Sorry again for the delay. Cheers. – Liveste (talk • edits) 22:46, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Initial review started. I'll try to complete the refcheck in one or two days. Cheers again. – Liveste (talk • edits) 02:57, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Sorry for spending more than a week (on and off) checking references. I was able to access most of them through Google Books; others I was able to verify through other sources. But some information I couldn't verify myself, try as I might – so strictly speaking the refcheck can be wrapped up now. There are some issues with close paraphrasing but the other concerns are mostly minor. I've placed the GAN on hold for seven days (I won't be too rigid with this) so that these concerns can be addressed. Cheers. – Liveste (talk • edits) 11:54, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GAN passed. Nice article BTW, it was an interesting read. And thanks for the encouragement. This was my first GA review, so I should be able to streamline the whole process for the next one. According to WP:GAN, I'm supposed to encourage you to review GANs yourself, but you seem content to add to the GAN backlog rather than reduce it :P. I'll review my next article later in the week. Cheers again. – Liveste (talk • edits) 21:41, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this is a fascinating article and easily capable of reaching FA status. I will finish the copyedit then address the issues that need to be fixed before it goes to GA review. Would you be happy to submit it when its ready? Best, ► Philg88 ◄ ^talk 03:59, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Valentin Pavlov 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! Gamaliel (talk) 22:16, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Trust Is All You Need. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Tenth Five-Year Plan (Soviet Union) at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome!

Hi, just to let you know, that I am going to revert several copyedits. (I have no time right now; so may be you review them yourslf.) A classical example of a well-meaning and language-correct copyedit, but lacking the knowledge of the subject. (I have seen this lots after "technical writers" copyedited technical user guides.) Lovok Sovok (talk) 04:05, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as I see you didn't. I've just reverted a simple one, just to show you. Of course, this is a minor detail, but when there are many such minor "bugs", it is a nuisance and confusion, especially accumulated after several iterations of independent "improvements of style". Lovok Sovok (talk) 01:50, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Nikolai Ryzhkov 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! Canada Hky (talk) 03:57, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Lev Voronin 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! E♴(talk) 13:43, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For your continued efforts at improving such a wide range of important articles, which have made Wikipedia a much better place, and kept all of us over at the GOCE plenty busy. Please, do keep up the good work! Bobnorwal (talk) 18:30, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:KnowIG has been indefinitely blocked; he won't be reviewing the article anytime soon. --Rschen7754 05:59, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To follow up on Rschen7754's info KnowIG has also had the ability to edit his talk page and to email removed. He also managed to get himself blocked on another Wiki so it is unlikely that he will have his editing rights restored in the near future. We wanted you to know this so that you weren't left waiting for something that is unlikely to occur. Cheers and good luck with you editing. MarnetteD | Talk 19:03, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On 10 April 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Marino Murillo, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Marino Murillo, the former Minister of Economy and Planning of Cuba, believes the Cuban economic system is too paternalistic and supports the creation of a small-scale private market? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 00:04, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi, TIAYN. One of the scripts I use showed that all your ISBNs had failed check-digit verification so I looked them up on Worldcat and corrected them. Here is an example. 10-digit ISBNs were used prior to 2007 and 13-digit ISBNs were used after 2007. It is not true that all books have a 978 prefix; this is true only for books published after 2007. --Diannaa ^(Talk) 16:11, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Worldcat can also be used to look up the location of a published work, which you should include for articles going to FA. Some GA reviewers might ask for locations as well. Regards, --Diannaa ^(Talk) 16:27, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've posted some questions regarding the nomination of Mikhail Pervukhin at T:TDYK. Thanks, --Soman (talk) 02:25, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

		The Photographer's Barnstar
		For improving quality of some articles by adding images. Wustenfuchs 15:27, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Award is not only reason I write to you, but, I noticed you uploaded few images of People's Heroes of Yugoslavia, so I wonder can you find one image of Ivan Rukavina?

Regards, --Wustenfuchs 15:22, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and yes, I can find a photo for the article. --TIAYN (talk) 16:14, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great, no need for rush... ;)

I will fix it, but I havn't been able to find a photo yet. --TIAYN (talk) 08:59, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you alot, I'm glad I gave this award to you, you deserve it.--Wustenfuchs 12:26, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am a Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Wikipedia. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Wikipedia contributors." I would like to invite you to a short survey. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates only 5 minutes. cooldenny (talk) 19:20, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

With this edit, it appears that you changed the date formats to dd mmm yyyy, but only for dates inside the succession box. As the article dates were predominantly in mmm dd, yyyy, your edit left the article with both formats. I would draw your attention to WP:MOSNUM, which suggests a unique date format within any given article. Thank you. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 06:14, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On 16 April 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ivan Silayev, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Ivan Silayev was the last Premier of the Soviet Union? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

I replaced the image of Ruzhkov due to concerns raised at Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know#Ryzhkov_picture_in_prep_3. --Orlady (talk) 15:43, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On 17 April 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Valentin Pavlov, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Valentin Pavlov, the Prime Minister of the Soviet Union and de facto Chairman of the Cabinet of Ministers, was involved in the 1991 Soviet coup d'état attempt against Mikhail Gorbachev? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

On 18 April 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Nikolai Ryzhkov, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Nikolai Ryzhkov (pictured), the Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the Soviet Union, was considered to be a conservative by radical reformers during the Gorbachev Era? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Orlady (talk) 18:02, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On 19 April 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lev Voronin, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Lev Voronin, a First Deputy Chairman of the Council of Ministers, was acting Premier of the Soviet Union between Nikolai Ryzhkov's hospitalisation and Valentin Pavlov's election as Premier? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 18:03, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of Vladimir Velichko 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! Materialscientist (talk) 05:10, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've proposed blanking and redirecting Ryutin Affair to Martemyan Ryutin. How does one make this announcement on the Wikiproject Socialism main page? You also might take a look at the two pieces and see if you agree with my assessment that the latter replaces the former on the basis it constitutes an info fork. Thanks! — Tim Carrite (talk) 01:15, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to have a look at how they set up the page with tabs at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Conservatism. I still am baffled how to edit the WP:Soc page to alert on the merger proposal, by the way. best, — Tim Carrite (talk) 15:52, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Nur Muhammad Taraki 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! OCNative (talk) 17:15, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TIAYN, I was just reading an article you wrote, Brad Follmer, and I noticed it has a maintenance tag asking for clarification. The sentence in question reads "While announcing, Carter wanted to assure viewers and fans alike, sainy even if he is most known for appearing in "slapstick comedies", he will see his "more serious side" on The X-Files." I didn't put the "clarification needed" tag, but to be honest, I haven't got a clue what the sentence means. I'm not sure if I'm missing something, but could you possibly make it a bit clearer? Thanks, --BelovedFreak 22:52, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On 26 April 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Vladimir Velichko, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that in 1991, Vladimir Velichko became the first First Deputy Prime Minister of the Soviet Union? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 00:05, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Article needs a cited statement that he was Deputy Premier. Gatoclass (talk) 08:03, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I did a search for "Deputy Premier" and only found it in the template at the bottom. Gatoclass (talk) 08:11, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, well you need to clarify that in the article. Gatoclass (talk) 08:14, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please see new idea on DYK talk page. Yoninah (talk) 19:54, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On 4 May 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mikhail Pervukhin, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that when Nikita Khrushchev gave the go-ahead to build the Berlin Wall, Mikhail Pervukhin was the first to know? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 12:02, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

I have seen that you have edited the Afghan national army page, so if you are interested here are some links with a lot of recent information and a picture of the regional commands that would really improve it. If you are interested could you add some of this information to the page and if you know anyone else who is interested in improving the pages related to the afghan army/military could you send them these links. I would do it myself but I am not experienced in editing wikis.

http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2011/05/afghan_national_army_4.php

http://www.longwarjournal.org/multimedia/afghanistan_ANA.JPG

http://www.longwarjournal.org/multimedia/ANSF%20OOBpage4-ANA.pdf

Prisonbreak12345 (talk) 17:38, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Trust. I have reviewed Council of Ministers (Soviet Union). Sorry about the delay. I feel there is a bit of work needed to get it up to WP:GA standard, but hopefully we can get there. I have left comments at Talk:Council of Ministers (Soviet Union)/GA1. Feel free to reply to any you disagree with. Cheers AIRcorn (talk) 12:00, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have failed it for now as you no longer appear active. Feel free to nominate it once you return. AIRcorn (talk) 03:32, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this list know that it will be appearing as the main page featured list on June 27, 2011. You can view the TFL blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured list/June 27, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured list directors The Rambling Man (talk · contribs), Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) or Giants2008 (talk · contribs), or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured list/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! ۞ Tbhotch^™ & (ↄ), Problems with my English? 20:22, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The maindate was postponed, I'll notify you when it is re-scheduled. ۞ Tbhotch^™ & (ↄ), Problems with my English? 00:29, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It was postponed to Wikipedia:Today's featured list/July 18, 2011. Same comments as before. ۞ Tbhotch^™ & (ↄ), My comment was grammatically incorrect? Correct it! → Click here for terms and conditions 01:04, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Council of Ministers ID.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:34, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article Ivan Silayev you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is capable of meeting the good article criteria, but there are changes and clarifications which need to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Ivan Silayev for things which need to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:16, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have completed the GA review for this article. Please address the issues identified in the review within the next five days. Thank you for your hard work! Lemurbaby (talk) 19:31, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This article is so close to passing. I hate to have to fail it on account of no response from you. Would you please reply at the article's talk page ASAP? I can hold off until Friday, but after that I will have to fail it. Lemurbaby (talk) 18:16, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TAY,

Please review my edits. I glossed Solidarity and TDU, for example.

I have tagged your reference to a Brown University student newspaper as unreliable. The first sentence of this discloses a conflict of interest between the student author, who describes La Botz has an "old family friend"; she acknowledges that La Botz pitched the story idea to her.

Other unreliable sources include an advertising "newspaper" La Prensa, and a Cincinnati blog-web.

I removed long paragraphs stating LaBotz's views, since WP's articles on other senatorial candidates failed to feature such free advertising.

Another failing of the article was recentism: It essentially was about his campaign and why his views are so wonderful. Please flesh-out the article by adding material from most reliable high quality sources, for example peer reviewed academic journals: JSTOR contains many book reviews, for example. If he is a leader of TDU, you should be able to find independent third-party HQMR sources mentioning him.

I appreciate that you made many contributions to the article, e.g. Wikifying the citations, etc. Thanks again!

Sincerely,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 00:11, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I greatly dispute this being a GA. It is way off being good enough. I've opened a GA review on this as unless it is dramatically improved it should be delisted.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:44, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

	Congratulations!
	Thanks for all the work you did in making Nur Muhammad Taraki a certified "Good Article"! Your work is much appreciated. In the spirit of celebration, you may wish to review one of the Good Article nominees that someone else nominated, as there is currently a backlog, and any help is appreciated. All the best, – Quadell (talk)

Hello, Trust Is All You Need. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Red Party (Norway) at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome!

Hi,

I would like to redirect Tikhonov to Tikhonov (surname) (since there are a few Tikhonovs, eg the mathematician and the writer, which are no less known then the Brezhnev-time politician, no offence I hope:). Does this sound reasonable to you?

Thanks,

Sasha (talk) 04:21, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again,

I will do it, please revert if you have strong objections.

Best, Sasha (talk) 17:12, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The September 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 02:42, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Political culture/Liberalism/Left panel, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Greg Bard (talk) 05:00, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:The X-Files franchise.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion 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. damiens.rf 15:41, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Trust Is All You Need, I hope you're well. My name is Aaron and I'm one of the Storytellers working on the 2011 fundraiser for the Wikimedia Foundation. For this year's campaign, we're interviewing as many of the very active and productive Wikipedians as we can to broaden the range of appeals we run come November. I wonder if you would want to tell me more about your experiences editing and writing here? If so, I'll ask you your personal story and I'll ask you some general questions about Wikipedia. Please let me know if you're interesting by emailing amuszalskiwikimedia.org. Thanks! Aaron (WMF) (talk) 01:14, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can you fix this? Dougweller (talk) 05:04, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The common name of the office is "Prime Minister". For example Berlusconi's title is Chairman of the Council of Ministers but the English media uses the term of PM of Italy. Kádár's official title is included in the infobox person template. I think it is enough. Furthermore the first János Kádár government was called as First Hungarian Revolutionary Worker-Peasant Government not as Council of Ministers.--Norden1990 (talk) 13:36, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thanks for your edits on the Baath Party page. However, the complexities of the split of 1968 creates some problems. When we talk of the 'Iraq-based Baath Party' it is not the same as the Baath Party in Iraq. The party was split in 1968, two separate parties with overlapping geographical coverage were created. The Iraq-based party had (still has?) a Syrian branch and the Syria-based party has an Iraqi branch. So the list of Iraqi RC leaders becomes problematic, as up to 1968 it refers to the original party, post 1968 to the Iraq-based splinter group. Perhaps we could split the article, so this confusion is lessened? One option would be to move as of the 'Iraq-based Baath Party' material to 'Baath Party (1968)'? --Soman (talk) 10:09, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think we agree in principle. Personally, i'm now confused over the year of the big split, btw. My suggestion would be 3 articles: Baath Party (up to the split), Baath Party (Damascus) for the Damascus-based party and Baath Party (Baghdad) for the party of Saddam. --Soman (talk) 11:13, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but the Baghdad-based party definately had a functioning NC until 2003. Moreover, there are still NC members of the party, whose mandate is valid until next congress. Anyway, I prefer 'Damascus' and 'Baghdad' as the disamb, to avoid confusion (as both parties are active in both states). --Soman (talk) 12:55, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is definately a pedagogical problem, as people are confused that 'Baath Party (Syria)' has MPs in Yemen and Lebanon. For example, the merger of the Yemen article never went through, not sure why. Using 'Damascus/Baghdad' would help ease some of the confusions. --Soman (talk) 14:42, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya again. I noticed your sandbox edits. I think it is important that if we go for a split in 3 articles, there should be a clean cut at 1966. Otherwise we just keep fanning the confusion of two pan-arab parties with identical names. Pre-1966 material can be kept in the pre-1966 party article, with proper sections for each state (Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, etc..). The 1966 was not a split between the Iraqi and Syrian RCs, it was just as much as split within each RC. A spontaneous suggestion: if you keep working on the sandbox of the Baghdad party, I'll start on the Damascus one (at User:Soman/temp). Would that be ok with you? --Soman (talk) 06:31, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

--Soman (talk) 11:44, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And yes, I agree that it is hundred times more difficult to find refs on Baathism in Yemen, Tunisia, Libya, Bahrain, etc. than Syria and Iraq. But it is precisely that fact that have to push us into confronting this bias by highlighting the pan-arab character of the two parties. --Soman (talk) 11:53, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the FB page of the Yemeni branch of the Hussein party: http://ar-ar.facebook.com/pages/%D8%AD%D8%B2%D8%A8-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A8%D8%B9%D8%AB-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A8%D9%8A-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%B4%D8%AA%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%83%D9%8A-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%82%D9%88%D9%85%D9%8A-%D9%82%D8%B7%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%8A%D9%85%D9%86/136917672987633

Note the naming they use 'National Arab Socialist Baath Party - Yemen Region'. --Soman (talk) 12:05, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the blog of the Students Bureau of the Arab Socialist Bath Party - Sudan Region: http://albas2009.maktoobblog.com/ --Soman (talk) 14:05, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here is an article on the history of the party in Palestine: http://www.albasrah.net/ar_articles_2007/0707/3rar7_180707.htm --Soman (talk) 14:22, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blog of Jordan RC: alb3th1947jordan.wordpress.com --Soman (talk) 14:28, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but after having re-read the party history and thinking it over, I think it would be best to go for just 2 articles: One on the party founded in the 1940s (and considering the Iraqi wing as the continuation of that one) and one for the Damascus-based party. The Iraqi wing had the majority of the NC elected at the last pre-split national congress, and could thus be considered as the authentic inheritor. Such an approach would also reduce some problems of confusion, as if we do a 'clean cut' at 1966 there is lots of overlap. --Soman (talk) 05:27, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My problem is mainly with this formulation: "The party was founded in 1951 by the two Iraqi Shia Muslims Fuad al-Rikabi and Sa'dun Hamadi as a branch of the transnational Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party headquartered in Syria. The Iraqi Ba'ath Party was a branch of the transnational Ba'ath Party headquartered in Damascus, Syria until 1966 when the organisation split in half; the one half led by the Syrian Ba'ath Party, the other half led by the newly established Iraqi-led Ba'athist movement." It has several problems: 1) 'pan-Arab' is better than transnational, 2) the Jadid (and later, al-Assad)-led party was not 'led by the Syrian Ba'ath Party', it was/is a party dominated by Syrians, there is not 'Syrian Ba'ath Party' inside the Damascus-based Ba'ath Party. 3) 'the other half' was not led by the 'newly-established Iraqi-led Ba'athist movement', it was led by Aflaq and Bitar (the old NC). The de facto transfer of power from NC to Iraqi RC took place in a later stage in a gradual process. Do note that Aflaq shifted from Damascus to Beirut, so it is likely the NC was headquartered there for some time. Thus the material on the founding of the Iraqi regional organization should be in the pre-1966 party article.

An alternative proposal for a lede, for the article presently at Ba'ath Party (Iraq), would be:

"This article is about the Ba'ath Party that governed Iraq between 1968 and 2003. For the party governing Syria, see Ba'ath Party (Syria)

The Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party (also spelled Ba'th or Baath which means "resurrection" or "renaissance"; Arabic: حزب البعث العربي الاشتراكي) is a pan-Arab nationalist and Arab socialist political party. The party is one of the two parties (with identical names) that emerged out the 1966 split in the original Ba'ath Party. The party governed Iraq between 1968 and 2003, for many years under the leadership of Saddam Hussein. The party was banned in Iraq following the United States invasion of Iraq in 2003." --Soman (talk) 08:13, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't agree. The Baghdad-based party has survived the fall of Saddam, albeit not very well. If the Syrian organization of the Damascus party would be dissolved, there still would be a party, with 4 parliamentary seats and a political network. I think it is good that the relations of power is clear, and I've tried to state quite explictly that the NC is much less powerful than the Syrian RC, but it doesn't mean that the party has ceased to be a pan-Arab organization. It is important, so we don't create the impression that the non-Syrian/non-Iraqi regions are exile branches of a Syrian or Iraqi party. --Soman (talk) 11:09, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

--Soman (talk) 06:10, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there Trust Is All You Need, thank you for your contributions! I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Trust Is All You Need/Sandbox.

• See a log of files removed today here.
• Shut off the bot here.
• Report errors here.
• If you have any questions, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:06, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Trust Is All You Need! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you  have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to  know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation  also appears on other accounts you  may  have, please complete the  survey  once only.  If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you  have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 13:42, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Category:Leonid Brezhnev family, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mike Selinker (talk) 21:34, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. An article you brought to GA status (The Erlenmeyer Flask) is part of a proposed Good Topic nomination, as part of the first season of the series. Just a heads-up to let you know about this in case you would like to be involved. Your username will be credited as one of the editors responsible for the articles unless you'd rather it not be. I'll not move forward with the nomination until I hear back from you in case there's anything you'd like to add or change. Thanks! GRAPPLE X 16:48, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Lost city part 2 (Stargate SG-1).jpg. You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact Web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page or me at my talk page. Thank you. George Ho (talk) 20:28, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I saw your ping on the GOCE Requests page. I've messaged Cj94112 to ask his plans, but he is a very new editor and hasn't edited since 9 November, so I'm pessimistic. If he or anyone else doesn't do anything in another week or at most two, I'll take it over. Regards, --Stfg (talk) 11:08, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dominant party system appeared to be the best alternative to single-party state. It was not a single-party state, the Ba'ath Party was the dominant party that ruled through the National Progressive Front of Iraq.--R-41 (talk) 18:49, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Very well, single-party state is acceptable if it is viewed in that context - one party dominating the country. But I don't agree with the edits to the History of Iraq (1968-2003) that say that the General Secretary of the Ba'ath Party of Iraq was the leader of the state. There is no legal clause that I am aware of that authorized that, and besides both of the major General Secretaries were the Presidents of Iraq.--R-41 (talk) 19:13, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have read through the Constitution of the Ba'ath Party, it is not that long. Don't worry about the issue of the constitution of the party. Neither Syria nor Iraq from 1968 to 2003 truly adhered to all its principles - they only adhered to its Pan-Arab nationalist and socialist parts, but they did not adhere to the constitution's advocacy of freedom of speech and freedom of association.--R-41 (talk) 19:27, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am not aware of the Syrian party's own constitution. I am using the original constitution of the Ba'ath Party adopted in 1947 by Michel Aflaq and Salah al-Din al-Bitar. A one-party state appears to be a violation of the original intentions of the Ba'ath Party, the Syrian Ba'athists of the 1960s sought to purge the "old guard" of the party, including Aflaq - he narrowly escaped and lived in exile in Iraq as the official Secretary General of the Ba'ath Party (the "national" overarching branch, not the "regional" Iraqi branch) until his death.--R-41 (talk) 19:37, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with including the General Secretary of the Ba'ath Party of Iraq, is that from the 1960s to 1989 Aflaq was in Iraq as General Secretary of the "national" Ba'ath Party, so legally he would have precedence. In actuality he did not have much influence - he was used by the Iraqi government as a figurehead of legitimacy. So the power resided with the leaders of the government - the President and Prime Minister, not the leader of the national Ba'ath Party. So unless there is any further issue, I will restore President and Prime Minister to the list and remove General Secretary, as the national General Secretary did not wield real power in the Iraqi state.--R-41 (talk) 19:55, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As said above, I don't know what the logo of the Ba'ath Party was before its de facto split in two in 1966.--R-41 (talk) 00:51, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am relying on a book written in the 1970s that I've borrowed from my university's library. I've not gotten too far into it yet. From what I have heard, Aflaq was a prolific writer and intellectual, he wrote several books, took part in writing the constitution of the Ba'ath Party, and wrote many articles for newspapers. I want to make the suggestion that the Ba'athism article have its ideology text section organized in a similar rational way as I reorganized the ideology section of the Marxism-Leninism article as the following:

• Components
  • Social
  • Economic
  • Justice and Security
  • Political structure
  • International relations

This makes the description of the ideology easier to understand for the reader, and the model can be used for any ideology.--R-41 (talk) 01:15, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I urge you to immediately stop personal attacks as you did at Danrolo's talk page. Virulent and vulgar attacks like these are shockingly inacceptable and may lead to serious consequences for you. You really should know better. Cool off and return to civilised talk. Regards --RJFF (talk) 14:08, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is true that an intro doesn't need to be sourced if it is just going to repeat what is later on. However if strong potentially controversial statements are made, they can be challenged by users if they are not backed by sources. The Ba'ath party did not, in its founding 1947 constitution, advocate totalitarianism as you claimed, it advocated freedom of association. It did not always act as a vanguard party, the Ba'ath initially acted as supporters of Abd al-Karim Qasim's government of Iraq, alongside his National Democratic Party as well as the Iraqi Communist Party, until the Ba'ath turned against Qasim. As I said earlier, I strongly urge that the ideology section be organized along these subsections, rather than as it is currently organized:

• Components
  • Social
  • Economic
  • Justice and Security
  • Political structure
  • International relations

--R-41 (talk) 07:54, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say that Ba'athists per se always have a vanguardist approach to politics, it is a core fundament of their political/organizational doctrine (and the word 'Talia' always appears in Ba'athists publications, front groups, etc..). That doesn't mean that they always actually play the dominant role of national political life. Being vanguard party doesn't mean dominant. --Soman (talk) 08:02, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK review note: Thank you for your review of Template:Did you know nominations/Théâtre de la Mode. There are still some issues concerning this nomination that may need to be clarified; please respond on that page as soon as possible. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:43, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In Department of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page TASS (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. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line 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) 10:52, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What was the rationale behind this revert? Editors should not be expected to have to chase editors up on their user pages for comments which should be left in edit summaries. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 17:47, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As you've deigned not to reply to this, I've used my mind-reading powers to deduce that it was probably the image size. I've reincorporated the new changes with a hard-coded smaller size for the image. Next time, it would be wonderful if you could take five seconds to include an edit summary when reverting productive changes. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 14:14, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Ba'athism 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! Miyagawa (talk) 10:04, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The December 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 04:03, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In History of Iraq (1968–2003), you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Battle of Baghdad (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) 11:05, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On 17 December 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ba'athism, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the ideology of Ba'athism was developed mostly in Syria by Zaki al-Arsuzi, Salah al-Din al-Bitar and Michel Aflaq, who is considered the founder of Ba'athist thought, as a way to unite the Arab world into one nation? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ba'athism.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Zaki al-Arsuzi 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! MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 00:28, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I saw your request for a CE at the GOCE request page, so I thought you might be interested to know that Strunk and White's The Element of Style (1918) is in the public domain, free for you to download. Hopefully it'll help improve your writing. Cheers, and Merry Christmas :) --Sp33dyphil ©^hat_ontributions 11:57, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and a happy Christmas to you :) --TIAYN (talk) 12:13, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I just nominated an article for GA and was delighted to see that Zaki al-Arsuzi was being nominated as well. I worked in the past on Gamal Abdel Nasser and Izzat Darwaza, two other pan-Arabist thinkers, and helped bring their articles to GA, but back then there wasn't much activity in this area of wikipedia. So I'm glad to see your many contributions to articles on various Arab nationalist groups, movements and figures, particularly al-Arsuzi. I'll probably continue copyediting the article as much as I can, although I'm not much of a copyeditor myself. I also ran into a few issues in the article, but I'll list those at the relevant talk page. Regards, --Al Ameer son (talk) 20:00, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As for "al-" versus "Al-", the "a" is capitalized if you begin the sentence with it. The "al-" is simply the article "the" or "of" so it would be capitalized if it's the first word of a sentence. Other than that, it stays lower case. You could bring it up at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Arab world for more clarification. I could be wrong. --Al Ameer son (talk) 20:05, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know much about Aflaq, other than his early political associations and development of Arab Socialism within Ba'athism. Aflaq was Western-educated and heavily influenced by European political and philosophical figures, including Comte - the founder of positivism that Aflaq ascribed to, as well as Nietzsche I believe. Aflaq changed his political associations several times, he was a communist, then he became a Syrian nationalist and admired the Syrian Social Nationalist Party, but he then abandoned Syrian nationalism and became an Arab nationalist. However I need to point out to you that it is important to note that Aflaq was heavily influenced by Zaki al-Arsuzi. The books that I have read do not suggest as is currently stated in the article that al-Arsuzi was somehow only considered the founder of the Ba'ath ideals by Syria. The books state very clearly that al-Arsuzi did develop the basis of the Ba'ath movement, Aflaq and al-Bitar and their students held very close connections and interest in al-Arsuzi's literature. The book states that al-Arsuzi was a highly intelligent and articulate intellectual who developed the major ideas adopted by Ba'athism - especially Arab Socialism. Al-Arsuzi was far more insistent on socialism than Aflaq was who by the early 1940s had almost shed himself of his Marxist socialist past to become a pan-class Arab nationalist. Though al-Arsuzi never joined the ASBP, his followers did with his support of them doing so, and he pressed his followers to demand that Aflaq emphasize socialism in the Ba'ath Party during talks to form its constitution in 1947. So al-Arsuzi is the founder of the Ba'ath idea, Aflaq expanded on it and organized it.--R-41 (talk) 02:15, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On the topic of Ba'athism. I am creating an ideological components section in a Wikipedia "sandbox" that I hope to add to the article. It describes the ideology's components by themes that can be applied to any ideology: social, economic, justice and security, political system, and international relations. Another optional component themes is the environment - but that is more relevant to quite modern contemporary ideologies than those developed in the 1940s. I may rearrange material in the article, including moving some material from the current ideological-thematic approach you have added, to the components section. My problem with an ideological-thematic approach of stating all its themes in big subject headlines, is that there are endless themes in ideologies, now there could be headlines like: "Arab nationalism", "Arab socialism", "vanguard party" etc. But to fully represent Ba'athism these headlines would need to be massively expanded to include "secularism" "people's democracy", "women's rights", etc. - the list would go on forever. But a components section under basic headlines of its components: social, economic, justice and security, political system, and international relations; can include all this material in a rational and systematic way that is compact is easier to read.--R-41 (talk) 02:15, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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.

History of Iraq (1968–2003) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Umma Party

Michel Aflaq (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Regionalism

Zaki al-Arsuzi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Populist

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:08, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]