On 10/9/05, actionforum(a)comcast.net <actionforum(a)comcast.net> wrote:
------------- Original message --------------
On 10/9/05, actionforum(a)comcast.net wrote:
It is still not up in the introduction as one of
the major branches of anarchism.
Review the history.
It's hardly a *major* branch. But it gets three paragraphs compared to the
much better established anarcho-syndicalism which gets seven. But how the
anarcho-syndicalism article manages to get by without mentioning the Spanish
Civil War and the CNT is beyond me, so I agree that the anarchism articles
are a mess.
Wrong, it hasn't gotten worse, at least Batista is
no longer
called a dictator, as he once was. That is how much the clique, did
not want Castro labeled a dictator. Note that Batista still has a regime,
which has been regarded as POV on other pages. Batista did not shoot
people trying to escape Cuba, Castro does.
Well, do you not see that all you're talking about is a tit-for-tat affair?
What does the issue of killing people trying to escape Cuba have to do with
the question of whether we call Batista or Castro dictators? Both of them
instituted a government by force of arms, so they would both fit the
traditional standard. Shah Pahlavi, for that matter, when dismissed by
Massadeq, was reinstalled by military force, so I guess we could call him a
dictator too. But the editors of the Pahlavi article, for whatever reason,
are not squabbling.
The spanish title and a
literal translation probably deserves mention in the
english version,
although
probably not in the intro.
Hmm, let's see:
"Adolf Hitler (April 20 1889--April 30 1945) was Chancellor of Germany from
1933 and Führer und Reichskanzler (Leader and Chancellor) of Germany from
1934 to his death. He was leader of the National Socialist German Workers
Party (NSDAP), better known as the Nazi Party."
That wasn't difficult, was it? And here's a familiar chap:
His Imperial Majesty Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi (in [[Persian]]: محمدرضا شاه
پهلوی) (October 26 1919--July 27, 1980), was the last reigning Shah of Iran
to date, ruling from 1941 until 1979. He is also known by the deferential
title Aryamehr (meaning Light of the Aryans).
Very controversial fellows, but no problem calling them by their formal
titles. Presumably the fellows writing those articles realise that they're
writing an encyclopedia, not a poxy little political pamphlet.
In the english speaking world the cold war was fought
against
communism, not a stateless, classless system where all property
is held communally.
I see. Your objection is that the article doesn't employ the same shorthand
as the political leaders of your own country (and please, don't try to lump
Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Britain and Ireland in with the USA. We
don't like it when you do that).
There is a dispute resolution process for the serious stuff, you know.
We would end up having to abjudicate every edit.
Two determined sets of edit warriors face each other across the wasteland of
Khmer Rouge, which until recently had been protected from editing for ninety
days out of one hundred. Adjudicating *anything* in those circumstances
would be recognised by all involved as a great advance.