User talk:The Four Deuces
2008: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2009: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2010: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2011: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2012: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2013: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
please stop rehashing issues in the mediation. please let the mediator guide the discussion and just respond simply and directly to questions the mediator asks. thank you. Jytdog (talk) 06:24, 25 November 2014 (UTC) (struck, apologies for the offense Jytdog (talk) 16:50, 25 November 2014 (UTC))
Moved your comment to comment section on Talk:Marxism-Leninism
I have moved your comment here as I requested that users do at the beginning of the post on the list. If you want to move it back that's okay, but I am going to be adding more sources there and it will be very confusing if comments are all over the place. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 04:39, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
- I have responded to your question on my talk page.--184.108.40.206 (talk) 06:47, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
Dennis Brown is on a long Wikibreak
Hello TFD, we spoke earlier on an attempt on my part to return to Wikipedia upon recognizing the problems with my editing behaviour from my past that has been affected by my health condition. I have been waiting a while as Dennis Brown is on a long Wikibreak. Aside from writing here to inform you of the current status, I am adhering faithfully to your statement that I should not be editing on an anon account before Dennis Brown reviews my request to return.
In the meantime, while I've come out of denial aware of my editing problems in the past, such as succumbing to frustration and combative arguments with others, including yourself and not taking breaks when needed; and with cherrypicking rather than seeking out all major views on a topic; I'd like to know what other problems with my editing you noticed in the past. Also I'd like to know the context of what you were referring to in a recent message on the writing style. I have an unfortunate tendency to be verbose at times that comes forth in my writing, that is affected by my health condition. If that is an issue, is there any systematic way that you know of on how to minimize the space of content while maximizing information within that content?--220.127.116.11 (talk) 04:31, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Note for you on the arguing and edit warring between Zozs and TIAYN on Marxism-Leninism article
I'm about to begin the process to see if I can/should return to Wikipedia. In the meantime, I'm informing you of the deteriorating conditions of dialogue on the Marxism-Leninism article between Zozs and TIAYN, and related matters involving the topics involved. I will not get into that fray until the process of addressing whether or not to return to Wikipedia to edit articles, is complete. However I believe some outside intervention by a sober-minded third party such as yourself or an administrator is necessary to stop the edit warring there between Zozs and TIAYN as they have become completely antagonistic towards each other.
I earlier attempted to show reliable sources demonstrating that the main argument is between those who say: (1) that Marxism-Leninism in the USSR largely moved away from Stalinism under Khruschchev but kept a number of facets of Stalinism after Khruschchev's changes, and (2) that Marxism-Leninism in the USSR remained fully Stalinist with minor changes even after the official denunciation of Stalin by Khruschchev. Therefore there is division amongst scholars on the role of Stalinism's influence in Marxism-Leninism in the Soviet Union after Khruschchev's denunciation, and not a single accepted view.
Zozs and TIAYN have returned to very combative ad-hominem style arguing. Zozs is not listening to the criticisms made of her/his edits by TIAYN, you, or me, and keeps making the article prominently and implicitly imply in the beginning of the article that Marxism-Leninism is the same as Stalinism. Zozs needs to be informed that this is unacceptable and contrary to the policy of WP:CONSENSUS.
Directly related to this, Zozs has, without consensus, replaced an image showing a Marxist-Leninist flag symbol (depicting artwork drawings of Marx, Engels, and Lenin together that is based upon a real Marxist-Leninist symbol as can be seen here on this page that I found: http://permanentred.blogspot.ca/2009_05_31_archive.html) with a picture of Stalin on the Marxism-Leninism sidebar: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Marxism%E2%80%93Leninism_sidebar&diff=638261566&oldid=638200291. The message implied through the use of this image is absolutely clear: "Stalin = Marxism-Leninism". Given what has been demonstrated by reliable sources on the apparent division by historians on the role Stalinism played in the Soviet Union after Khruschchev's denunciation of Stalin and purging of Stalin's close allies, this edit by Zozs is not taking the division by scholars on the matter into serious consideration that Zozs is aware has been discussed on the article.
Zozs' recent edits have not been made consistent with consensus-seeking and due to that, they are aggravating to other users, including me and at least to TIAYN as well. Zozs asked for reliable sources to show the division by scholars on the matter of association of Marxism-Leninism as being just another word for Stalinism, I provided sources demonstrating this, even an award-winning biography of Khrushchev that follows the perspective that Khruschchev effectively ended the Stalinist era though he kept components of Stalinism within Soviet Marxism-Leninism, but Zozs has gone back to pushing for Marxism-Leninism to be exclusively associated with Stalin. This is not constructive.--18.104.22.168 (talk) 09:57, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
- Even though it is in my view fair for the Marxism-Leninism sidebar to show a symbol depicting Marx, Engels, and Lenin together - because that is the basis of the ideology claim of following their views; an alternative symbol could be chosen if users like Zozs believe that such a depiction of Marx, Engels, and Lenin together for Marxism-Leninism in a symbol is an association of them with the policies endorsed by the Soviet government under Stalin. It is a fair criticism that Stalin's policies have been regarded amongst a number of scholars as have been inconsistent with the views of Marx, Engels, and Lenin. For a possible solution, I suggest the red star emblem as a possibility, though I'd prefer to have that for a new sidebar I am proposing here.--22.214.171.124 (talk) 14:23, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
- I propose to you that a Bolshevism sidebar be created that would have Marxism-Leninism included within that sidebar as a variant of Bolshevism that had factions within it. The Marxism-Leninism sidebar could be made redundant and deleted, and less controversy would come up, as no one disputes the ideological foundations of Bolshevism as being strongly associated with theories and leadership of Vladimir Lenin; it is the divergent paths upon the death of Lenin where scholarly debates arise on the faithfulness of Bolshevik figures like Stalin and Trotsky to Lenin's views.--126.96.36.199 (talk) 14:28, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Sorry for having to bring this up, I was wanting to look up something for my own writings outside of Wikipedia for the topic of the history of Marxism-Leninism amongst other political ideologies, and saw from the layout of the page that the edit warring appears to be in full swing. I thought it would be best for you to get involved to mediate, as you have demonstrated a strong ability to maintain a sober-minded perspective on even the most controversial of political topics. I'll not discuss this further until my request to return to Wikipedia is approved or rejected.--188.8.131.52 (talk) 15:03, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Formal mediation has been requested
Scott Card racist?
(Note: Per wp:CANVASSING I am "non-biasedly" advertising a topic for discussion by posting a notice on the ten most recent users who commented on the page in question's talkpage and also the ten most recent users who edited the article in question.)
Commentators continue to reference/allege Card's piece involving a fictional, future Obama's coup d'état by way of urban guirillas as racist (eg see here in Slate, 2013; here, HuffPo, 2013; here, Wired, 2014). Should our article mention this aspect of controversy with regard to the piece here: "Orson Scott Card#Politics"?
See discussion here: Talk:Orson Scott Card#RfC: Subject of blp racist?