Talk:History of anarchism/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Carabinieri (talk · contribs) 05:03, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

I'm afraid this article still requires a good deal of work to be a Good Article. The following list of concerns is far from comprehensive and is only meant to give you an idea of some of the issues.

First, the prose needs considerable work. There are problems with the grammar and a lot unidiomatic expressions. It mixes American and British spelling. The article needs be thoroughly copyedited in this respect. A lot of the article is also written in the neutral and dispassionate language that we typically use on Wikipedia. Here are just a few examples of the prose issues:

• One group of scholars considers anarchism is strictly associated with the class struggle Something is wrong the grammar (and the source also doesn't back this claim up)
• Anarchist philosopher Murray Bookchin depicts it as the continuation of the "legacy of freedom" of humankind What does "it" refer to?
• Along with the definition debates, the question of what it is complicates the issue. Is it a philosophy, a theory or a series of actions? We don't normally ask rhetorical questions.
• Taoism, which developed in ancient China, has been embraced by some anarchists as a source of anarchistic attitudes I have no idea what "source of anarchistic attitudes" means.
• There is an ongoing debate whether exhorting rulers not to rule belongs to the sphere of anarchism I don't know what that means.
• Even though it was a religious revolution and strengthened the state, it also opened the way for the humanistic values of the French revolution. What is "it"?
• Anarchism was then the main progressive ideology not only in Europe but in North and Latin America, Asia and Australia I'm not sure what "progressive" means in this context, but this statement is clearly untrue.
• The anthropology of anarchists has changed in the new era What does that mean?

The selection of the content also feels fairly arbitrary. Just a few examples:

• The (rather silly) idea that anarchism can be traced back all the way to antiquity is espoused by a lot of anarchists, but not by many serious scholars. Yet, a considerable portion of the article is devoted to telling pre-modern history from this perspective and presents this idea as true.
• The first known political usage of the word anarchy[a] appears in the play Seven Against Thebes by Aeschylus, dated at 467 BC. There, Antigone openly refuses to abide by the rulers' decree to leave her brother Polyneices' body unburied as punishment for his participation in the attack on Thebes. Sophocles used the same theme 50 years later, in his tragedy Antigone, where the heroine challenges the established order of Thebes, coming in direct conflict with the established authority of the town. I see why the first use of the term is relevant, but why does the rest of this passage matter?
• In Spain, Ramón de la Sagra established the anarchist journal El Porvenir in La Coruña in 1845 which was inspired by Proudhon's ideas.[61] The Catalan politician Francesc Pi i Margall became the principal translator of Proudhon's works into Spanish.[62] Later, he briefly became president of Spain in 1873 while leader of the Democratic Republican Federal Party. Proudhonian thought had influenced Spain's federalist movement since early 1860. [62] When Pi y Margall came into power for a brief period, he tried to implement some of Proudhon's ideas.[61] Why is this more important than, say, the reception of Kropotkin in Italy or Bakunin in the United States?
• Why is there a whole section about the French May 68?
• After the events of May 1968, Situationist International sprung up. Their main argument was that life had turned into a "spectacle" because of the corrosive effect of capitalism.[240] They dissolved in 1972. The Situationists weren't anarchists.
• Neither the Zapatistas nor the PKK and YPG are anarchists. The conflict there emerged during the Syrian Civil War and is founded upon Bookchin's ideas of Libertarian municipalism and social ecology within a secular framework and ethnic diversity is clearly not true.

The structure of the article is also erratic at times. The bibliography is not presented uniformly. Most of the images lack copyright information.

Please let me know how you want to proceed. I don't think these issues can be ironed out in the framework of GA review, since they require a fundamental reworking of the article. I'd definitely be willing to work with you on this, but my time is rather limited and I have a few other things I'm working on.--Carabinieri (talk) 20:03, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Carabinieri. Please give me some time (one or two weeks) and I 'll provide answers, explanations and change some parts of the article. I look forward to a fruitful discussion. Cinadon36 21:42, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

@Carabinieri:, thanks for waiting, hope it didn't seem like ages. Ok, here is my respond.

Thanks one more Carabinieri for your comments on the article. While some of your conserns are valid, some others- on text- might need some discussions.

Styling issues

• I am not a native English speaking so I can not really help on the prose or syntax. Twofingered Typist, a member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/GOCE Hall of Fame had done an excellent work previously on the article, I will ask him if he would be kind enough to spare some time and improve the article a little bit more.

• American spelling was turned to British [1]

• "neutral and dispassionate language" I tried to use this kind of language on purpose.

context issues

• The claim is backed. It s Levy 2011, not Levy 2019. I 've added one more ref that is backing that there are two different opinions on the origins of anarchism.[2]
• "It" changed --->[3] Maybe it is better now.
• Along with the definition debates, the question of what it is complicates the issue. Is it a philosophy, a theory or a series of actions? We don't normally ask rhetorical questions.---->Normally. I think it is an exemption that suits the purpose to illustrate the different views on definitions. I think is adds some colour to the article.
• "I have no idea what "source of anarchistic attitudes" means"---->rephrased [4]
• There is an ongoing debate whether exhorting rulers not to rule belongs to the sphere of anarchism I don't know what that means.--->It means that it is questionable whether asking for a ruler not to rule is an anarchist demand. It has been rephrased though, hope now it is better. [5]
• Even though it was a religious revolution and strengthened the state, it also opened the way for the humanistic values of the French revolution. What is "it"?---> it is Reformation. taken care of. [6]
• Anarchism was then the main progressive ideology not only in Europe but in North and Latin America, Asia and Australia I'm not sure what "progressive" means in this context, but this statement is clearly untrue.-->taken care of. [7]
• anthropology of anarchists---->turned into "anthropology of anarchism".[8] The term is used in the literature. Antrhopology of anarchism examines the people involve in anarchism, the anarchists. Who are they? are they middle-class, working class? Are they educated? criminals or crooks? Staff like that.
• The (rather silly) idea that anarchism can be traced back all the way to antiquity is espoused by a lot of anarchists, but not by many serious scholars.--->Silly or not, (I believe it is not but anyway), a considerable number of scholars trace the roots of anarchism back in ancient times. So I believe it should be included in the article. This debate is also explained in more detail at section "Backround"

@Cinadon36:, I wonder if this could be cleared up just by qualifying the claim back to the scholars you are citing? Something like "Many scholars of anarchism, including anthropologists Harold Barclay and David Graeber, claim that some form of anarchism dates back to pre-history." That way, you aren't making a definitive truth claim, but you are still including what is clearly an important part of an anarchist understanding of history - Manicatorman (talk) 15:41, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

• Yet, a considerable portion of the article is devoted to telling pre-modern history from this perspective and presents this idea as true.----> I removed 1333Kb [9] Do you think it needs more trimming?
• Why is this more important than, say, the reception of Kropotkin in Italy or Bakunin in the United States? ---> That is a difficult question. I opted not to give much weight on persons, but tried to explain the history of anarchism as a movement and philosophy.
• Why is there a whole section about the French May 68?---> Removed the section [10] But I left the paragraph (one) because French May had an impact on contemporary anarchism.
• The Situationists weren't anarchists---> Also, situationists influenced anarchism and its philosophy. It is only a sentence, Marshall discuss them in certain extent.
• Neither the Zapatistas nor the PKK and YPG are anarchists--->The border among anarchist and nonanarchist groups are extremely hard to find. My criterion is whether a Reliable Source considers them as a part or strongly associated with the anarchist movement.
• The conflict there emerged during the Syrian Civil War and is founded upon Bookchin's ideas of Libertarian municipalism and social ecology within a secular framework and ethnic diversity is clearly not true--->I have changed the wording. [11]
• The structure of the article is also erratic at times. --->Can you please elaborate a little more?
• The bibliography is not presented uniformly.--->I am not sure I understand what you mean. I am using Shortened footnotes. Bibliography is presented using {{cite book}}. PS-Oh! This[12]? Taken care of. [13]
• Most of the images lack copyright information.---> I know next to nothing on how to overstep this issue. czar, can you pls give a hand here? thanks.

I like to thank you once more Carabinieri. I look forward on working with you to improve the article, regardless of the GA Nomination.Cinadon36 14:22, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

I'll help with the image copyright info. czar 10:13, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Okay, I swapped a few out and the remaining photos should be sufficient for GA with their current licenses. Some of the older images are in legal limbo, as they are likely archival photos whose original authors/photographers and original publication dates will be hard or impossible to track. czar 14:16, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Czar, great job![14] Cinadon36 17:51, 23 June 2019 (UTC)