Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 07:52, 29 June 2023

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Tankie article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 12 months

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Socialism High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Politics Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Politics of the United Kingdom Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Internet culture This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Internet culture To-do: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : View all requested internet culture articles Expand : Pick an article from here or here Photo : Category:Internet culture articles needing images Stubs : All stubs are located here Other : Category:Internet self-classification codes (!?); Try to get YouTube to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}} See also Category:Internet culture articles needing attention

This article was nominated for deletion on 3 January 2013 (UTC). The result of the discussion was merge to Communist Party of Great Britain.

Shouldn't the title be italicized

should not the title be italicized, since the page is about a word. Other pages about words (see:You, Faggot (slang), I (pronoun), etc.) have their titles in italics, so shouldn't that be the case here as well?

Biases, inaccuracies

The article refers to leaders such as Joseph Stalin and Mao Zedong as "totalitarian" this is of course preposterous as such leaders were regulated through Democratic Centralism, Stalin was elected by party members three times, that was how he gained his position of leadership and he also tried to resign four times meaning he didn't care about preserving his status as leader and wanted to leave office. It also means he was selected democratically, if you say this selection by party members isn't democratic, you are ignorantly hypocritical, look at America, the voters don't select their leader, the electoral college does, that's how Trump got elected despite the fact Hillary had the popular vote, for example. Proletarian Banner (talk) 00:06, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Stalinism isn't technically an ideology and merely refers to Marxism-Leninism, most Marxist-Leninists who refer to themselves as "tankies", or "Stalinists" most often do it ironically with an attempt of humour. Proletarian Banner (talk) 00:07, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

• I don’t trust a user called “proletarian banner” to be neutral on this any more than I trust all the conservatives bombing socialism articles with WP:NOTFORUM rants. Misplaced Pages isn’t about righting WP:GREATWRONGS no matter what side you’re on. Dronebogus (talk) 05:07, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

  Violation of WP:AGF Jibal (talk) 04:47, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

  Given that the user is arguing that Stalin and Mao weren't totalitarian and has now been blocked for sock puppetry, I'd say Dronebogus was pretty on the money. — Czello 07:36, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

• This article is not the place to have a discussion about whether Joseph Stalin and Mao Zedong were totalitarian. If thats what the WP:RS call them then thats what we do as well, we don't really have the latitude to replace the findings of experts with our own personal opinion. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 15:31, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

I don't trust a user with the term bogus within their name to be neutral either. Proletarian Banner (talk) 19:26, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Oh, I am not righting any great wrongs. Also, their status as "experts" is absurd, they clearly don't understand the political systems of those nations or the concept of democratic centralism because they are ignorant, biased right-wingers, okay?! Proletarian Banner (talk) 19:20, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

It's not my opinion that they were democratic, it's factual. I could argue America isn't democratic because it uses an electoral college to decide who becomes president and disregards the voters, these could be interpreted as phony, mock elections. Proletarian Banner (talk) 19:21, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

The United States is formally a federal presidential-constitutional republic—the lead of United States explicitly says this—but that does not really change the fact that Stalin is widely described as totalitarian by a metric ton of Reliable Sources. Referring to all people who think that the Soviet Union was totalitarian as ignorant, biased right-wingers is an extraordinary (and false) claim. Additionally, Democratic Centralism is a concept associated with vanguardism that means that votes are binding to all members of a political party, which is different than direct democracy in a number of ways (but an in-depth comparison of the two systems is not the crux of this issue, which can be solved by examining mainstream WP:SCHOLARSHIP on Stalin’s rule). — Mhawk10 (talk) 14:41, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

This isn't the place to debate such things. Jibal (talk) 04:49, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Nah, it's not an extraordinary and false claim, it's true. Proletarian Banner (talk) 21:50, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

I think the preponderance of scholarship is going to disagree with you here, especially with respect to the Stalin era. The edit summary you left here indicated that there is a bit of original claim-making going on in that edit. — Mhawk10 (talk) 15:24, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

There's not original claim making, there is evidence to suggest that they were democratic. Proletarian Banner (talk) 20:15, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

More sources, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Proletarian Banner (talk • contribs) 01:45, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

In order, your sources are:

1. A CIA report emphasizing that the top of the Communist party calls the shots as a group in the USSR;
2. A deadlink;
3. An insecure website I'm not going to click through on;
4. Another deadlink
5. A chapter of a 1918 document written by Lenin
6. Another chapter of that same 1918 document written by Lenin
7. A third deadlink
8. A fourth deadlink
9. A 1938 article written by a grad student and hosted on a deprecated website
10. Another writing by Vladimir Lenin
11. A manifesto of CPSU General Secretary Konstantin Chernenko
12. An anonymous blogpost
13. A 1947 work by an ethics professor at Union Theological Seminary

None of these remotely meet the criteria of reliable scholarship on the Soviet Union. The writings of Lenin are fine primary sources for his thoughts—not independent scholarship on how the Soviet Union actually worked in practice. The manifesto of a CPSU General Secretary that was published by a state publishing company is also clearly not independent of the CPSU. Blogs are not reliable sources, particularly when they are published by anonymous non-experts. Links to non-existent pages are not even sources at all, in and of themselves. This leaves the super insecure website, a 1952 CIA memo, a 1947 work by an ethics professor, and the 1938 work by the grad student. The text of the CIA memo doesn't actually support the claim that the Soviet Union was a democracy, while the book written by the ethics professor is clearly written out-of-expertise. The 1938 work by a grad student indeed says that the Soviet Union had democratic elections under the auspices of the dictatorship of the proletariat, is extremely old, and was published by the American Russian Institute—this doesn't smell like peer-reviewed scholarship, and it seems to be WP:FRINGE territory. — Mhawk10 (talk) 03:06, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

References

1. https://cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP80-00810A006000360009-0.pdf?fbclid=IwAR28x5c-GTROxLQT-ZBoTPkTupCV3t1B7qJQNTWVb91qbfHt1nbWhUA_CTu
2. https://ojs.library.ubc.ca/index.clogic/article/view/191861/188830
3. https://www.docroid.net/25FEQ8G/the-cpsu-in-a-soviet-election-campaign-pdf
4. https://ojs.library.ubc.ca/index.clogic/article/view/191862/188831
5. https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1918/prrk/soviet_republic.htm
6. https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1918/prrk/soviet_constitution.htm
7. https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691654065
8. https://archive.org/details/WorkerParticipationInTheSovietUnion/mode/2up
9. https://www.unz.com/print/AmQSovietUnion-1938oct-00059
10. https://archive.org/details/OnSovietSocialistDemocracy/page/n1/mode/2up
11. https://archive.org/details/sovietdemocracychernenko/mode/2up
12. https://writetorebel.com/2016/11/13/socialism-and-democracy-in-the-ussr
13. https://ucf.digital.flvc.org/islandora/object/ucf%3a4773/datastream/OBJ/view

It's not a fringe theory, I gave you over twenty sources, want more? I could give you a hundred! You refuse to acknowledge the truth because of your biases and you dismiss several things just because you don't like them and don't think they constitute academic research. Proletarian Banner (talk) 03:52, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

First off, you did not give me twenty sources—you gave 13 links, 4 of which were deadlinks and 1 of which is a fatally insecure website. Second off, I believe that I am evaluating the eight sources that you've presented in line with Misplaced Pages's guideline on reliable sources and I have made my reasoning explicit. This is not a situation where I just don't like it, this is a situation where the sources spectacularly fail to meet the relevant guidelines on scholarship. If you'd prefer, I could open up a noticeboard discussion to involve more users on whether or not the notion that the Soviet Union was a democracy is a fringe historical theory. Third off, I don't really see how this is ordered towards improving the Tankie page's content, and it is bridging into WP:NOTFORUM territory. — Mhawk10 (talk) 05:14, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Just a single WP:RS would be fine, none of those work. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 04:59, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Stalin and Khrushchev

Stalin's and Khrushchev's governments shouldn't be conflated, as the latter nominally and actually distanced itself from the former, so the government that invaded Hungary or it's leader should be talked about, instead of the one that preceded it. Also what does Mao have to do with it? He called out the Khrushchevites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MisterCauliflower2137 (talk • contribs) 14:38, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

More recent usage (2022)

In 2022 the term "tankie" is sometimes used for those leftists who support the Russian invasion of Ukraine (such as by Hungarian YouTuber Adam Something). Maybe this use isn't frequent enough yet to be mentioned in this article. Tobias b köhler (talk) 20:00, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Reliability of Sources

I was purusing through the article and noticed a part that seemed odd. So I looked at the sourcing, Source 10, and the title stood out as a little odd. So I decided to go to the piece in question. It is an opinion piece that has anti-Chinese misinformation in its opening paragraph that then goes on to talk about China. While the piece does have some possible uses, are there not any sources that don't open with the equivalent of blowing their foot off? Or at least something that doesn't have such an extreme bias from out of the gate? 206.127.65.238 (talk) 07:48, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

If you're talking about the Diplomat, it's considered reliable per WP:RSP. What is the misinformation in the opening paragraph? — Czello 08:12, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Unclear origin of usage

Under the Definition section it starts with the Prague Spring (1968), but under the Usage section it states the term comes from the UK when referring to the Soviet invasion of Hungary (1956). Should there be an addition in the beginning of the Definition section that starts with the definition from British politics, or is it that the term was popularized/its definition solidified in common lexicon after the Prague Spring? Riverraleigh (talk) 01:36, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

• All unassessed articles
• C-Class socialism articles
• High-importance socialism articles
• WikiProject Socialism articles
• C-Class politics articles
• Low-importance politics articles
• WikiProject Politics articles
• C-Class Politics of the United Kingdom articles
• Low-importance Politics of the United Kingdom articles
• C-Class Internet culture articles
• Unknown-importance Internet culture articles
• WikiProject Internet culture articles