User talk:Stevenjp

April 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, please do not add promotional material to articles or other Wikipedia pages, as you did to European Union. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" is strongly discouraged. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. RolandR (talk) 21:36, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Trotskyism. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. RolandR (talk) 21:39, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Roland, I think you are criticising my addition of the comments 'Trotskyists claim that ... ". Pointing out that Trotskyists claim something is accurate - it does not equal either endorsing or rejecting the content of their claims.

See Words to avoid: "The word "claim" may be used accurately and appropriately. The term "claim" indicates attribution—an essential concept for dealing with the handling of particular sources, such as may make statements of varying veracity, substance, and relevance.The term "claimed" can also be misused to cast doubt on an assertion. This usage is especially apparent when one viewpoint is regarded as a "claim", whereas another perspective is associated with a word, such as "argument", "demonstration", or "belief", that implies a stronger or deeper engagement between the attributor and that which is attributed... "Claim" can be appropriate for characterizing both sides of a subjective debate or disagreement. Do not use "claim" for one side and a different verb for the other, as that could imply that one has more merit." Your edit clearly goes against this, implying that a statement made by a Trotskyist is less reliable than one made by a non-Trotskyist. RolandR (talk) 18:26, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you will find I did not contrast it with another statement. I did use 'claim' as an attribution; the Trotskyists indeed make many claims about the Russian revolution; it is not Wikipedia's role (is it?) to uphold the veracity of their claims.

May 2009

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did to Socialist Workers Party (Britain), you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Don't insert your own derogatory comments into articles. They will not be tolerated. RolandR 19:26, 24 May 2009 (UTC) Dear Roland, as you are a supporter of the Fourth International, you can hardly be trusted to put forward a neutral point of view on Trotskyism. It seems you are using Wikipedia to promote the Trotskyist viewpoint, accompanied by threats to those who disagree with you.[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did to Trotskyism, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. If you add material to articles, particularly if this adds contentious or non-consensual claims, you must include a verifiable source so that other people can themselves assess the validity of your assertion. Otherwise, such edits are not allowed, and will be deleted. RolandR 11:49, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. RolandR 11:50, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Roland, if you are objective, perhaps you will allow the addition of this quote to any of your Trotskyist propaganda pieces: In 1915, Lenin wrote in his article "The United States of Europe Slogan", “Uneven economic and political development is an absolute law of capitalism. Hence the victory of socialism is possible first in several or even in one capitalist country taken separately. The victorious proletariat of that country, having expropriated the capitalists and organised its own socialist production, would stand up against the rest of the world, the capitalist world.” Stevenjp (talk) 12:07, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Forgive me Roland, if I can't quite understand how you are in a position to make such threats? Stevenjp (talk) 12:12, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 14:42, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your request for editor assistance

Hello, Sevenjp. You made a request for editor assistance two days ago which did not have an appropriate, descriptive request title. The request has now been retitled and may be found at WP:EAR#Socialist Workers Party (Britain). You may also wish to address the concerns made in the volunteers' replies to your request. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 19:39, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copied from WP:EAR

Copied here for your convience. Athanasius • Quicumque vult 17:37, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Communist Party of Britain Marxist-Leninist page

This page is continually amended to say that the CPBML has suported the Labour Party ever since 1979. This is not true. The CPBML said 'Vote Labour' to get Thatcher out. When she lost power, the CPBML returned to its traditional line of 'Don't vote, organise'. Wikipedia surely does not wish to allow falsehoods to be continually asserted. Also someone is continually entering a sentence about a particular individual who left the CPBML, stating that his departure significantly weakened the party. This is, to say the least, highly debatable. First, why is one individual singled out? Second, is this not an attempt to promote the profile of this individaul, and therefore tendentious and unacceptable to Wikipedia?

Stevenjp (talk) 10:21, 25 May 2009 (UTC) stevenjp[reply]

I haven't looked at the history yet, but yes, this sounds tendentious, and also possibly the start of an edit war. Attempt to discuss it with the other editors both on their talk page, and the discussion page of the article.Drew Smith What I've done 10:25, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that there has been no discussion on the article talk page. I have reverted some recent vandalism from a Chinese IP and placed a warning on the IP talk page. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:34, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note the unclear request below, #Socialist Workers Party (Britain), may be tangentially related to this request. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 19:54, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Socialist Workers Party (Britain)

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did to Socialist Workers Party (Britain), you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Don't insert your own derogatory comments into articles. They will not be tolerated. RolandR 19:26, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Dear Roland, as you are a supporter of the Fourth International, you can hardly be trusted to put forward a neutral point of view on Trotskyism. It seems you are using Wikipedia to promote the Trotskyist viewpoint, accompanied by threats to those who disagree with you. Stevenjp

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did to Trotskyism, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. If you add material to articles, particularly if this adds contentious or non-consensual claims, you must include a verifiable source so that other people can themselves assess the validity of your assertion. Otherwise, such edits are not allowed, and will be deleted. RolandR 11:49, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( Stevenjp (talk) 14:04, 26 May 2009 (UTC) ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. RolandR 11:50, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Dear Roland, if you are objective, perhaps you will allow the addition of this quote to any of your Trotskyist propaganda pieces: In 1915, Lenin wrote in his article "The United States of Europe Slogan", “Uneven economic and political development is an absolute law of capitalism. Hence the victory of socialism is possible first in several or even in one capitalist country taken separately. The victorious proletariat of that country, having expropriated the capitalists and organised its own socialist production, would stand up against the rest of the world, the capitalist world.” Stevenjp (talk) 12:07, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Forgive me Roland, if I can't quite understand how you are in a position to make such threats? Stevenjp (talk) 12:12, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Stevenjp" Hidden categories: User talk pages with Uw-advert1 notices

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevenjp (talk • contribs) 15:04, 26 May 2009

And your request is what precisely? Jezhotwells (talk) 15:41, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The whole request is a partial copy of the requestor's user talk page. I've fixed the pre-formatted text sections as they were screwing up the pagewidth, and put the whole thing in a blockquote to indicate that it's just a quote. I've also added a more appropriate title to this request and will shortly notify the requestor of the change and requested that he clarify this request. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 19:39, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, gentlemen, I'm pretty new to Wikipedia. I suggest that a balanced account would put the Totskyist account of the orgins of the dispute over 'Socialism in one country' and also proffer the non-Trotskyist viewpoint, for example, the following: In 1915, Lenin wrote in his article "The United States of Europe Slogan", “Uneven economic and political development is an absolute law of capitalism. Hence the victory of socialism is possible first in several or even in one capitalist country taken separately. The victorious proletariat of that country, having expropriated the capitalists and organised its own socialist production, would stand up against the rest of the world, the capitalist world.” Otherwise Wikipedia's supposedly objective account of Trotskyism merely reproduces what Trotskyists say about themselves.Stevenjp (talk) 16:10, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So, you're suggesting the account of Trotskyism in Socialist Workers Party (Britain) is biased towards Trotskyists, and that the article should reflect an alternative viewpoint? Certainly a valid request to make, though being unfamiliar with the subject area I can't exactly evaluate the appropriateness of it. As such the best advice I can offer is, if discussion of the issue at Talk:Socialist Workers Party (Britain) has failed, you may wish to try Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Political parties or Portal talk:Communism or something else similar to turn the ear of editors with significant experience in editing in that subject area. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 19:52, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm not "suggesting the account of Trotskyism in Socialist Workers Party (Britain) is biased towards Trotskyists, and that the article should reflect an alternative viewpoint." I think that the article should not merely repeat their claims, without any qualifications. The articles should say, for example, that Trotskyists believe that the SU was a degenerated workers' state, not that it was a degenerated state. Stevenjp (talk) 11:23, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

July 2009

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Trotskyism. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. RolandR 16:07, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did to History of the Socialist Workers Party (Britain). Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. RolandR 16:09, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Roland, as you are an avowed supporter of the spurious '4th International', you may feel that presenting evidence that undermines your odd belief-system is vandalism. To normal people, it isn't.