User talk:Trust Is All You Need/Archive 4

GA review of No More Good Days

Hello, just a follow up message to let you know that there are a couple of outstanding concerns wrt the GA review of "No More Good Days". The review has now been on hold for two weeks, and six days have passed since I re-iterated remaining issues with the article. If you intend to address these issues, or if there's anything I can help with, please let me know within 24 hours or the article will be failed. Thank you. Frickative 03:08, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, i forgot all about it! --TIAYN (talk) 06:52, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

No problem, these things happen :) There are only two issues outstanding - would you like me to leave it on hold a while longer or not? Frickative 14:34, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

No thank you, but its nice of you to ask, but i think it would be better to you to delist it. --TIAYN (talk) 14:38, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Sure, I'll go ahead and do that now. Thanks for your quick response. Frickative 14:53, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Frank Zeidler

Frank was not the longest-sitting mayor of Milwaukee, nor even second-longest. Those would be Henry Maier and Daniel Hoan respectively. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:46, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay, have i stated otherwise in an article, if i did i need to fix it. --TIAYN (talk) 17:50, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Brian Patrick Moore

The resolution comes from the Socialist Party of Florida which nominated him. This is part of a new pattern in the SPUSA of doing away with their candidates i.e. Walter F. Brown and Atlee Yarrow. Attempts at David McReynolds have also taken place. Maybe there is a category or means to record this phenomena better? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.122.31.30 (talk) 21:11, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

If thats true, fine, but we need reliable sources to include it on Wikipedia, if not, we can't include it. If you are able to give me a reliable source for it, i'll find a place for it here on Wikipedia. --TIAYN (talk) 21:15, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I will need to know specifically whom I am dealing with before citing critical source material. However, you are free to fully ask more questions of Chegitz and to note his changes without any authority or citation. Where are Chegitz records for his changes? Seek the truth if you claim it to be.

This is a cross-post for your information to see what and whom you are dealing with:

Removed yet more OT discussion. Personal attacks are against Wiki Policy. Chegitz (talk) 13:36, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Truth has never been a personal attack. You are openly a liar which is why you are so hateful and leading the charge against Brian Patrick Moore by introducing the motion to impeach him for uncovering your lies. There is no limit to how low a person you are to do these spiteful deeds of pure evil.

Socialist Party of Florida

This is cross-posted due to the control deletions by the user Chegitz with a conflict of interest being a party officer with the page of concern and his lack of being truthful with socialist voters in Florida.

Feel free to pick up the phone and call the Florida Division of Elections for your factual data. Also note that user Chegitz is a well known communist who has expressed this view against socialism and socialists. As for the number of actual membership numbers it should take one call to the SPUSA National Secretary when he is in the office. You claim your name to be about "truth" but can you deliver it here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.171.114.135 (talk) 12:02, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

First if he's a communist fine, i don't really care... But can you tell me where is biased or inaccurate information is, so that i can remove it? --TIAYN (talk) 15:57, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

The logo was deleted by him. The new logo is that of his opinion. There never has been an official logo or trademarked brand for the SPFL. Where did he get the authority to change it? He insist the address for the office is at his address while the state only recognizes that offices of Chair. He has now out of hate and spite gone after the Chair to get his way. He has intentionally removed the 2006 campaign in an attempt to erase Atlee Yarrow from history. He even went as far as having Yarrow's account from wiki deleted by one of the National Committee members of the SPUSA to try and stop the truth. This current management has all but crushed socialism in Florida by it's very words and actions. Why has SPF voters grown by 30% to 617 yet there is a 60% membership drop to 22 persons? This does not take into account that now there are three "socialist" parties dividing the vote in Florida. Radical democracy is about having more democracy and tendencies which follow localism, according the the very book with the same title by a Ph.D. Marc Luzietti is trying to force his Stalinist vision on socialism in the state and the voters are not fooled. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.122.31.30 (talk) 03:52, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Where can I find the reflist so I can start adding some citations. Chegitz (talk) 22:37, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Chegitz is an officer of the party which means WP: COI policy is being abused by him by his very pretense of being neutral on this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.171.114.230 (talk) 08:05, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I would have to agree here, Chegitz has a clear WP: COI in being a known officer of the party. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.29.160.143 (talk) 22:15, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I can see with the help of both your edit summaries that you are the same person. --TIAYN (talk) 05:42, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry you had to wander into his personal feud with reality. Now you see why I keep a close watch on the page against new edits. Chegitz (talk) 18:28, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

I can prove I am not the same person to Chegitz by using his own words from his very own closed private list which Atlee Yarrow and Brian Moore have no access at looking at (see below), This is why and how I know Chegitz is a liar to SPF Voters. The question now for Chegitz is who am I really that I would know he is a liar and also on his private list?

Comrades of the Socialist Party of Florida may have recently noticed a slew of websites purporting to be the Socialist Party of Florida, or its locals. On these websites, the Party is continuously misrepresented or attacked: • The 2004 constitution, not the 2007, is shown as being the Party's constitution • The Party's address is shown incorrectly; donations are directed to be sent there. • What is shown to be the Platform and Principles of the SPFL, is instead something made up entirely. • The websites give the impression of a connection with something calling itself America's Socialist Party, which has nothing to do with the Socialist Party USA, (which the SPFL is a constituent part). • Some of the content on the main page is an attack on other socialist Parties in Florida with whom we have some working relations. • The personal private information of the SPFL's state officers, with pictures, and without permission, is listed on these sites.

These websites are the work of Atlee Yarrow. Who is Atlee Yarrow? Yarrow is a former member of the SPFL.In 2006, he became secretary of the SPFL. • According to former SPFL Vice-Chair, Linda Moffit, Yarrow's "sexist" treatment of her led her to quit the Party. • The Chair, David Maynard, resigned, in part, because of comments made to him by Yarrow.

In early 2007, Yarrow • Appointed himself Party chair. • Unilaterally declared the SPFL was no longer part of the SPUSA. • Misled the officers of the Socialist Party of Jacksonville, and then claimed that the SPJax was also no longer part of the SPUSA. • Declared both the SPFL and SPJax had joined the "Socialist Party of America." • Published the home address of a comrade on Wikipedia, MySpace, and gave it to all 67 county governments in Florida, to publish as the home address of the SPFL, despite that comrade’s repeated requests for him to stop doing so.

At the June 2007 state convention for the SPFL, the attendees voted unanimously to expel Yarrow from the Party, immediately.

Since that time, Yarrow has: • Broken into the email archives of the SPFL SEC, publishing some of the information he found there on his personal blog. In breaking in to the archives, he had access to, and may have stolen, membership information up to Oct. 2007. • Cyber-stalked and cyber-bulled at least two SPFL comrades who have emotional difficulties. • Admitted to having Party property but refuses to return it to the Party.

In addition, though he claims to be doing this in the interests of socialist voters, on his own atleeyarrow.org, he refers to himself as a social conservative.

Yarrow's motivations can only be speculated upon. What cannot be denied is that his continued actions have harmed this organization for almost four years.Over the years, various SECs have sought out attorneys for advice about legal action, but were unable to obtain a lawyer.

Florida law prohibits the use of a Party's name or logo without the written consent of the Party's State Executive Committee (subject to the 1st Amendment). In December, 2009, the SEC was contacted by a progressive lawyer, Barry Silver of Boca Raton, who was interested in working with us. On Dec 21, the SEC voted unanimously to speak with the lawyer to to get legal advice; including seeking injunctions against Yarrow to stop misrepresenting the Party, return our Party property, and to leave our members alone. On Feb 9, 2010, the SEC voted 3 - 1 to instruct the lawyer to initiate legal proceedings.

The State Executive Committee strongly urges the membership of the Socialist Party of Florida to have no contact with this person, nor his websites.

The following is a list of fake SPFL websites: http://socialistpartyofflorida.com/ http://socialistpartyofflorida.org/ http://socialistpartyofflorida.net/ http://spfvoters.org/ http://www.socialistpartyofgainesville.webs.com/ http://sptampabay.webs.com/ http://spjax.webs.com/ http://www.socialistpartyoftallahassee.webs.com/ http://www.facebook.com/pages/Socialist-Party-of-Florida/181953801187?v=wall

-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.122.30.234 (talk) 11:13, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Union for Democratic Socialism

I'm not sure about this one, other than the observation that from the sounds of it it was probably a paper organization related to the NY Old Guard. I'll snort around a little and get back to ya. Carrite (talk) 18:11, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

I only have one pamphlet in my collection by UDS, something called "Creeping Socialism" published in 1953. The ILGWU papers at Cornell include some correspondence from the UDS for the years 1953-1955, with this notation: "Includes James T. Farrell letter to Norman Thomas outlining a general political program (n.d.)." So this looks like a very short-lived McCarthy-era vaguely SP-ish offshoot... Carrite (talk) 22:24, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

There seems to be a mention of a 1973-era group of the same name in Busky's book (which I do not own). LINK. Carrite (talk) 22:27, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

In concrete answer to your actual question, assuming you're talking about the 1972-73 incarnation, you'll need to score some microfilm of New America and Newsletter of the Democratic Left. I damned near sprung for New America film this month, but wound up spending my pennies on Reading Labor Advocate 1932-37 and Milwaukee Leader 1914 instead... From memory the DL film picks up with issue 6, so you're probably SOL on that unless they've still got a functioning DSA office with a file and you ask 'em nice for some photocopies... I've tried to ignore the 1972-73 fiasco, since there were (at least up till a few months ago) some people futzing around with the SDUSA name... I wanna make sure a dog is good and dead before I go conducting an autopsy. Carrite (talk) 22:44, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

A different subject: I notice that this WP bio isn't under the Socialism Project umbrella yet: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Ware What's the procedure for getting such things included and rated? Carrite (talk) 22:19, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Drop me a straight email... This having to edit pages is a hard way to communicate. My name's Tim, pleased to meetcha! MutantPop@aol.com Carrite (talk) 22:48, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Socialist State

Let me address this edit summary that you made:

“Will do, but not today... Don't really understand why you are reverting, when a majority of a country believes Obama is a socialist.. something is terrible wrong.. Did not mean to offend.”

As far as the majority of the country believing that Obama is a socialist, I missed that particular poll. Even if this does show up in a poll, it is hardly the result of confusion over “Keynes-based economic theory” -- I would be surprised if a majority of people could give even an approximate description of ANY economic theory. Nor do I consider right wing attempts to picture Obama as a socialist to be the result of confusion on their part.

But more importantly, I don’t see where any of this has any relevance to the article or is justification for edit warring over a properly placed fact tag.Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 22:18, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

CPUSA Bibliography

That's just a jump page off the regular CPUSA history page -- it was ALL part of Communist Party USA already and there were "Split This Page" tags appearing at the top of that page, which were distracting and annoying, both. Splitting that one section to its own page almost singlehandedly cut it from 102 k. to 82 k., which is in the range where WP seems to want to be. It's obviously a selected bibliography and if you want to, in the name of completism, link it to John Haynes' MULTI-THOUSAND title listing, I have no objections... But that's a very useful cross-section of the literature and includes the overwhelming majority of essential titles in the field. Carrite (talk) 06:13, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

MPs table

Hi, I just wanted to launch a suggestion to you. As I recently made a new kind of template showing all Members of Parliament for the Progress Party [1] (can be found at the bottom of the article about the party), I just wanted to make you aware of my idea so you could perhaps make one for the Socialist Left Party also if you want to (since you are editing on it a lot). I think it gives a very nice overview of party MPs. It actually took a little while to create one, so I don't think I'll make any more such templates for other parties. Just a suggestion though. -TheG (talk) 19:09, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Socialist Left Party (Norway)

Hello, I have reviewed Socialist Left Party (Norway), an article that you nominated for Did you know, and there appears to be some issues that may need to be clarified. As soon as they are addressed, please let me know on my talk page and I would be happy to verify your article right away. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Arctic Night 07:18, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

3RR Warning

I'm posting this on both of your pages, both of you are edit warring to ridiculous extremes on the Socialist Party USA article. I'm sure you both think you're right, but you're both going to wind up blocked if you don't stop immediately and start using the talk page. Dayewalker (talk) 09:09, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Edit Warring Report Posted

With regrets, as both of you ignored the warnings of edit warring, I've reported you to the 3RR & Edit Warring Board. You can find that discussion here [2]. Good luck in the future. Dayewalker (talk) 09:41, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

ANI BTW

I've moved your report at WP:ANI down to the bottom of the page, that's where new reports should go. Otherwise, no one will see them. That could have been the problem, and the reason no one responded to you. When you pointed me to ANI, I didn't see it either until noticing it stuck at the top. Just something for future reference, good luck. Dayewalker (talk) 09:50, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Claimed DSA membership being published is erroneous

I object most strenuously to the revert you have imposed on Democratic Socialists of America. However, rather than clog this page with that, here's the link...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Democratic_Socialists_of_America#Membership_claim_absolutely_false

Carrite (talk) 18:53, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Look, I have no interest in fighting with you. DSA is swell, I have nothing against them. I'm a former member and their political ideas are close to mine. But you simply can not have a paid circulation of a magazine that every member gets of 5700 and an organizational membership of 10,000. I don't object to changing the way I stated that, if you think I'm too harsh for suggesting that DSA hides their actual membership count (which they do, by the way). There are other ways to say it which don't involve "original research"... But you can't just go quoting Old Clem from Maine as saying there are "about 10,000" members in his group and then using that as evidence to demonstrate a linear growth of the organization from 1982 to date. That's simply not the case. DSA today is, in all likelihood, a smaller organization than it was in 1982. I say that not without a little sorrow — that's just the truth. Carrite (talk) 20:17, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

More on DSA memberships

RE: That might as well be true, seeing that i really don't know anything about this subject, but if you don't have a source which actually says that it cannot be included to Wikipedia. While the claim of 10,000 members might be false, there is no other references stating otherwise. Instead of arguing about this, it would be better to actually use your time to actually find a reference which actually agrees with your calculations, instead of edit warring with me. --TIAYN (talk) 20:23, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I was trying to restructure things in a more neutral way but you reverted three lines bing-bing-bing as they were made. Admittedly, rather than pasting on (appropriate) disclaimers to each assertion of membership sitting there, it needs to be reconstructed, since the appropriate disclaimers have a negative tone all their own. I'll give it a few weeks to cool off and we'll see if we can come up with a phrasing that is NEUTRAL and ACCURATE together. Best regards, Tim. Carrite (talk) 21:07, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

SPUSA

please see: | Self-published and questionable sources as sources on themselves Chegitz (talk) 15:28, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves, without the requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as:

1. the material is not unduly self-serving;
2. it does not involve claims about third parties;
3. it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject;
4. there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity;
5. the article is not based primarily on such sources.

So, given the above, can the two of you collaborate on something that is both accurate and GA? Chegitz (talk) 15:28, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Chegitz fails at one because he is trying to self-control the material with his personally citable facts, hence the domino failure into number two. In number four there is a question as to the authority Chegitz has been claiming from within the party structure while openly abusing membership and voters who disagree with him while trying to legalese his way out of things like this. Chegitz is the king of doublespeak as we have crossed several emails among ourselves with him telling each person a different story so they lean towards his favor. So "authenticity" and your latest crypto message to the NC has us laughing once more. Number five is a huge one here as Chegitz 's imagination is so far the only source for material. That is unless he actually opens the minutes archives and email lists for the world to see how he played everyone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.122.30.234 (talk) 16:23, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Leave me alone, we are talking about a different article. Get a life --TIAYN (talk) 17:13, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I want to thank you for the work you've done on both the SPFL and SPUSA articles. Chegitz (talk) 19:54, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

BTW, just in case you're wondering who this other person is, he is a former Secretary of the SPFL, who was expelled by state party convention after he declared himself chair and that the SPFL had left the SPUSA, among other things. He's never forgiven me because the state party convention voted unanimously to throw him out. He's been harassing the organization ever since. He now sees you as an avenue of battle against the Party. Since he's going to continue to bother you as long as I write to you, this will be my last communication. Chegitz (talk) 20:02, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

DSA

Thanks for the nice note, I appreciate it. I'm actually playing with a little Trotskyist sect today called the Communist League of Struggle, getting it from stub-class to C-class or whatever... I was thinking this morning that if you want a good DSA project, there still is no photo of Mike Harrington up at either his own WP page or the DSA page. You might try writing a couple notes to DSA themselves for some help obtaining a copyright-clear image. There are pictures of him on practically every book, but they're all WP-no-nos. I tried to track down his wife about a year ago for this, but I believe she had recently died, and I didn't get anywhere with a random letter to the national office. If you do choose to do this, address your note to the attention of Joseph Schwartz — he's been a lifetime DSA guy and he'll either help you or steer you in the right direction. You might also note our difficulty finding official membership figures that don't start with the word "about" and see if he's got any tips on where to find something like that. Best to ya. —Tim Carrite (talk) 18:51, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

I took a fresh crack at it, trying to keep things neutral and not overstating the significance of "Total Paid Distribution" or implying that actual membership is actually a fraction of those figures (it's probably a pretty decent proxy for membership actually...) Have a look and I hope it meets with your approval. Carrite (talk) 16:24, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I really don't have time for this...

RE: << What is the point of listing their national convention, they are not notable enough to get an article, and, if i undestand right, that list is going to become "hugh". --TIAYN (talk) 19:15, 26 February 2010 (UTC) >>

Why do you revert my work first and ask the question second?

The answer is this: the group's policy statements are composed and officers are elected at the National Conventions. If a person is doing serious history on an organization, they need to know when and where these events took place so that they can scour local media for coverage, or target their search of archival documents by date.

Just because something is not interesting or useful TO YOU, that does not mean it is not potentially interesting or useful TO SOMEBODY ELSE SOMEWHERE DOWN THE ROAD.

I'm not even gonna go to the question of you pasting in FOR THE THIRD TIME IN THE ARTICLE the 1982 claimed memberships (see: Lead, Body at top); or the non-germane 1987 membership claims, the utterly impossible opinions about the size of the organization expressed by Bill the Banjo Plucker in Maine, or the propaganda assertions of FoxNews. I seriously just have no time to waste writing and then having my work snuffed for no good reason... Seriously, I think you're doing a good thing with your rating articles, etc., but you need to STOP reverting, not just me, but everybody. Don't do it. Carrite (talk) 19:26, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

RE: << If it is so darn important for you to have a list of their national conventions, create an article for it, or even better, make a section in the DSA article entitled "National convention" were you can add the list. Oh, and i do many other things than just assess articles. --TIAYN (talk) 19:54, 26 February 2010 (UTC) >>

So put a heading on it that says National Conventions. I don't care. People can add to the table, it is a concise way to present the material. Carrite (talk) 20:07, 26 February 2010 (UTC)