User talk:Trust Is All You Need/Archive 9

Reply about your Stalin Brezhnev and Putin question

First of all.Please check it in:http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Putin.This is about The Putin question!The rationalwiki.org administrators has already agreed and allowed me to put these Contents in rationalwiki.org(entry:Putin).These Contents has already in rationalwiki.org(entry:Putin) now.You can check it on rationalwiki.org(entry:Putin).You can check it in this:http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Putin

Vladimir Putin has said that Stalin's legacy can't be judged in black and white in 2009. Putin's policies have been likened to the Soviet era by some people, but which has received a lukewarm response by Gennady Zyuganov,the ledder of Communist Party of the Russian Federation（KPRF). Roger Boyes, on the other hand, considers him more of a latter-day Brezhnev than a clone of Stalin.

Khrushchev cremated Stalin's corrosion resistant body In 1961,which in China Deng Xiaoping never do that to Mao Zedong's.And about Brezhnev,when Brezhnev wiled power,in 1969(Stalin's 80 birthday)，a Stalin's half-body bronze statue were bulit in behind Lenin's mausoleum by Soviet union government. What is wrong with something I want to put it in wikipedia:English(entry:Brezhnev).that is already put it in wikipedia:中文（Chinese).The Chinese Wikipedia administrators has already agreed and allowed me to put these Contents in Wikipedia：中文(Chinese).These Contents has already in Wikipedia：中文(Chinese) now.You can check it on Wikipedia：中文(Chinese) (entry:Brezhnev). Khrushchev's "On the Cult of Personality and Its Consequences" speech said Stalin is a distorter to Lenin.So as Mikhail Gorbachev.They praise Lenin not Stalin.They condemned Stalin not Lenin.Brezhnev says Stalin as a successor to Lenin and a war hero,even has many serious mistakes.But still has done right things more than wrong.That is a huge different.We need to let people understand. On November 2, 1987,Mikhail Gorbachev said that Stalin knowingly committed "real crimes" against the Soviet people." About Putin!! On 03 December 2009,Russian President Vladimir Putin says Stalin's legacy can't be judged in black and white. Roger Boyes said Putin is no Stalin but a latter-day Brezhnev. Some People think Putin's policy is close to the Soviet Union's.How ever,Gennady Zyuganov, the leader of the Communist Party of Russian Federation,although he is a harsh critic of Putin ,but his recipes for Russia’s future are true to his Soviet roots. In November 2001, Zyuganov said that Russia President Putin was betraying its national interests. And What is wrong with something I want to put it in wikipedia:English(entry:Putin).that is already put it in wikipedia:中文（Chinese).The Chinese Wikipedia administrators has already agreed and allowed me to put these Contents in Wikipedia：中文(Chinese).These Contents has already in Wikipedia：中文(Chinese) now.You can check it on Wikipedia：中文(Chinese) (entry:Putin).

Reply about your Stalin Brezhnev and Putin question

Khrushchev cremated Stalin's corrosion resistant body In 1961,which Deng Xiaoping never do that to Mao Zedong's corrosion resistant body.And about Brezhnev,when Brezhnev wiled power,in 1969(Stalin's 80 birthday)，a Stalin's half-body bronze statue were bulit in behind Lenin's mausoleum by Soviet union government.

What is wrong with something I want to put it in wikipedia:English(entry:Brezhnev).that is already put it in wikipedia:中文（Chinese).The Chinese Wikipedia administrators has already agreed and allowed me to put these Contents in Wikipedia：中文(Chinese).These Contents has already in Wikipedia：中文(Chinese) now.You can check it on Wikipedia：中文(Chinese) (entry:Brezhnev).

Khrushchev's "On the Cult of Personality and Its Consequences" speech said Stalin is a distorter to Lenin.So as Mikhail Gorbachev.They praise Lenin not Stalin.They condemned Stalin not Lenin.Brezhnev says Stalin as a successor to Lenin and a war hero,even has many serious mistakes.But still has done right things more than wrong.That is a huge different.We need to let people understand.

On November 2, 1987,Mikhail Gorbachev said that Stalin knowingly committed "real crimes" against the Soviet people."

About Putin!!

On 03 December 2009,Russian President Vladimir Putin says Stalin's legacy can't be judged in black and white.

Roger Boyes said Putin is no Stalin but a latter-day Brezhnev.

Some People think Putin's policy is close to the Soviet Union's.How ever,Gennady Zyuganov, the leader of the Communist Party of Russian Federation,although he is a harsh critic of Putin ,but his recipes for Russia’s future are true to his Soviet roots. In November 2001, Zyuganov said that Russia President Putin was betraying its national interests.

And What is wrong with something I want to put it in wikipedia:English(entry:Putin).that is already put it in wikipedia:中文（Chinese).The Chinese Wikipedia administrators has already agreed and allowed me to put these Contents in Wikipedia：中文(Chinese).These Contents has already in Wikipedia：中文(Chinese) now.You can check it on Wikipedia：中文(Chinese) (entry:Putin).

Reply about your Stalin question

Reply about your Stalin Brezhnev and Putin question

Khrushchev cremated Stalin's corrosion resistant body In 1961,which Deng Xiaoping never do that to Mao Zedong's corrosion resistant body.And about Brezhnev,when Brezhnev wiled power,in 1969(Stalin's 80 birthday)，a Stalin's half-body bronze statue were bulit in behind Lenin's mausoleum by Soviet union government.

What is wrong with something I want to put it in wikipedia:English(entry:Brezhnev).that is already put it in wikipedia:中文（Chinese).The Chinese Wikipedia administrators has already agreed and allowed me to put these Contents in Wikipedia：中文(Chinese).These Contents has already in Wikipedia：中文(Chinese) now.You can check it on Wikipedia：中文(Chinese) (entry:Brezhnev).

Khrushchev's "On the Cult of Personality and Its Consequences" speech said Stalin is a distorter to Lenin.So as Mikhail Gorbachev.They praise Lenin not Stalin.They condemned Stalin not Lenin.Brezhnev says Stalin as a successor to Lenin and a war hero,even has many serious mistakes.But still has done right things more than wrong.That is a huge different.We need to let people understand.

On November 2, 1987,Mikhail Gorbachev said that Stalin knowingly committed "real crimes" against the Soviet people."

About Putin!!

On 03 December 2009,Russian President Vladimir Putin says Stalin's legacy can't be judged in black and white.

Roger Boyes said Putin is no Stalin but a latter-day Brezhnev.

Some People think Putin's policy is close to the Soviet Union's.How ever,Gennady Zyuganov, the leader of the Communist Party of Russian Federation,although he is a harsh critic of Putin ,but his recipes for Russia’s future are true to his Soviet roots. In November 2001, Zyuganov said that Russia President Putin was betraying its national interests.

And What is wrong with something I want to put it in wikipedia:English(entry:Putin).that is already put it in wikipedia:中文（Chinese).The Chinese Wikipedia administrators has already agreed and allowed me to put these Contents in Wikipedia：中文(Chinese).These Contents has already in Wikipedia：中文(Chinese) now.You can check it on Wikipedia：中文(Chinese) (entry:Putin).

Khrushchev's De-Stalinization policy defined Stalin as a traitor to Lenin.So as Gorbachev,also defined Stalin as a traitor.They Praises Lenin not Stalin.They condemn Stalin not Lenin.Brezhnev defined Stalin as a War hero and Successor to Lenin,even he have some serious mistakes,but in Brezhnev's mind,Stalin still have things more right than wrong.That is huge differents between Khrushchev Brezhnev and Gorbachev. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.56.196.39 (talk) 15:41, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Trust Is All You Need. You have new messages at Al Ameer son's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Al Ameer (talk) 17:52, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

2013 Odlum Brown Vancouver Open – Men's Singles (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Matt Reid, Benjamin Mitchell and James McGee

Ba'ath Party (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Enlightenment and Karak

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:47, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Reply about your Stalin question

Khrushchev's De-Stalinization policy defined Stalin as a traitor to Lenin.So as Gorbachev,also defined Stalin as a traitor.They Praises Lenin not Stalin.They condemn Stalin not Lenin.Brezhnev defined Stalin as a War hero and Successor to Lenin,even he have some serious mistakes,but in Brezhnev's mind,Stalin still have things more right than wrong.That is huge differents between Khrushchev Brezhnev and Gorbachev.

Khrushchev cremated Stalin's corrosion resistant body In 1961,which Deng Xiaoping never do that to Mao Zedong's corrosion resistant body.And about Brezhnev,when Brezhnev wiled power,in 1969(Stalin's 80 birthday)，a Stalin's half-body bronze statue were bulit in behind Lenin's mausoleum by Soviet union government.

What is wrong with something I want to put it in wikipedia:English(entry:Brezhnev).that is already put it in wikipedia:中文（Chinese).The Chinese Wikipedia administrators has already agreed and allowed me to put these Contents in Wikipedia：中文(Chinese).These Contents has already in Wikipedia：中文(Chinese) now.You can check it on Wikipedia：中文(Chinese) (entry:Brezhnev).

Khrushchev's "On the Cult of Personality and Its Consequences" speech said Stalin is a distorter to Lenin.So as Mikhail Gorbachev.They praise Lenin not Stalin.They condemned Stalin not Lenin.Brezhnev says Stalin as a successor to Lenin and a war hero,even has many serious mistakes.But still has done right things more than wrong.That is a huge different.We need to let people understand.

On November 2, 1987,Mikhail Gorbachev said that Stalin knowingly committed "real crimes" against the Soviet people."

About Putin!!

On 03 December 2009,Russian President Vladimir Putin says Stalin's legacy can't be judged in black and white.

Roger Boyes said Putin is no Stalin but a latter-day Brezhnev.

Some People think Putin's policy is close to the Soviet Union's.How ever,Gennady Zyuganov, the leader of the Communist Party of Russian Federation,although he is a harsh critic of Putin ,but his recipes for Russia’s future are true to his Soviet roots. In November 2001, Zyuganov said that Russia President Putin was betraying its national interests.

And What is wrong with something I want to put it in wikipedia:English(entry:Putin).that is already put it in wikipedia:中文（Chinese).The Chinese Wikipedia administrators has already agreed and allowed me to put these Contents in Wikipedia：中文(Chinese).These Contents has already in Wikipedia：中文(Chinese) now.You can check it on Wikipedia：中文(Chinese) (entry:Putin).

Disambiguation link notification for August 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Dan Evans (tennis) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Diego Alvarez and David Rice

2013 Comerica Bank Challenger – Singles (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to James McGee

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:11, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Reply about your Stalin Brezhnev and Putin question

Reply about your Stalin Brezhnev and Putin question

Khrushchev cremated Stalin's corrosion resistant body In 1961,which Deng Xiaoping never do that to Mao Zedong's corrosion resistant body.And about Brezhnev,when Brezhnev wiled power,in 1969(Stalin's 80 birthday)，a Stalin's half-body bronze statue were bulit in behind Lenin's mausoleum by Soviet union government.

What is wrong with something I want to put it in wikipedia:English(entry:Brezhnev).that is already put it in wikipedia:中文（Chinese).The Chinese Wikipedia administrators has already agreed and allowed me to put these Contents in Wikipedia：中文(Chinese).These Contents has already in Wikipedia：中文(Chinese) now.You can check it on Wikipedia：中文(Chinese) (entry:Brezhnev).

Khrushchev's "On the Cult of Personality and Its Consequences" speech said Stalin is a distorter to Lenin.So as Mikhail Gorbachev.They praise Lenin not Stalin.They condemned Stalin not Lenin.Brezhnev says Stalin as a successor to Lenin and a war hero,even has many serious mistakes.But still has done right things more than wrong.That is a huge different.We need to let people understand.

On November 2, 1987,Mikhail Gorbachev said that Stalin knowingly committed "real crimes" against the Soviet people."

About Putin!!

On 03 December 2009,Russian President Vladimir Putin says Stalin's legacy can't be judged in black and white.

Roger Boyes said Putin is no Stalin but a latter-day Brezhnev.

Some People think Putin's policy is close to the Soviet Union's.How ever,Gennady Zyuganov, the leader of the Communist Party of Russian Federation,although he is a harsh critic of Putin ,but his recipes for Russia’s future are true to his Soviet roots. In November 2001, Zyuganov said that Russia President Putin was betraying its national interests.

And What is wrong with something I want to put it in wikipedia:English(entry:Putin).that is already put it in wikipedia:中文（Chinese).The Chinese Wikipedia administrators has already agreed and allowed me to put these Contents in Wikipedia：中文(Chinese).These Contents has already in Wikipedia：中文(Chinese) now.You can check it on Wikipedia：中文(Chinese) (entry:Putin). Nvrenshinanrendetou (talk 18:17, 8 August 2013‎ (UTC)

You sure? Stalin was 74 years old when he died, how he can celebrate 80th birthday? OwnDealers (talk) 14:56, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Brezhnev

Well, pages like, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva simply cite him as he's voted/called, so how about you simply put "greatest russian" for brezhnev, on the lead intro? Thanks OwnDealers (talk) 14:43, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Fine, instead of "popular" just put "admired", i mean, even Dokka Umarov is popular, but brezhnev is somewhat liked by russians. OwnDealers (talk) 14:52, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Last time, "admired", not "popular", like i explained above ^^, thanks OwnDealers (talk) 15:16, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

North Korea

Hi there. I wish to inform you that I have reverted your edit on North Korea for unexplained removal of content. You are currently engaged in an edit war and there is a high chance that you may be blocked from the encyclopedia if you insist on violating the three-revert rule. Please resolve the dispute on the talk page. I have the seen the page history, which indicates that is an ongoing dispute. But for my input, I believe that North Korea is well-established as a communist—or a dictator–state and nothing much else, and I'll remain generally neutral. TBrandley (T • C • B) 07:57, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

I understand and I now realize your were not the editor to have started the dispute. I understand your point, perhaps we could compromise. I'd suggest replacing the current text with socialist republic with dictatorship structures or something rather similar. TBrandley (T • C • B) 08:23, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Agreed. OwnDealers (talk) 07:42, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Džemal Bijedić.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Džemal Bijedić.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:24, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Fascism

The definition of fascism is out of keeping with existing norms in encyclopedias.

It is always defined as "rightwing."

It is also not a form of nationalism. Even the two citations justifying defining it as "nationalism" do not say that. They say it espouses nationalism. Very different from essentially being nationalism (and nothing else).

All existing encyclopedias define it as "rightwing political movement that was authoritarian, nationalist, xenophobic, etc."

The idea of nationalism can be retained but the essence of fascism is something else--a rightwing political movement that used state terror to impose rightwing values on a community.

Mryan1451 (talk) 12:16, 14 August 2013 (UTC)mryan1451

Your GA nomination of Mikhail Youzhny

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mikhail Youzhny you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of Fyunck(click) -- Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:35, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Request for Input

I'd be interested in your perspective/input to the last two sections of this discussion. Best - BlueSalix (talk) 19:03, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Reply about your Stalin Brezhnev and Putin question

First of all.Please check it in:http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Putin.This is about The Putin question!The rationalwiki.org administrators has already agreed and allowed me to put these Contents in rationalwiki.org(entry:Putin).These Contents has already in rationalwiki.org(entry:Putin) now.You can check it on rationalwiki.org(entry:Putin).You can check it in this:http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Putin

Vladimir Putin has said that Stalin's legacy can't be judged in black and white in 2009. Putin's policies have been likened to the Soviet era by some people, but which has received a lukewarm response by Gennady Zyuganov,the ledder of Communist Party of the Russian Federation（KPRF). Roger Boyes, on the other hand, considers him more of a latter-day Brezhnev than a clone of Stalin.

Khrushchev cremated Stalin's corrosion resistant body In 1961,which in China Deng Xiaoping never do that to Mao Zedong's.And about Brezhnev,when Brezhnev wiled power,in 1969(Stalin's 80 birthday)，a Stalin's half-body bronze statue were bulit in behind Lenin's mausoleum by Soviet union government. What is wrong with something I want to put it in wikipedia:English(entry:Brezhnev).that is already put it in wikipedia:中文（Chinese).The Chinese Wikipedia administrators has already agreed and allowed me to put these Contents in Wikipedia：中文(Chinese).These Contents has already in Wikipedia：中文(Chinese) now.You can check it on Wikipedia：中文(Chinese) (entry:Brezhnev). Khrushchev's "On the Cult of Personality and Its Consequences" speech said Stalin is a distorter to Lenin.So as Mikhail Gorbachev.They praise Lenin not Stalin.They condemned Stalin not Lenin.Brezhnev says Stalin as a successor to Lenin and a war hero,even has many serious mistakes.But still has done right things more than wrong.That is a huge different.We need to let people understand. On November 2, 1987,Mikhail Gorbachev said that Stalin knowingly committed "real crimes" against the Soviet people." About Putin!! On 03 December 2009,Russian President Vladimir Putin says Stalin's legacy can't be judged in black and white. Roger Boyes said Putin is no Stalin but a latter-day Brezhnev. Some People think Putin's policy is close to the Soviet Union's.How ever,Gennady Zyuganov, the leader of the Communist Party of Russian Federation,although he is a harsh critic of Putin ,but his recipes for Russia’s future are true to his Soviet roots. In November 2001, Zyuganov said that Russia President Putin was betraying its national interests. And What is wrong with something I want to put it in wikipedia:English(entry:Putin).that is already put it in wikipedia:中文（Chinese).The Chinese Wikipedia administrators has already agreed and allowed me to put these Contents in Wikipedia：中文(Chinese).These Contents has already in Wikipedia：中文(Chinese) now.You can check it on Wikipedia：中文(Chinese) (entry:Putin).

Your GA nomination of 1966 Syrian coup d'état

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 1966 Syrian coup d'état you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of Midnightblueowl -- Midnightblueowl (talk) 18:46, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 1966 Syrian coup d'état

The article 1966 Syrian coup d'état you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:1966 Syrian coup d'état for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of Midnightblueowl -- Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:57, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello there TIAYN! I just wanted to let you know that I have passed 1966 Syrian coup d'état and want to say a massive thank you for pulling the article up to the sufficient standard. Considering the current situation in Syria, it's really important to have articles on modern Syrian history brought up to a very good standard.

		The Good Article Barnstar
		For your contributions to bring 1966 Syrian coup d'état to Good Article status. Thanks, and keep up the good work! Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:05, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Trust Is All You Need. You have new messages at Al Ameer son's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Al Ameer (talk) 01:50, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Pictures

Hi, those photos with text will be very complicated to fix, but I suggest you ask over here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Graphic_Lab FunkMonk (talk) 00:48, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

I took a swing at them with this program called Ipaint (free trial). They're not that great ([1], [2]), and look better as thumbnails or infobox pictures than in they're actual size, but it's the best we got so far. Better versions could be uploaded whenever available. --Al Ameer (talk) 16:16, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

They are good enough, and that's the whole point... :) --TIAYN (talk) 17:12, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Hafez al-Assad (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Ruse, Sagger and Purple Line

Presidency of Hafez al-Assad (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to King Abdullah and Hatay

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:57, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

September 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Syrian Army may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Since 1948 it has played a major role in Syria's governance, mounting five military coups (two in 1949, including the [[March 1949 Syrian coup d'état]] and the August 1949 coup by Colonel [[

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:23, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Presidents of Syria

I still think the previous version was better, and I definitely see no reason for remodeling list like this... Anyway, I think we should make a clear difference between officeholders who belonged to the unified Ba'ath Party (pre-1966) and Syrian-led Ba'ath Party (post-1966). That difference existed before, you removed it and I'm sure it should be put back again. I'm ready to do that myself. --Sundostund (talk) 19:08, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

I can't do it right now, it is fully protected for the next three days... --Sundostund (talk) 19:11, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

OK, but right now, as you can see, I've written Ba'ath Syrian Regional Branch, holding the national Ba'ath Party out of the equation.. But if you think that's best, OK.... But no NPF. --TIAYN (talk) 19:14, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Its definitely the best to have a clear distinction between pre-1966 and post-1966 Ba'ath. Syrian Regional Branch existed both before and after 1966, but unified Ba'ath Party ceased to exist in 1966. It must be make clear here... As for the NPF, I'd but it back too, I absolutely see no reason to remove it. --Sundostund (talk) 19:18, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Neither me, you, nor the article can be blocked indefinitely because of this. There can be some sort of block, though and I want to avoid that. I totally disagree with your version, but I'm ready give up the NPF inside your version. I'm sure your version will be reverted eventually, I'm convinced it will not stand for a long time. --Sundostund (talk) 19:37, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

If you want to put it up as a 'deal', fine. That 'deal' can apply only on what's happening inside your version. I hope you understand that I do not agree with your version, and that I'll eventually revert it without any doubt. From my perspective, version which stand until today was perfectly fine, and I'll reinstate it for sure. --Sundostund (talk) 19:52, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Wrong. If you revert it back, you risk to start another totally useless edit war, as you did today by meddling into perfectly fine article. You can't push in your version by edit warring, and that must be clear to you. Your version will not stay for a long time. --Sundostund (talk) 20:00, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

I agree to a 'deal' inside your version, and I reaffirm that. I do not accept your version as a whole, and I reaffirm it too. Don't use words like 'shit' in conversation with me. There is nothing which make my version more difficult for the reader, you're the only who has a problem with it. As for the FL process, I don't care for it because I'm not interested in it, in the same way as I'm not interested into becoming an admin here. --Sundostund (talk) 20:06, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Again - be careful when choose words in conversation with me, like 'stupid' etc... My version can be bad in your opinion, that's perfectly possible. I don't own that article, same applies to you. You started today's edit war, by pushing in your controversial edits. As for the FL, you're utterly obsessed with it and its totally irrational. --Sundostund (talk) 20:11, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

That article was seen by countless editors since it was modeled into the form in which it was until today, and nobody except you thought its bad, awful, that it must be remodeled into a FL etc... I didn't created it, I just worked on it. I said we have a 'deal' inside your version, and I stand by it, but I'm opposed to your version and you can't change that fact. --Sundostund (talk) 20:17, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

You are obsessed with the FL, the facts are saying that. There is no MoS on how this lists must looks and when someone try to turn all of them into the FL, then its an obsession. The article wasn't a stub, it is a list of officeholders which had all the elements which such a list should have. You don't need to remodel list according FL to make it good. --Sundostund (talk) 20:22, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Something useful?

Would you accept to remodel List of Presidents of Syria and List of Prime Ministers of Syria to look like List of Presidents of Pakistan and List of Prime Ministers of Pakistan? Both of them are FL, as you can see it and I can accept that version. What do you think? --Sundostund (talk) 20:30, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank God! I think we're finally up to something now... I can support making all three lists to look like Pakistani Presidents and PMs. --Sundostund (talk) 21:07, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

From my point of view, all the problems which we had today will be solved if Syrian lists are remodeled after Pakistani ones, plus making clear distinction between pre-1966 and post-1966 Ba'ath and keeping "Head of state" column in the list of Syrian PMs after its remodeling after the list of Pakistani PMs. If you do that, you'll have my support. --Sundostund (talk) 21:41, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Just tell me do you agree with what I said above? --Sundostund (talk) 22:11, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

OK then. Remodel list of Syrian Presidents, PMs and Speakers after Pakistani ones as soon as possible. --Sundostund (talk) 22:18, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

All of us need a days rest from time to time, no matter where we live :)... Start remodeling them as soon as you can. --Sundostund (talk) 23:53, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

You did nice job at the Presidents so far! Remodel the other lists (Prime Ministers, Speakers) when you can... Btw, many of data you posted at the list of Presidents already exist at President of Syria. Try to change that by adding some more prose, we definitely need that. See the prose at the list of Pakistani Presidents, try to emulate that as much as you can. Also, think about the removing the infobox, it also already exist at President of Syria. --Sundostund (talk) 18:06, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Protection on List of Presidents of Syria

Would you mind responding at User talk:EdJohnston#Why did you block the page??. Sundostund has left a new comment there. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 13:43, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Ammash

It looks a bit confusing - apparently there were both father and daughter named Salih Mahdi Ammash, and she served as a member of the Regional Command from 2001 to 2003. Look at Salih Mahdi Ammash. Cheers! --Sundostund (talk) 18:50, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

I'll fix. --TIAYN (talk) 20:45, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Trust Is All You Need. You have new messages at Al Ameer son's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Al Ameer (talk) 18:24, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

the talk pages

I always thought that removing people's comments on the talk pages, if the comments weren 't obcene was totally rude. It would be nice to have an apology.Ericl (talk) 00:19, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Salah al-Din al-Bitar, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Abd al-Latif al-Baghdadi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:14, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Fractional currency FLC

Hi TIAYN-

Like you, I have a list at FLC. If you have the chance, a review, comments, or feedback (positive or negative) would be appreciated. Based on my prior experience with a list on this topic (numismatics), finding reviewers has been difficult. Thanks-Godot13 (talk) 19:40, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

October 2013

Please stop the nonconstructive edits without consensus on 1970 Syrian Corrective Revolution. I would rather not leave the page on extended protection just because one editor is being disruptive. See Wikipedia:Resolving disputes for proper avenues. -- JHunterJ (talk) 10:49, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

You can't be serious? :) I mean, you want to base the article on wrong information... Please help me understand, because just because other people are ignorant you don't need to be.. If the problem is that the Hinnebusch book is not available online I can send you a pdf copy... But please, WP is about writing accurate information, you're adding false. --TIAYN (talk) 12:01, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Please use Talk:1970 Syrian Corrective Revolution to build consensus for your improvements, and Wikipedia:Resolving disputes if needed. I am not there to evaluate the content improvement, but to help end the disruptive approach to the content improvement. -- JHunterJ (talk) 12:04, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

OK, fine, but tell me this, how is it unconstructive? I nominated it for a merger (and people who don't know crap about the topic says this and this)... In general, if you want to shorten, and making it much easier, you could write that Assad took power in what he called a corrective revolution, but thats because he was not the official leader of the country until 1971 (it was a game and a mixed baggage of pragmatism) ... This debate has become toxic, why? Because every time I make an edit, Greyshark accuses me of vandalism, bad-behaviour so on. --TIAYN (talk) 12:08, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

It's unconstuctive because it's both controversial (that means another editor disagrees and consensus has not been shown) and undiscussed (discussion is how consensus is shown). Use the article talk page. -- JHunterJ (talk) 12:11, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

That doesn't make sense, since there is no disagreements... To quote you, "The topic receives coverage in a number of sources and redirecting readers to other articles would no better serve the needs of readers seeking the meaning of this term. User:Trust Is All You Need has a point about the Corrective Movement technically being "a reform package introduced by Hafez al-Assad immediately after the 1970 coup",[3][4] but many sources use the term for the coup itself[5][6][7] (and subsequent the reforms in some cases[8]). These nuances are further reason why an article is needed where the various meanings can be explored"... Have I removed info on the coup?? No, I've lengthened it... Have I removed information on the reforms (no I added them since they were missing)... Whats so darn controversial about the changes.. Do me a favour, read the new text before reverting and tell me what exactly is so darn controversial . --TIAYN (talk) 12:17, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

You have to be the most pathetic man ever.. I havn't done crap, its the same information on the Corrective Movement before I edited it, and you removed... What is the difference, nothing.. Its written in total agreement on what other users wrote on the talk page, and you revert. How the fuck did you became an administrator, you don't know crap, you take sides, you make articles worse, I mean , its pathetic, I don't know if I should laugh or quite WP because of you're stupdity.. Should i role back the edits on the Hafez al-Assad article? I mean they are probably controversial, for instance, it did state that Assad was the leade of the Ba'ath Party in 1947, but hey, factual inaccuracy is what WP is about ... --TIAYN (talk) 15:31, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

You refuse to take the simple advice, but I'll repeat it yet again: Use the article talk page to discuss controversial edits to the article. But I'll add here:

Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.

Restoring the article content to the version before either you or the other editor started your non-consensus edit is not taking sides. I believe you may have factual accuracy on your side, and it's too bad that you won't work with your fellow editors to improve Wikipedia with them. I have no expertise (nor "side") in the content-dispute, but am using the admin tools for the administrative tasks following the guidelines and policies of Wikipedia. -- JHunterJ (talk) 15:39, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

I have no problem working with others editors, but no other editors have told me what is wrong. If someone has a problem with my edits, they should tell me. Not you. Me. So if an editor comes to you to complain, you should tell him to talk to me, not you. This is you're fault. I'm following the line you guys agreed upon, If I had my choice i would merge the fucking the article. It doesn't deserve an article. It doesn't. So no, I didn't do anything wrong, I did what you guys told me.. Which of my edits were controversial? Which. Because the information is the SAME. --TIAYN (talk) 15:45, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to 1970 Syrian Corrective Revolution may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Movement resulted in a tacit alliance between the political elite and the Damascene bourgeoise.{{sfn|

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:54, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Please stop

Please stop edit waring to try to force your desired changes to Single-party state‎ upon the community and start discussing the issue on the article talk page . I'm happy to discuss this with you, but it should be clear that your proposed changes are disputed and need to be discussed and consensus reached before being made. TDL (talk) 14:35, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

ANI Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.GreyShark (dibra) 20:45, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Federer stats

Just a heads up... I have no problem with you editing Federer stats. But the first edit you made today was to remove the player flags and it wouldn't let me undue that single action, so I had to undue it all. It is part of Tennis project consensus and guidelines to include them so they cannot be removed. Thanks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 05:00, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Another thing I just noticed. Tournament names in charts must be the tournament name, not the location name. It should actually be both per guidelines. And it should be the non-sponsored name so readers can easily see how many times a players has won a tournament. The link can be to the sponsored name in that particular year. Thanks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:36, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Roger Federer career statistics, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Wayne Arthurs, Sala Polivalenta and Chris Guccione (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:50, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hafez al-Assad

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Hafez al-Assad you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:50, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hafez al-Assad

The article Hafez al-Assad you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Hafez al-Assad for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:12, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

For all your efforts on Hafez al-Assad--keep up the good work! -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:15, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. --TIAYN (talk) 17:00, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.GreyShark (dibra) 18:57, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule at Template:Egypt Protests and Revolutions. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 19:44, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 6th Congress of the Workers' Party of Korea, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Divine right (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:42, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

RE:WP Tennis

I don't understand why such drastic changes are needed. I chose option 5 because it would help colour blind users, but that is the only reason why I would support any changes. The old format has been used for so long, its simplistic and easy to understand and users are familiar with it. In my opinion, making so many major changes just for the sake of getting an article to FL status just isn't worth it. JayJ47 (talk) 09:45, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

I stand firm with options 1 or 5. I would settle with option 1 including symbols, only because of the colour blind issue. This wouldn't make the doubles table excessively long either. So my suggestion is, keep the tables in their existing format but add symbols to them to help colour blind readers. No background colour for surface, player names and flags stay the same (no country code). Otherwise, anything else besides the two options and suggestion I've mentioned, I oppose, but thats just my opinion, I'm not saying i'm right or wrong. JayJ47 (talk) 09:59, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

No I wouldn't because we need consistency. JayJ47 (talk) 10:07, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

I would agree with Jay. The charts have always worked just fine. A problem for the blind was pointed out and can easily be remedied by simply adding one extra column with the tournament type. That's all we need. The coding is well known to tennis editors so an extra "!column" will be the least obstructive yet satisfy FL. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:20, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Stalking

Please stop following my edits [3], [4] and reverting me, without having even read what I edited. Thanks in advance. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 20:23, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Fractional currency set FPC

The images from the FLC Fractional currency have been nominated as a Featured Picture Set on English Wikipedia. As you were involved in reviewing the FLC, you may or may not wish to comment or review the FPC. Thank you.-Godot13 (talk) 06:30, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

November 2013

In a recent edit to the page Socialism, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, or New Zealand, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. "Endeavour" is the English spelling. It is appropriate when writing of the British Labour Party, and in any case was the spelling used in Clause IV, which was what you amended. You should never change the spelling or wording of a citation, and certainly not to introduce an inappropriate Americanisation. RolandR (talk) 11:45, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Socialist Alternative (United States) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• |ideology = [[Democratic socialism]], [trotskyism]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:49, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Constitution of the Communist Party of China, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Socialist democracy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Labor Party (Mexico)

Hi, Trust Is All You Need. Thank you for your interest in Mexican politics and in left-wing parties. Your update that the Labor Party has an "anticapitalist" stance should be added in the article, and not just mentioned as a claim in the edit summary. Please go back and add the source in the article (preferably in a body paragraph because citations usually do not go in infoboxes). Thanks, ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 18:17, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

hafez al-Assad pragmatist

your ref is 'google search 'assad-pragmatist' - . but just replace 'assad -machiavellian' - you'd get a tranche of refs to that epithet too. its pov imo. it needs maybe something like, 'it has been argued that hafez al-assad was essentially a pragmatist (and then add RS refs) - other views emphasise his machiavellianism - etc , or whatever , his 'crony-ism' - its pov as is. Sayerslle (talk) 20:10, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

@Sayerslle: Pragmatism just means he wasn't an ideological zealot - its a reason why he supported private enterprise, reestablished relations with the Arab countries the Ba'ath deemed "reactionary", weakening the party so as to establish his own rule, or the appointment of his son, Bashar al-Assad, to succeed him. Pragmatism is the perfect word to describe him, and I haven't't read one book which doesn't call him pragmatic... Pragmatism is not a good thing (or a bad thing in politics, its bad someone sells out their belief for something else, its not bad when for instance the Chinese communists introduced reform). Machiavellianism however, only has negative connotations (a die hard communists wouldn't call Stalin a Machiavellian, a person who supports democracy would call a person he supports in an election Machiavellian).. Short, I don't see the problem, but I think you have a problem with Assad - why? Because you called the article unneutral, stating it takes pro-Assad standpoints. I can't see that. --TIAYN (talk) 20:41, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

I think what I have a problem with is feeling like the reader might be being given an 'ideological' reading, under the guise of being given a non-ideological reading - like you assert 'Pragmatism is the perfect word to describe him' - its like being told 'Syria is non-sectarian under the assad regime and only pragmatic considerations prevail and zealots have no place etc etc - ' - while , maybe -, well, for example, just a couple of hours ago I read on josh landis blog [5] a commentary on the work of fabrice balanche by Nikolaos van Dam and came across sentences like these: "Since the Asad regime relies so heavily on people from its own Alawi community, its strength can be attributed, to a great extent, to the issue of communitarianism As described by Balanche, however, the importance of communitarianism has been ignored or even denied in various academic circles because of prevailing ideological or idealistic motivations" and, again, ",Where Syria is concerned, one should, however, not underestimate the force of Arabism and Arab identity. Balanche has correctly noted that Arab nationalism has not at all been a success, and that primordial loyalties have turned out to be stronger. He even cynically comments that “Les indices de la supercherie baathiste étaient pourtant clairs depuis des décennies pour celui qui connaissait réellement la société syrienne.” [The indications of Ba'thist deception were clear for decades to those who really knew Syrian society] (Volume 1, p. 145). ... The Ba’th regime in Syria has achieved exactly the dramatic opposite of the ideals it originally wanted to achieve. They have thereby even endangered the very existence of Syria, with sectarianism stronger than ever before, as is demonstrated through the ongoing civil war." so what i'm saying is if you say 'pragmatic' is the word to describe him -I think 'says who?'-which academics, commentators etc have thought this the essential adjective to describe him? -and is that how commentators today regard him essentially? behind the ba'th ist watchwords ,the 'supercherie baathiste/Ba'thist deception', - what were the realities of the 'pragmatist' hafez assad? Sayerslle (talk) 22:01, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

@Sayerslle: The information just proves that Assad was pragmatic, or non-ideological.. At first, the Ba'ath was ruled by genuine Arab nationalists (Michel Aflaq, Salah al-Din al-Bitar and Munif al-Razzaz), in the second phase it was ruled communists, or at least state socialists (Salah Jadid and in the third phase, the current and in all probability the last phase, Syria has been turned in a dynastic system of government were basic Arab nationalist and socialist values have been replaced by communitarianism (and sectarianism in the political system - I say political system, since the average Alawite was no more richer during senior Assad's reign than the Sunni, in fact they were power, but Assad gave Alawites total monopoly in the military, security and intelligence sectors)...

But again, pragmatism is a neutral word, Machiavellianism is not however.. And there is a logical fault in this discussion, its like saying we can't call Pol Pot a communists (since the majority of socialist states during the Cold War referred to it as fascist), but we still call it communist. Its like saying we can't mention that North Korea is Stalinist because the majority of the scholarly community views it as xenophobic, racist, leader centered only blah blah blah.. Another point, the lead does explain why he is pragmatic (private property is allowed, improving relations with the reactionary Arab World, deideologizing the Ba'ath Party, turning it into a personal service to the presidency etc etc etc).. While its correct to refer to him as, lets say sectarianism, the meaning of that word can be misconstrued (especially in this instance)... While a majority of newspaper calls Assad senior sectarianist without much hards fact to defend them, good arguments could be made otherwise - for instance, yes, the Alawites have been given a monopoly in the military, intelligence and security sectors, but the Alawites are poorer than the average Sunni.. The Syrian middle class is Sunni dominated, and not Alawite dominated .. Things tend to get mixed up (and with good reason). Assad was a smart guy, the Sunnis were his front figures and controlled the civilian government (and still do), while the Alawites were behind the scenes and controlled, as siad before, military, intelligence and security sectors - why? because he knew as well as they that no Alawite could ever fill his shoe (the exception being when the Alawi is his own son..)

But at last, the lead is ment to be a summary of the article, Machiavellianism is mentioned only one place, in the lead, pragmatism however, is mentioned throughout the article. --TIAYN (talk) 22:24, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

but 'Machiavellian' and hafez assad returns plenty, - it could easily be made to appear throughout the article - perhaps I shall do that - and then would you accept it in the lead? - but i'll leave it for now, my current 'obsession' is rather trying to understanf the Lebanese civil war , and the first books I've read have Syria in 1976 lining up with the Phalangists against Palestinians and then i read about bourj al barajneh Palestinian refugee camp in 1986 and Syria supported Amal militia killing Palestinians, so you know, are these examples of 'pragmatism' - a 'pragmatic' approach - seems more lke sectarian motivations to me, anti-Sunni maybe, - its terrible complex - (i confess btw i am feeling more and more a problem notwith hafez assad, but with assad supporteers because, like what you see of them on twitter etc, they seem an unhinged bunch of fascist, vicious , morons who deal in personal abuse and no attempt at reason and discussion - makes Wikipedia look ultra-civilized really Sayerslle (talk) 23:10, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

@Sayerslle: Sadly the communist movement, and close to all the far-left socialist movements, have been taken over by fascists idiots... I call it the Stalin-complex. Back to the point, there are two arguments, (1) Assad supported the Christians to put an end to the conflict, knowing full well if Jumblatt and the Palestinian won, Israel would go straight in, however, by forcing the Christians into negotiations he would be able to stabilize the conflict between the religions (by given the Sunnis the presidency). Assad and Syria are the main reasons why the civil war ended, but his solution is not a long term one... But yes, I would consider this pragmatic, he opposed anti-Arab nationalist and socialist tendencies so that he could stabilize Lebanon so to not give Israel an excuse to intervene. The only reason Syria went in was to weaken Israel's hegemony (by that time they were negotiating with the Egyptian, and were at peace with Jordan - Syria was alone with Lebanon, or to simplify it, Syria was alone).. (2), as you say, Assad was a scrupulous dictator who's sole aim was to take over Lebanon, either for his own aim, Arab nationalist goals, Syrian nationalism etc etc.. One of these explanations are probability a part in the answer, but if it were so, it was a failure - Lebanon only gave them heartache (they didn't get anything) --TIAYN (talk) 12:58, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

well I think it gave more heartache to Palestinian refugees shot and killed or made paraplegic etc than it did hafez assad but whatever - as for the rationale you give I don't know - is that how the opaque policy of Assad is explained usually - you may be underestimating the point the French writer was making - primordial loyalties have turned out to be stronger -Sayerslle (talk) 23:08, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Corrective Movement (Syria), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page National holiday (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 6th Congress of the Workers' Party of Korea

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 6th Congress of the Workers' Party of Korea you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Midnightblueowl -- Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:52, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Communist Party of China, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wang Jun (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 6th Congress of the Workers' Party of Korea

The article 6th Congress of the Workers' Party of Korea you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:6th Congress of the Workers' Party of Korea for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Midnightblueowl -- Midnightblueowl (talk) 00:02, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Have a Barnstar!

		The Good Article Barnstar
		For your contributions to bring 6th Congress of the Workers' Party of Korea to Good Article status. Thanks, and keep up the good work! Midnightblueowl (talk) 00:16, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

thanks :) --TIAYN (talk) 05:40, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Communist Party of China, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Liberation Army, Vatican and National anthem of China (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:09, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

An editor you interacted with has been reported at AE

Hello TIAYN. Please see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Estlandia- repeated violation of warning to cease all personal attacks. It seems that one of the reported personal attacks may have been against you ('get lost' in edit summary). It is up to you whether you see anything here that calls for a comment. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 16:34, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Communist Party of China, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Kim family, Guandong province and Pierre Laurent (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

is united russia "civic nationalist" and should it be described as such in the infobox of the united russia article?

someone included that the ideology of united russia is "civic natiolism" in the infobox, i removed it with the edit summary of "rm unsouced" but restored it because am unsure, problably a source exist somewhere but i do not know if this still makes it correct, am asking if you could please give a third opinion since you have edit the page, if you think it should be included do not revert the edit but if you dont think it belongs there plase remove it, thanks 90.129.76.175 (talk) 20:14, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Communist Party of China, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages President of China and Freedom (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:09, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

January 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Chekism may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• ''Chekism''' is a term used to describe the situation in the [[Soviet Union]] (USSR where the secret [[political police]] ''de facto'' controlled everything in society.<ref>[http:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:10, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Trần Phú

Hi - I've noticed that the 'alt' text for the picture of Trần Phú in General Secretary of the Communist Party of Vietnam is completely wrong ("A hairy man, in a suit with a pale shirt and dark tie"). It's not your problem of course, but since the image came from you originally, would you like to supply a better description? (Mysteriously, the same description - equally inaccurately - is also used for Lê Hồng Phong and Nguyễn Văn Cừ in that article, and for Võ Nguyên Giáp in Secretary of the Central Military Commission of the Communist Party of Vietnam.) Several of the other alt descriptions are pretty questionable too. Colonies Chris (talk) 16:28, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

@Colonies Chris: I'm really bad at describing thing. --TIAYN (talk) 16:32, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Syrian officeholders

Hi, TIAYN! As per our earlier discussion and agreement about lists of Syrian officeholders, I just wanted to ask you a few questions. Obviously, you remodeled List of Presidents of Syria, List of Prime Ministers of Syria and Vice President of Syria to look like List of Presidents of Pakistan and List of Prime Ministers of Pakistan, but Speaker of the People's Council of Syria should be remodeled in the same way, so when do you plan to do it? Also, you should add more prose, facts about history of the office, etc to List of Presidents of Syria and List of Prime Ministers of Syria in order to make them look more like Pakistani lists. Cheers! --Sundostund (talk) 15:14, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

@Sundostund: I said I would convert the lists (that is, the tables), but not all the work. I will, however, convert the last one. I have way to many things on my hand now, university, job, girlfriend, social life (large one) etc etc etc (and among the etces is WP, and in WP I have many tasks)... However, I'll fix it before the end of the week, you have my word for it. --TIAYN (talk) 18:32, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Believe me, I fully understand you have a real life, and its much more important that WP, without any doubt... But, you said me earlier that you want to nominate Syrian lists of officeholders as FL (Pakistani lists are already FLs). If you want to see them achieving that status, you must make them in every sense similar to Pakistani lists - adding text about history, past officeholders, etc. So, its necessary to do much more stuff on Syrian lists, than just converting the tables. As far as I'm concerned, you may do that work whenever you want (and when you have enough time). Cheers! --Sundostund (talk) 19:11, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Ivar Hippe (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Universitas

Vigdis Hjorth (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Universitas

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Russian language person in need of help on Jimbo's talk page

Hi, can you read and write in Russian? There is an individual who has just posted at User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive 155#Law of Florida is mixed with dirt in Wikipedia RU, who seems to be very upset about some content or edits in Russian Wikipedia. Unfortunately, it looks like their post may be done with Google Translate or similar, so its meaning is not very easy to establish. If you can read Russian, perhaps you could reach out to them to work out what their concerns are, and summarise them for people on Jimbo's page? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:25, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Communist Party of China, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page President of China (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:20, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 30 January

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Communist Party of China page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:27, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Communist Party of China, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page South Lake (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Communist Party of Ukraine, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Slavic nationalism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:09, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Regarding GOCE copyedit request

You submitted a request to the GOCE to review Babrak Karmal for "awkward" wording. If you would like to review, please do so. TheFurorDivinus (talk) 18:00, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

I've started a discussion on the Talk page of Communist Party of Ukraine

about using "Pro-Russia" as an ideology. Please come leave your thoughts when you have time. --4idaho (talk) 22:56, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 6th National Congress of the Communist Party of Vietnam

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 6th National Congress of the Communist Party of Vietnam you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dudley Miles -- Dudley Miles (talk) 20:41, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 6th National Congress of the Communist Party of Vietnam

The article 6th National Congress of the Communist Party of Vietnam you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:6th National Congress of the Communist Party of Vietnam for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dudley Miles -- Dudley Miles (talk) 18:41, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 6th National Congress of the Communist Party of Vietnam

The article 6th National Congress of the Communist Party of Vietnam you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:6th National Congress of the Communist Party of Vietnam for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dudley Miles -- Dudley Miles (talk) 12:11, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Juche

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.--Lokalkosmopolit (talk) 13:20, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Juche, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Korean Revolution (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:11, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Deputy to the Prime Minister of Norway

Hello!

There is no such position as Deputy to the Prime Minister of Norway and there has never been. Mostly the Minister of Foreign Affairs has acted as an informal deputy. The position as Deputy Prime Minister is not written in the constitution, but due to co-operation agreements between parties in various coalition governments, the leader of the # 2 party of the coalition has acted as a Deputy. I had added an article, published by the Norwegian government, which was removed along with the deputies. I am born, raised and live in Norway. I know how my country is governed. In this article the system is explained. I can translate it for you, if necessary.[6]

Here is information taken from World Women Leaders.com: [7]

2005-12 1. Deputy to the Prime Minister Kristin Halvorsen 2005-09 Minister of Finance 2009-13 Minister of Education 2012 Acting Minister of Children, Equality and Social Inclusion Parliamentary Leader of Socialistisk Vensterparti (Socialist Left) 1997-2001 and Party Leader 1997-2012. Mother of 2 children born 1988 and 1992. The office of Vice Prime Minister does not exist in Norway but as leader of the second party in the government, she was de-facto Deputy to the Prime Minister. (b. 1960-).

Best wishes! Mbakkel2 (talk) 10 Mar 2014, 17:!4 (CET)

If you still won't beleive me, here is an article from Norway's most reliable encyclopedia. It states that Bård Vegar Solhjell was Deputy to the Prime Minister from 2012 to 2013. [8] Mbakkel2 (talk) 11 Mar 2014, 19:04 (CET)

Disambiguation link notification for March 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Workers' Party of Korea, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Protocol, National holiday and Great Leader (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Workers' Party of Korea logo

Yes you are right the party logo is the one in the image, but can't we have a better one? I think that also with the red background could be good. My one it's only a suggestion to improve the image, because, as you said, it is not so good. -- Nick.mon (talk) 15:46, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

@Nick.mon: I'll ask someone to Wikimedia Commons to look into it, but in the meanwhile it stays... --TIAYN (talk) 16:04, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Ok thank you. Yes of course, if we don't have a better picture, the current logo will remain in the article. Nick.mon (talk) 16:42, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I did read your message and of course I can help you and I'll do my best, but I don't have clear this, I saw there is apparently two flags, one is a PNG with white background (poor quality) and the other is very similar but is svg with red background, I guess the flag with white background actually is not a flag but a emblem, I'm right? --C records (talk) 07:02, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

@C records: Sadly, yes, the picture with a white background is supposed to be the emblem. But thanks for you're help! --TIAYN (talk) 08:26, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Don't worry, I'm working on it right now. --C records (talk) 03:28, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

OK, good, thanks! :) --TIAYN (talk) 18:22, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

• 
   Done Workers' Party of Korea Emblem.
• 
   Done Workers' Party of Korea member pin.

I've been searching some references about Workers' Party of Korea emblems and I used this and this as referents for the emblem, being very carefully with the symmetry of the main element taken from here. The WPK member's use a distinctive pin (the second image), is a flag shaped pin with the face of Kim Il-sung ( Like the soviet version). As you can see in the pictures here, and here, this pin is a strong precedent and there are some other pin's too, but this is the most used by party members.

If it's needed any improvement or change on the SVG or the PNG file, I can do it. Regards! --C records (talk) 08:02, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

@C records: Wow, that's amazing work! :D ... I can't thank you enough, with both the emblem and the old pin (the new one contains an image of Kim Jong-il)... Sorry If I sound like an ungrateful sob, I really do like this work. :) ... Anyhow, seeing from you're edits, it seems to you like doing this; if this is the case, the Vietnamese Communist Party (emblem and pin or this, I don't think they have one specifically as the KWP and the CPSU) and the Lao People's Revolutionary Party (just flag; don't know if they have a pin) misses the same.. Again, thanks! --TIAYN (talk) 12:18, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

@Nick.mon: C records fixed it. --TIAYN (talk) 12:18, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

The two images are perfect, great job! -- Nick.mon (talk) 14:36, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

@C records: Your works are simply great! In fact I would ask you, if you can, to make the logo of the Italian Socialist Party (here there is the current logo used on Wikipedia) because I think that your one will be better. Thank you very much! -- Nick.mon (talk) 17:09, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

In the case of Vietnam I have not clear what kind of emblems they use, some pictures of Nguyen Phu Trong show he uses different emblems (1, 2), I didn't found more hq images from him or about the vietnamese emblems. --C records (talk) 11:03, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

@C records: The CPV emblem is the hammer and sickle (boring, but common).. I do think that's the pin; all the other members of the 11th Politburo uses that pin (when they use one at all)... But you're probably right, when I think of it, there isn't one official pin, but neither was there for the Soviet Union. --TIAYN (talk) 11:50, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Indeed, in the case of North Korea I found more references than here. I can do the badge, please look for a image and select one, then let the image here, if the badge have a motto in vietnamese, put a description too. You think? --C records (talk) 12:18, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

@C records: I've learnt the difference, the badge that I've shown (and the two you showed me) are the official badges of the National Assembly - the first is from the 11th National Assembly, the second from the 13th National Assembly (the present one)... Considering that, I don't think there is any need for it. Anyhow, if you're looking for work, you can always look into the File:Communist Party of Vietnam hammer and sicke.png (I uploaded it, but forgot how I did it, and I can't seem to make it smaller without screwing it up-again, thinking of File:Danghui.svg) or get the hammer and sickle (the emblem) out of the File:Flag of the Lao People's Revolutionary Party.png. I'll be honest, I don't know if the LPRP has a logo (I can't access their party charter/or regulations in general because I can't speak Lao and I can't translate Lao on Google Translate. So I'm handicapped, but I'm guessing since the WPK, the CPC and the CPV all have emblems, I'm guessing the LPRP has one too... If this is too boring, and you want something harder, you can always look into the logo of the Socialist People's Party (Norway) ([9]), you'll have to make it from scratch... --TIAYN (talk) 18:00, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox former communist states

Template:Infobox former communist states has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:42, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Workers' Party of Korea (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Progressive and Revisionism

Communist Party of China (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Yanan

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:59, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

March 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Sergey Kirov may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• First Secretary]] of the [[Leningrad Regional Committee]] of the [[All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:04, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Politburo of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Factionalism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

A50000 at USSR page

I've raised the issue of his current (and past) edit warring at WP:ANI#User:A50000 at Soviet Union if you wish to weigh in.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 04:44, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Caps

Hi, the trend throughout English is to downcase formal titles. This is reinforced by en.WP's own style guide. It's perhaps different when a specific person's name comes straight after (President Hollande). Tony (talk) 08:00, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

@Tony1: From what I understand, it depends on the situation. For instance, when referring to the title only, big letters; e.g. General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Vietnam... However, in other cases, lower cases. --TIAYN (talk) 08:06, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Three general secretaries of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Vietnam served during that period. Tony (talk) 08:28, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

@Tony1: I reverted because you put lower cases, turning it to "general secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Vietnam" (which doesn't make much sense grammatically. --TIAYN (talk) 08:44, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Why doesn't it make sense? Tony (talk) 08:46, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

@Tony1: Because its the full name of the office; you don't write president of the United States, you write President of the United States.. full, formal name, is different from an abbreviated name.--TIAYN (talk) 08:49, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Communist Party of the Soviet Union (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Party line, Revisionism, Per se, Alexander Yakovlev and Polarization

Ideology of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Per se and Polarization

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Hasan Brkić (non-free).jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Hasan Brkić (non-free).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 16:33, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello

Hi, I'm The Dracommunist (talk · contribs). I was wondering if you would be willing to help me get more involved in editing articles related to Socialism. Thanks for the help!The Dracommunist (talk) 19:32, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

@The Dracommunist: Sure, how can I help? .. Which articles do you want to edit? As you may have seen from my edits, I mainly edits articles on one-party states (China, Vietnam, Laos, Korea Syria, Egypt etc..), ideology and institutions. --TIAYN (talk) 09:57, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

single party state

but the soviet union was a single party state and a single party state means there olny is one legal party, even if youre right, could we say in the intro that the cpsu was the sole legal party from 1928-1989? 95.199.200.34 (talk) 16:51, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

@95.199.200.34: It was the sole governing party, it practically means the same thing... China is a one-party state (a state in which one-party rule), but other parties exist in present-day China, the same goes with North Korea (were there are officially two other parties). --TIAYN (talk) 17:02, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

well as i said can if you were right can we say in the intro that cpsu was the sole legal party from 1928-1989? 95.199.200.34 (talk) 17:11, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

@95.199.200.34: Why, sole governing party means practically the same thing. Why are you making such a big deal out of this? --TIAYN (talk) 17:16, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

if it practically means the same thing then it can be stated as sole legal party.you were constantly reverting so it is you whos making this a big deal 95.199.200.34 (talk) 18:05, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

@95.199.200.34: Do you know what "practical the same way" means"? Sole legal is wrong, since it was not the sole legal party. Thats it; one of these are factual accurate, the other factual inaccurate. That simple. We can't discuss this, this is fact, and Wikipedia is based on facts.

Disambiguation link notification for April 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ideology of the Communist Party of China, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Revisionism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi again

Hello, TIAYN. I just want to inform you that editor LibDutch (I believe you encountered him already at History of Libya under Muammar Gaddafi) wants to add a new section about Syrian Ba'ath Party's results in parliamentary elections at Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party – Syria Region. I truly believe it is unnecessary. The present version, largely modeled by you, and centered around party's history and structure is looking just fine as far as I'm concerned. I don't want to go to edit war with him, so can you please do something about it, as well as History of Libya under Gaddafi article? I don't think his removal of data from that article is helpful in any way. --Sundostund (talk) 12:22, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

@Sundostund: I'll look into it --TIAYN (talk) 15:24, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

@Trust Is All You Need: Please do. I think he removed some really valuable data from the Libyan article, and it should be restored to its previous version... As for the Syrian article, I'd really appreciate your opinion on it - do you think the newly-added section should be removed or kept? If you think it should be removed, I'll remove it myself (as you know from above, I think we should remove it). If you want it to stay, I think we should make the same section at Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party – Iraq Region, about the results of Iraqi Regional branch at Iraqi elections (that would cover the period from 1980 to 2000). My only goal is to keep articles about Syrian and Iraqi Regional branches as similar as possible. If we have the election results section in one article, we should have it in the other too. --Sundostund (talk) 12:26, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

@Sundostund: I'll find a solution, I have much on my plate right now, so won't take any actions at least until the weekend. When It comes to the elections results, I don't have any problems with them being here, I do however, have a problem with them being there without any discussion on the subject; e.g. Syria is an authoritarian states in which the election results are decided beforehand, and seats are allocated through discussions (I guess), or something similar, in the National Progressive Front or another organ. Thinking of writing a "Governance" section (similar to the one in the Communist Party of China article; the section being 1. Assad family, 2. Military influence, 3. Role and 4. National Progressive Front)... I believe that instead of having a Election section (as we do now), we should merge the current one into a subsection of the future "Governance" section (presumably in the National Progressive Front section). I'm opposed to Duchlibs formatting, however. There is a problem, I have exams soon, and I'll be busy alot these couple of weeks, I'll probably have some spare time, but real work (or at least expansion) won't take place until after the 23rd May; I have a lot of catching-up to do... The Libyan debacle I'll fix this weekend thou. --TIAYN (talk) 19:39, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

@Trust Is All You Need: I absolutely understand you have work and life outside WP (exams, etc). All of us have a timetable in real life... I just don't know whether to remove the election results section from the Syrian Regional branch now, or to make the same one at the Iraqi Regional branch article? Give me some input what to do about it. Anyway, making a "Governance" section may be a good idea, I can't say more until I see how it will look and fit in the article when you make it. --Sundostund (talk) 19:48, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

@Sundostund: I say keep it at the meantime - it makes sense (at least in my head), since the Ba'ath Party doesn't have all the seats (as in the Soviet Union for instance), and since a formal opposition party actually has seats in parliament... I don't know anything about the election results of the Iraqi Ba'ath, but the system was identical wasn't it (minus the formal opposition), wasn't it? --TIAYN (talk) 05:42, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

@Trust Is All You Need: Yes, I assume the electoral system in Ba'athist Iraq was identical as in Syria, with parliamentary seats being allocated through discussions in the National Progressive Front... So, I'll make the results section at the Iraqi Regional branch, it would cover the period from 1980 to 2000. Just tell me, do you want that section to be in the middle of the article, like in the Syrian article (between History and Organization sections), or at the bottom of the article? If you think its appropriate, I can go to the Syrian article and move the results section at the bottom too. --Sundostund (talk) 11:19, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

@Sundostund: Bottom; it doesn't make sense its in the middle, it breaks with the flow of the article. --TIAYN (talk) 11:42, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

@Trust Is All You Need: Done. I did it at both articles, you can see it here - Syrian Regional branch, Iraqi Regional branch. Check it out, and feel free to fix something if you think its needed. I placed election results in both articles at the very bottom, to avoid any breaking with the flow of article, as you said. --Sundostund (talk) 15:36, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Workers' Party of Korea

The {{Politics of North Korea}} sidebar may be more useful further up on the page. Good luck and all the best, Miniapolis 18:25, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Edit warring at Communist Party of the Soviet Union etc.

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 5 days for edit warring, as you did at Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

The full report of this case is at the 3RR noticeboard (permanent link). You're an experienced editor and you ought to be following WP:Dispute resolution instead of continuing these ridiculous wars. If you will agree to a voluntary restriction that will stop your participation in these wars the block might be lifted. EdJohnston (talk) 14:01, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

@EdJohnston: Fine, but I fail to see how I get blocked and not LibDutch, who is removing material from WP (and has garnered complaints), and considering that he has breached consensus on the article. But yes, I'm sorry for my actions on the Soviet Communist Party article; I know they were stupid, and even said so at the noticeboard. I'll stop participating in these edit wars. --TIAYN (talk) 15:46, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

How about a two-month voluntary restriction from the topic of communism, and from all articles that contain a mention of communism, including the ones about Libya? The ban would keep you away from the topic of communism on talk pages as well. If you get into a new or continuing dispute with either User:LibDutch or User:Michaelwuzthere within the next two months or find a need to report either of them at a noticeboard, the block might be restored. A consequence is that you won't be able to pursue dispute resolution on any of these issues for two months. Let me know. EdJohnston (talk) 16:11, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

@EdJohnston: I can leave Libya alone, but as you may notice from my edit history, 90 percent of the articles I contribute to are communist-related - so that would practically be a block.. I could on the other hand leave the Communist Party of the Soviet Union alone for two months. --TIAYN (talk) 16:42, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

On another subject, can you explain why you'd file a 3RR report asking for yourself to be blocked? Doesn't that imply a lack of self-control? Don't you know how to open an WP:RFC? EdJohnston (talk) 17:51, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

@EdJohnston: Nope, never heard of WP:RFC (probably should have ... :P) .. Why? Because I brook the 3RR rule (I was trying to stop LibDutch's vandalism and I was in an edit war with the other guy).. I followed procedure (as I knew it). --TIAYN (talk) 20:49, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Please read the page at WP:Dispute resolution and get back to me if you can make a suggestion for how to resolve one of the disputes mentioned at 3RR. If you were reverting what you thought was vandalism that could lead you in the wrong direction. WP:VANDAL doesn't apply to a good-faith dispute and doesn't create an excuse to revert. EdJohnston (talk) 00:06, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

• Lets agree, @LibDutch: did a good job that he removed such unsourced content. If I were you, I would've added sources to it, but you have only reverted back to unsourced version. What if we had written same type of material about Obama or Reagan? I am sure you or anyone else would've removed it on the first day. But here you have provided special likeness to unsourced content. OccultZone (Talk) 02:28, 28 April 2014 (UTC)