Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:25, 2 January 2011

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

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

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

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11Auto-archiving period: 3 months

Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting.

This page was focused on by the Misplaced Pages spotlight collaboration drive on August 01, 2007. (comparison)

This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations: Howard W. French (December 1, 2006). "Who Did What in China's Past? Look It Up, or Maybe Not". New York Times. Howard W. French (December 1, 2006). "Misplaced Pages offers 2 visions of Mao Zedong". Daily Breeze.

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

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. China: History Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Chinese history (assessed as Top-importance). Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Biography: Politics and Government / Core This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Top-importance). This article is listed on the project's core biographies page. Military history: Biography / Asian / Chinese / World War II This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  Military biography task force Asian military history task force Chinese military history task force World War II task force Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Atheism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Atheism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of atheism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AtheismWikipedia:WikiProject AtheismTemplate:WikiProject AtheismAtheism Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. For more information and how you can help, click the link opposite: If you would like to participate, you can edit this article and visit the project page. Quick help Project's main talk page Article layout Links to atheism-related information · List of free online resources Writing about religion · Article development Citing sources · Verifying sources · About original research Assume good faith · Be civil Recent activity Core articles the "Atheism" article Articles recently added to Category:Atheism To do edit history watch purge Join WikiProject atheism and be bold. Add a userbox to your page ({{User WikiProject Atheism}} or {{User WPA2}}) and attract potential members. Help with articles. See this month's adopt-an-article. Help out with this to-do list. Be consistent Use a "standard" layout for atheism-related articles (see layout style, "The perfect article" and Featured articles). Add Atheism info box to all atheism related talk pages (use {{WikiProject Atheism}} or see info box) Ensure atheism-related articles are members of Atheism by checking whether ] has been added to atheism-related articles – and, where it hasn't, adding it. Maintenance, etc. Find sources for all positions of an article (see Citing sources and atheism references). Try to expand stubs. Ideas and theories about life, however, are prone to generating neologisms, so some stubs may be suitable for deletion (see deletion process). Watch the list of atheism-related articles and add to accordingly. Always write for an encyclopedia. Articles to improve Agnosticism Create Articles on notable atheists Expand an atheism stub Immediate attention State atheism needs a reassessment of its Importance level, as it has little to do with atheism and is instead an article about anti-theist/anti-religious actions of governments. False choice into False dilemma: discuss whether you are for or against this merge here Clarify references in Atheism using footnotes. Secular movement defines it as a being restricted to America in the 21st century. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Socialism Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Politics High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Philosophy: Philosophers / Social and political / Eastern / Contemporary High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Misplaced Pages.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated task forces: /  Philosophers Social and political philosophy Eastern philosophy Contemporary philosophy Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Cold War Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cold War, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Cold War on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Cold WarWikipedia:WikiProject Cold WarTemplate:WikiProject Cold WarCold War Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Template:WP1.0

A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on September 9, 2004.

Template:FAOL

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

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

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

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11Auto-archiving period: 3 months

Template:Controversial (history) Template:Pbneutral

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Mao Zedong. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Mao Zedong at the Reference desk.

Mao vs. the Khmer Rouge

How can you call Khmer Rouge a maoist party?! Oh, god, Mao never liked the Khmer Rouge! They killed TWENTYFIVE PERCENTS of the people in Cambodia!! 62.16.168.251 (talk) 17:34, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Didn't Moa kill 40 million people? Perhaps Mao didn't like the Khmer Rouge because they didn't kill enough? NickCT (talk) 21:32, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Many scholars refer to the Khmer Rouge as Maoist I've seen no evidence that Mao didn't "like" the Khmer Rouge. In fact, the Chinese Communist Party has been one of their strongest supporters. In this image, Mao doesn't seem to displeased with shaking the hand of Ieng Sary as a smiling Pol Pot looks on. (I'm surprised this image hasn't been added to wikipedia as of yet).--C.J. Griffin (talk) 12:51, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Both of you, do not add personal commentary and analysis onto talk pages. This is not a place to further your politica agendas.Дунгане (talk) 00:51, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

What does a photo prove? Mao shook hands with numerous people, including hardcore anti-communist Richard Nixon. I guess that makes him a supporter of spying at Watergate now? In fact, numerous party members, especially Zhou Enlai, were alarmed at the Khmer Rouge's radicalism and viewed King Sihanouk as a more moderate ally. A few radicals like security chief Kang Sheng supported the Khmer Rouge. The KR's philosophy has its roots in Buddhism, racism, and anti-materialism - its leaders were almost anonymous, as opposed to real Maoists like the Shining Path and the Nepalese Maoists.--PCPP (talk) 10:30, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Death toll in lede

Recently Cedric88 has attempted to replace the lower estimate of deaths under Mao in the lede with "17,4" million. He apparently gets this estimate by adding together some of the mass deaths during the Mao era given by Maurice Meisner in his book Mao's China and After (1977, 1999): terror against counterrevolutionaries: 2 million, GLF: 15-30 million, CR: 400,000. However, this is an example of OR as Meisner doesn't give an overall estimate of deaths under Mao. So putting the estimate of "17,4" million in the article and attributing it to Meisner is basically putting words in his mouth (especially considering the range of deaths he provides for the GLF). Secondly, this estimate cannot at all be adequate, as it excludes other mass deaths during the Mao era, such as casualties in the Laogai, the Anti-Rightist Movement and repression in Tibet. The aforementioned editor also cited Wang Weizhi's estimate of 19.5 million in Contemporary Chinese Population (1988), presumably as further justification for a much lower death toll. However, this estimate only pertains to deaths brought about by the GLF, and therefore makes it inappropriate as a primary source for the lower estimate in the lede.--C.J. Griffin (talk) 13:54, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

I agree C.J. Griffin. Lower estimate forwarded by Cedric88 is innappropriate. NickCT (talk) 14:50, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Shouldn't we separate the death tolls from purges and those from faulty policies? I think if we begin to elevate death tolls from bad policy to the level of intentional massacres, then most leaders of the world would be criminals in one way or another.128.151.24.39 (talk) 01:55, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't think we should separate them. Other leaders' "faulty policies" don't end up costing 45 million lives. Laurent (talk) 05:18, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Other leaders also didn't rule the world's most populous and famine-prone country that had more than 1800 famines in the past 2 millenia. Four famines from 1810 to 1849 killed 45 million people, the Taiping Rebellion killed 60 million, the Great North China Famine killed 13 million, and Mao wasn't even born then. Mao's rival Chiang Kai-shek oversaw a famine that killed 3 million in 1943, and as well as the deliberatly engineered the Yellow River Flood of 1938 that killed 1 million and displaced 12 million.--PCPP (talk) 10:40, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Why is it that some people will defend communism and Mao regardless of how many people were killed? It never ceases to amazes me. Faulty policies? When these so-called "faulty policies" result in the deaths of tens of millions of people, it is time to question whether they were faulty or whether the goals of the particular regime were accomplished. Mass death seems to be a feature, rather than a bug, when it comes to communism. Thank goodness someone had the sense to point out that 45 million+ deaths is a wee bit high to be attributed to a fault in policy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.141.155.184 (talk) 17:34, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Riiight, is that why no incidences of mass death has occurred in Communist Russia and China since Stalin and Mao's deaths, nor had it occurred in Eastern Europe and other communist states ruled by less totalitarian leaders?--PCPP (talk) 10:40, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

The 40 - 70 million death toll estimate currently cited is appropriate. Regarding the GLP in contrast to other famines, I don't know why it should be necessary to point out that the GLP was a man-made disaster, and that China's historical propensity for devastating famines is beside the point. If in doubt about whether the deaths under the GLP were deliberate and calculated, I suggest taking a serious look at Dikötter's research. Homunculus (duihua) 15:26, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, because one book released in 2010 and sponsored by the Chiang Ching-kuo Foundation is the end-all source on GLF. Here is something that says otherwise --PCPP (talk) 16:21, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

The source you cited is to a "socialist magazine." Their own words. I'll trust a well regarded SOAS professor over the denials of communist apologists. Homunculus (duihua) 16:36, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Newsflash, it's not "communist apologist" just because you disagree with it. It's cited by Google Scholar and used in at least one university publication . Furthermore, it's academically dishonest to dismiss any discussions on weather date and Chinese mortality rate, not to mention that famines caused by the Taiping Rebellion and An Shi Rebellion far exceeds the GLF death toll.--PCPP (talk) 12:00, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

At last check, 45 million > 36 million, the latter being a high-end estimate of deaths under the An Shi Rebellion. Famine-related deaths during the Taiping Rebellion, while still outrageously high, still pale in comparison to the GLP. It is not my intention to minimize the human tragedy of these events, but I maintain that there is a fundamental difference. Most severe famines are a result of floods, poor weather, or in the cases you cited, disruptions caused by civil war. The GLP did not occur under such conditions; it was a peace-time event that took place under normal environmental conditions. It was a deliberately engineered famine, apparently designed to invoke terror and subservience to CCP rule. If you would like to argue that more were killed during the Taiping or An Shi rebellions, I suggest you take it up on those pages, or perhaps here. Seeing as you are now well past debating the facts at hand, I am going to leave this discussion. As a parting thought, however, I will warn you not to edit against consensus. Homunculus (duihua) 16:24, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Chang and Halliday are unreliable, Article on them exposed false claims in their book.

I am not a commie or even a fan of Mao, but i despise POV twisting by some people who have a fetish with Mao and try to twist articles to fit their agendas. Speaking of which, Jon Halliday and Jung Chang hold absolutely no PHDs, degrees, doctorates, or anything in Asian and Chinese history, chinese politics, or even communism. nothing, zilch. Only in linguistics and Russian history, which are unrelated to the book they wrote about. Lets try to limit this article to reliable sources, and not a source written by an author with a personal vendetta.

Chang and Halliday falsely claim that Chiang Kai-shek allowed the Communists to escape on the Long March, allegedly because he wanted his son Chiang Ching-kuo who was being held hostage by Stalin back. This is contradicted by Chiang Kai-shek himself, who wrote in his diary, "It is not worth is to sacrifice the interest of the country for the sake of my son." Chiang even refused to negotiate for a prisoner swap, of his son in exchange fo the Chinese Communist Party leader. Again in 1937 he stated about his son- "I would rather have no offspring than sacrifice our nation's interests." Chiang had absolutely no intention of stopping the war against the Communists.

Among other things, it was reported that Chang and Halliday were "appallingly dishonest", and that Chiang Kai-shek never, ever let the Communists escape, contrary to Chang and Halliday's false claims. In addition, the alleged "source" Chang and Halliday claimed they met could not be found, on the contrary, a person who witnessed the battle, Li Guixiu confirmed that the battle had happened, contradicting Chang and Halliday.

This is not really new information. Criticism of Mao: The Unknown Story is already widely documented. rʨanaɢ (talk) 03:27, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

I just looked through the article and, in this version, found only four spots that are sourced only to Chang & Halliday (others have additional sources):

1. ref 10 (innocuous claim about Mao's not studying abroad)
2. ref 53 (properly attributed as Chang's opinion)
3. paragraph about the GLF, which cites reference 68 three times
4. ref 91, the "half of China may well have to die" quote, properly attributed as Chang's opinion and followed by an extended discussion from another source

Notice that none of these instances have anything whatsoever to do with the Long March, which your long comment above is about. So my question for you is, what exactly are you raising a complaint about here? rʨanaɢ (talk) 03:37, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Did Mao hold PHDs, degrees, doctorates, or anything in Asian and Chinese history, chinese politics, or even communism.? Yet we are to trust his word about his life? how many serial killers confess to their crimes? The order Mao created in China still hinders freedom of speech and free travel, just look at the nobel peace prize. And asking such a nation to tell the truth through previously secret documents is like asking joseph gobbels to write the truth about germany 1933-1945. Ofcourse they'll release documents but only scrutinized and to further their own goals. Not to distable their own powerbase. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.229.131.18 (talk) 00:50, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Your comment makes no sense. Mao is the subject being judged here, so why does he need any degrees? Last time I checked, you don't need any degrees to be a political leader. And the current Chinese government moved so away from Mao's ideals that it resembles more like Nationalist China.--PCPP (talk) 10:46, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

References

1. ^ "A swan's little book of ire". The Sydney Morning Herald. 2005-10-08. Retrieved 2007-12-08.
2. Jay Taylor (2000). The Generalissimo's son: Chiang Ching-kuo and the revolutions in China and Taiwan. Harvard University Press. p. 59. ISBN 0674002873. Retrieved 2010-06-28.
3. Jonathan Fenby (2005). Chiang Kai Shek: China's Generalissimo and the Nation He Lost. Carroll & Graf Publishers. p. 205. ISBN 0786714840. Retrieved 2010-06-28.
4. Hannah Pakula (2009). The last empress: Madame Chiang Kai-Shek and the birth of modern China. Simon and Schuster. p. 247. ISBN 1439148937. Retrieved 2010-06-28.
5. Jay Taylor (2000). The Generalissimo's son: Chiang Ching-kuo and the revolutions in China and Taiwan. Harvard University Press. p. 74. ISBN 0674002873. Retrieved 2010-06-28.

User Rjanag, "Speaking of which, Jon Halliday and Jung Chang hold absolutely no PHDs, degrees, doctorates, or anything in Asian and Chinese history, chinese politics, or even communism. nothing, zilch.", well, such a blatant attack on Chang and Halliday really is pointless, especially from a Wiki editor, who has turned a blind eye towards their years and years of visiting Chinese and international archives (档案馆), and translating various documents into English, which were then used as "source" in the writing of their book. User Rjanag, you might have also forgotten the fact that Jon Halliday is fluent in Russian, and the Russian archives is just as important as any Chinese archives when someone is doing research on Communist China history ? Arilang 02:33, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

User Rjanag, "Jon Halliday is a historian of Russia and was a former Senior Visiting Research Fellow at King's College London.", please tell other editors what you think of this statement. Arilang 01:45, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Should "Mao as a 'worst than Stalin' Mass Murderer" be included in the lede?

If Dikötter’s revised figure of 45 million withstands scrutiny, Mao will have definitively surpassed Joseph Stalin’s overall record as a mass murderer

• Frank Dikötter on Mao’s Mass Murders
• Legacy of Mao Zedong is Mass Murder

Arilang 00:08, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't think it's necessary to use a POV term like "mass murderer", especially in the lead. As long as we mention the death toll, most readers will reach this conclusion by themselves anyway. Laurent (talk) 05:35, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Why is it that "Mass murderer" be a POV term? And isn't Mao deserve such a term, after all, he did cause millions upon millions of Chinese to die of unnatural death, didn't he? Moreover, it is near impossible to find another "revolutionary leader" and "world leader" like him.

Hitler, for starters. 24.228.24.97 (talk) 22:30, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Arilang 05:44, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I am also interested to know how the term "mass murderer" is a point of view, rather than a matter of historical fact. Are Mao's deeds disputed? Or is there some other issue? --Asdfg12345 05:52, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Beijing government officials. including Zhou Enlai and Mao, increased the food procurement quota from the countryside to pay for international imports. According to Dikötter, "In most cases the party knew very well that it was starving its own people to death." Mao was quoted as saying in Shanghai in 1959: “When there is not enough to eat people starve to death. It is better to let half of the people die so that the other half can eat their fill.” Mao's Great Famine#Key arguments of the book

If Mao and Zhou Enlai and the Communist Party knew that Chinese were being starved to death in the millions, yet they keep on exporting food to oversea, then Mao and Zhou deserved the term "mass murderer". Arilang 06:09, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

While I agree the term describes him well, I don't think it looks serious in an encyclopedia article, and it makes it look like we are trying to push a POV more than we need to. If we look hard enough I'm sure we can find sources stating that Mao was an evil man, a selfish man and so on, but do we really need to mention all that? It should already be obvious from the text. Also I think most historians (let alone encyclopedia) don't bother with such terms, only journalists do so as to have catchy article titles. Laurent (talk) 06:37, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

"Mass murderer" is definitely a negative POV statement. It also assumes that he physically killed people, which he did not. His policies led to the death of millions of people, but he didn't murder them in cold blood. Also, the sources you are using for the term are not representative of a broad view of things; they are opinion pieces. ThemFromSpace 07:04, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

What Mao, and his communist friends, did was really Genocide, and Mass killings under Communist regimes, crimes which are much more serious than "mass murder". Even though he did not murder someone in cold blood, “When there is not enough to eat people starve to death. It is better to let half of the people die so that the other half can eat their fill.” he had virtually signed the death warrant of ten of millions of Chinese. And certainly it is not POV to those millions of dead Chinese.

The first large-scale killings under Mao took place during land reform and the counterrevolutionary campaign. In official study materials published in 1948, Mao envisaged that "one-tenth of the peasants" (or about 50,000,000) "would have to be destroyed" to facilitate agrarian reform. Actual numbers killed in land reform are believed to have been lower, but at least one million. The suppression of counterrevolutionaries targeted mainly former Kuomintang officials and intellectuals suspected of disloyalty. At least 712,000 people were executed, 1,290,000 were imprisoned inlabor camps and 1,200,000 were "subject to control at various times."

Mass killings under Communist regimes#Land reform and the suppression of counterrevolutionaries Arilang 07:44, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

So I agree with Wikilaurent about "letting the facts speak for themselves". No need for such a charged word, I suppose; better to describe what he actually did. --Asdfg12345 15:19, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Mass murder may sound charged but its really just a simple fact- he caused the deaths of millions of people. 24.228.24.97 (talk) 22:30, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages pages referenced by the press
• All unassessed articles
• C-Class China-related articles
• Top-importance China-related articles
• C-Class China-related articles of Top-importance
• C-Class Chinese history articles
• Top-importance Chinese history articles
• WikiProject Chinese history articles
• WikiProject China articles
• C-Class biography articles
• C-Class biography (politics and government) articles
• Top-importance biography (politics and government) articles
• Politics and government work group articles
• C-Class biography (core) articles
• Core biography articles
• Top-importance biography articles
• WikiProject Biography articles
• C-Class military history articles
• C-Class biography (military) articles
• Military biography work group articles
• C-Class Asian military history articles
• Asian military history task force articles
• C-Class Chinese military history articles
• Chinese military history task force articles
• C-Class World War II articles
• World War II task force articles
• C-Class Atheism articles
• Low-importance Atheism articles
• C-Class socialism articles
• Top-importance socialism articles
• WikiProject Socialism articles
• C-Class politics articles
• High-importance politics articles
• WikiProject Politics articles
• C-Class Philosophy articles
• High-importance Philosophy articles
• C-Class philosopher articles
• High-importance philosopher articles
• Philosophers task force articles
• C-Class social and political philosophy articles
• High-importance social and political philosophy articles
• Social and political philosophy task force articles
• C-Class Eastern philosophy articles
• High-importance Eastern philosophy articles
• Eastern philosophy task force articles
• C-Class Contemporary philosophy articles
• High-importance Contemporary philosophy articles
• Contemporary philosophy task force articles
• C-Class Cold War articles
• Mid-importance Cold War articles
• Cold War task force articles
• Selected anniversaries (September 2004)
• Misplaced Pages pages with to-do lists