Revision as of 21:11, 7 September 2014 editJamesBay (talk | contribs)354 edits →South Yemen← Previous edit | Revision as of 07:13, 8 September 2014 edit undoTrust Is All You Need (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers52,982 edits →South YemenNext edit → | ||
Line 61: | Line 61: | ||
You're making the same mistakes... again.There is a difference between ideology and forms of government, and adding random words such as "Marxist-Leninist state" is different from form of government. No sources have said that "Marxist-Leninist single-party staet" is a form of government. Just because a country has been called in passing a Marxist-Leninist single-party state, doesn't mean that Marxist-Leninist single-party state is a form of government. ... And at last, there is a difference between state and form of government , but who cares?! Is this so hard for people to understand, really? And are you really claiming "Socialist political system" is hardly defineable? All the modern self-declared socialist states have had the same political systems; see ]. Are you saying that the Eastern European socialist states do not have the same political system as China? It is clearly defineable and saying otherwise is nonsense. I've closed the discussion at ]; they don't make sense at all, and from a clear reading, its clear that you have no clue what you're talking about. You have started a discussion which includes three terms which don't have anything to do with form of government (that is, "Marxist-Leninist single-party state", "Marxist-Leninist state" and "People's democracy")... The consensus before was a ], it was factual inaccurate, and thats been my whole point from the very beginning... And it doesn't help really that no modern sources actually talk of a form of government in the former, or present socialist republics. --] (]) 19:45, 7 September 2014 (UTC) | You're making the same mistakes... again.There is a difference between ideology and forms of government, and adding random words such as "Marxist-Leninist state" is different from form of government. No sources have said that "Marxist-Leninist single-party staet" is a form of government. Just because a country has been called in passing a Marxist-Leninist single-party state, doesn't mean that Marxist-Leninist single-party state is a form of government. ... And at last, there is a difference between state and form of government , but who cares?! Is this so hard for people to understand, really? And are you really claiming "Socialist political system" is hardly defineable? All the modern self-declared socialist states have had the same political systems; see ]. Are you saying that the Eastern European socialist states do not have the same political system as China? It is clearly defineable and saying otherwise is nonsense. I've closed the discussion at ]; they don't make sense at all, and from a clear reading, its clear that you have no clue what you're talking about. You have started a discussion which includes three terms which don't have anything to do with form of government (that is, "Marxist-Leninist single-party state", "Marxist-Leninist state" and "People's democracy")... The consensus before was a ], it was factual inaccurate, and thats been my whole point from the very beginning... And it doesn't help really that no modern sources actually talk of a form of government in the former, or present socialist republics. --] (]) 19:45, 7 September 2014 (UTC) | ||
:As a matter of fact, I do know what I am talking about, as I lived in South Yemen. Additionally, I have studied its politics and history extensively over the course of my academic career. And you are in no place to lob accusations, much less close discussion on the matter or silence opinions different from your own. ] (]) 21:11, 7 September 2014 (UTC) | :As a matter of fact, I do know what I am talking about, as I lived in South Yemen. Additionally, I have studied its politics and history extensively over the course of my academic career. And you are in no place to lob accusations, much less close discussion on the matter or silence opinions different from your own. ] (]) 21:11, 7 September 2014 (UTC) | ||
::What does I live in South Yemen really have with the matter, a person knowing anything of the subject would understand "Marxist-Leninist single-party state" is a made up term. A person knowing something of the subject would know that People's Democracy was not a form of govenrment. It doesn't matter if you know a lot, you don't know a lot about this. Closing discussion, per ]. --] (]) 07:13, 8 September 2014 (UTC) |
Revision as of 07:13, 8 September 2014
Welcome!
Hello, JamesBay, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}}
before the question. Again, welcome! Sorry it's a bit late :) -- œ 03:25, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
March 2011
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Misplaced Pages. It appears that you recently tried to give Mayerthorpe incident a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Mayerthorpe Massacre. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Misplaced Pages has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Misplaced Pages:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. 117Avenue (talk) 21:16, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
July 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Québec solidaire 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:
- Internal Factions: <br> ]{{r|evans|page1=279}}<br>]<br>]
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:25, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Its name
Its name is the People's Democratic Republic of Yemen.. Sources refer to it as a "people's democracy" here; , , .. THis is what the sources say, there is no reason to argue about it... At last, Marxist-Leninist single-party state is not a government system, its a description.. There never existed anything like a Marxist-Leninist state. A people's democratic republic exists, and a socialist republic existed. But South Yemen had not reached the socialist stage of development, therefore calling it socialist would be wrong. It was a people's democratic republic. --TIAYN (talk) 07:18, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Copying to Talk:South Yemen so consensus may be reached. GrahamNoyes (talk) 01:03, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Arrogance
While Its fine that you don't oppose me, by stating that people who opposes me "Keep up the good fight" you are implying that I'm somehow being bad. Well fuck you. --TIAYN (talk) 21:04, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
I have assumed your edits were in good faith, in accordance with WP:GF. It is your methodology I disagree with. Don't be so sensitive. And have a read over WP:NPA. GrahamNoyes (talk) 21:10, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Copying to Talk:South Yemen. GrahamNoyes (talk) 21:15, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages isn't a "fight" Graham, and TIAYN, you need to moderate your language and avoid personal attacks. Both of you please step back for a minute, then go discuss on the talk pages of the articles you both have issues with. Thanks, Philg88 22:11, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Understood. And I apologize for the inappropriate commentary. GrahamNoyes (talk) 22:17, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks, Graham, and there's no need to apologize. Taking the discussion to 3PO was a wise move. Cheers, Philg88 22:20, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Canvassing
Hello GrahamNoyes, I saw your edit here. That's called "canvassing" on Misplaced Pages, and it's not a good idea. If you feel a certain discussion needs more input, try to leave a neutrally worded message at the talk page of a relevant WikiProject (here WT:WikiProject Yemen, for example, if that's reasonably active, or maybe WT:WikiProject Socialism for a more general discussion on how to describe the government system of states like South Yemen or Vietnam) or ask for a third opinion at WP:Third opinion. Thanks, Huon (talk) 21:55, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Huon. Won't happen again. Incidentally, I already have a WP:3O request for South Yemen underway. Thanks again! :) GrahamNoyes (talk) 21:58, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
- Hi. As a third editor has now entered the discussion at Talk:South_Yemen#Its_name, it's no longer eligible for 3O and I've delisted the request. All the best, --Stfg (talk) 20:17, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
- Much appreciated! JamesBay (talk) 20:22, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
User talk:Trust Is All You Need
Stop reverting this user on their own talk page. In fact, I'd stay away from his talk page entirely as he obviously doesn't want you posting there.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:45, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
- Understood. JamesBay (talk) 21:46, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
- Nothing against you posting there, I only have something against you reverting my own user talk page edits ;P No harm intended. --TIAYN (talk) 21:48, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Macedonia (ancient kingdom)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Macedonia (ancient kingdom). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
South Yemen
You're making the same mistakes... again.There is a difference between ideology and forms of government, and adding random words such as "Marxist-Leninist state" is different from form of government. No sources have said that "Marxist-Leninist single-party staet" is a form of government. Just because a country has been called in passing a Marxist-Leninist single-party state, doesn't mean that Marxist-Leninist single-party state is a form of government. ... And at last, there is a difference between state and form of government , but who cares?! Is this so hard for people to understand, really? And are you really claiming "Socialist political system" is hardly defineable? All the modern self-declared socialist states have had the same political systems; see list of socialist countries. Are you saying that the Eastern European socialist states do not have the same political system as China? It is clearly defineable and saying otherwise is nonsense. I've closed the discussion at Talk:South Yemen; they don't make sense at all, and from a clear reading, its clear that you have no clue what you're talking about. You have started a discussion which includes three terms which don't have anything to do with form of government (that is, "Marxist-Leninist single-party state", "Marxist-Leninist state" and "People's democracy")... The consensus before was a "sham consensus", it was factual inaccurate, and thats been my whole point from the very beginning... And it doesn't help really that no modern sources actually talk of a form of government in the former, or present socialist republics. --TIAYN (talk) 19:45, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
- As a matter of fact, I do know what I am talking about, as I lived in South Yemen. Additionally, I have studied its politics and history extensively over the course of my academic career. And you are in no place to lob accusations, much less close discussion on the matter or silence opinions different from your own. JamesBay (talk) 21:11, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
- What does I live in South Yemen really have with the matter, a person knowing anything of the subject would understand "Marxist-Leninist single-party state" is a made up term. A person knowing something of the subject would know that People's Democracy was not a form of govenrment. It doesn't matter if you know a lot, you don't know a lot about this. Closing discussion, per WP:DEMOCRACY. --TIAYN (talk) 07:13, 8 September 2014 (UTC)