Talk:Communist Party of the United States of America

From Conservapedia

Jump to: navigation, search

This is all stolen content from [1]. It should be removed immediately. --BillOReillyFan 13:44, 18 March 2007 (EDT)

Please review, it's not. It's all authored by me and another editor. RobS 13:56, 18 March 2007 (EDT)
Are you absolutely sure? Did you apply it to teachersparadise.com?
I am reviewing there is a lot of material thats word for word from the site linked...Tmtoulouse 13:59, 18 March 2007 (EDT)
The second paragraph certainly looks identical to me. Dpbsmith 14:02, 18 March 2007 (EDT)

Okay its a mixture of copy right and original from what I can tell, this needs to be gone over with a fine tooth comb. Tmtoulouse 14:00, 18 March 2007 (EDT)

Agree. By the way, it's virtually certain that the original source is Wikipedia. [2] appears to be a Wikipedia "mirror," and probably is a slightly out-of-date version of the current WIkipedia article. Dpbsmith 14:02, 18 March 2007 (EDT)
All this is moot now since its been locked. --BillOReillyFan 14:03, 18 March 2007 (EDT)

It needs to be unlocked right away, it should NEVER have been locked to begin with. I left a message at RobS. Tmtoulouse 14:05, 18 March 2007 (EDT)

I have to site the CP violations on this page to be believed. Follow BillOReillyfan's link...the first two paragraphs are verbatim. I am not going through the rest right until its unlocked. Tmtoulouse 14:07, 18 March 2007 (EDT)

I seriously suggest page-blanking until resolution. It can be worked on in user sandboxes, and patched together later. --Hojimachongtalk 14:14, 18 March 2007 (EDT)
I attempted a redirect to communism but got smacked down and the page locked, I think most of it is probably original but we need to be careful. Tmtoulouse 14:15, 18 March 2007 (EDT)

Wikipedia was invented so that the common man could change and edit pages to ensure there accuracy and authenticity. This website is complete rubbish, if to preserve the pages so they are aligned with your twisted world view you have to lock them then what is the point. You are a load of hard-headed persistant **

If name calling is, censorship & vandalism is what your comfortable with, perhaps you'd feel more at home at Wikipedia. RobS 12:29, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

There are sections in the first CP version which appear to have been written by at least the following Wikipedia editors: 24.27.58.16, Nobs01, Jiang, Nobs, 195.92.67.70, TDC, Fred_Bauder. I'm assuming Nobs and Nobs01 are the same person and am guessing that that's RobS, in which case it's mostly (but still not completely, I don't think) ok.

--Jtl 16:05, 5 May 2007 (EDT)

Nobs & Nobs01 are me; so is the 195.92.67.70; I'm not certain on the other IP so I'd have to check it out. The sections by TDC & Fred Bauder are collaborative with me, as can be shown throw diffs & discussion. And some of the TDC stuff actually was a page move of some of my work. RobS 16:18, 5 May 2007 (EDT)
For example, I wrote [24] and Fred Bauder, Wikipedia Arbitration Committee chairman, reinserted my passage with the edit summary "Attributed deleted passage". WP citations rules were more simple at that time. Bauder and I collobated on a few other pages and had extensive discussions on that source. RobS 16:26, 5 May 2007 (EDT)
The CP version I was comparing against had both versions of that edit; I attributed the first (shorter) version to Nobs01[1] [2] and the longer one to Fred Bauder[3], but as I said I didn't look at the talk page (or any other related pages) at all. Sounds like the only possible problems are 24.27.58.16's opening sentence and Jiang's "splinter group" paragraph? --Jtl 16:56, 5 May 2007 (EDT)
That's right. I'll confess to stealing the anon IP's opening sentence. Jiang I don't recall exactly what the interaction was, but it relates to statisitcs on party membership, and there are some stats over there at WP I placed but have not brought here yet. It's one of those things I've been meaning to do but haven'thad a chance to do so. RobS 17:05, 5 May 2007 (EDT)
I think I accounted for page moves; I certainly intended to. I did not look at the talk page at all, though, so any collaboration which happened there, I would have missed. There were two particular sentences that appeared to come from TDC: The CPUSA even went so far as to accuse Winston Churchill and Franklin Delano Roosevelt of provoking aggression against Hitler.[4] and The CPUSA went so far as to denounce the Polish government as fascist after the German and Soviet invasion.[5] Also, please understand I'm not claiming this is some massive problem; but having gone through 2 years worth of WP edits, there was no way I wasn't recording what I'd found. At the very least, it might prevent someone else from repeating the exercise.--Jtl 16:33, 5 May 2007 (EDT)
The discussion was very extensive and unprecedented; Bauder was a former National Lawyers Guild attorney, a CPUSA front organization. Bauder presided over my Arbitration hearing, which was brought by another former NLG member whom Bauder knew 30 years earier (see the Wikigulag Userbox on RobS user page). My banning from WP had countless conflict of interests such as this, including the fact the complaining party also had a personal relationship with the subject of the article that the dispute was over (another CPUSA member). Fred Bauder asked me to return to Wikipedia both publicly and privately [25][26] and finish the Venona series, which I declined, largely because of unresolved issues in the Wikipedia#Daniel Brandt controversy. RobS 16:56, 5 May 2007 (EDT)

Contents

Scope

The scope of this article has to be restricted to CPUSA -- that means dropping stuff about China and about spies that workred directly for the Soviets. It also means reading the recent scholarship about the party. RJJensen 13:10, 5 June 2009 (EDT)

Frank Marshall Davis

What's false about the cited material? [27] Rob Smith 20:59, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

his name is wrong, his politics are wrong, his influence is wrong and his role in history is wrong. RJJensen 21:53, 25 June 2009 (EDT)
Name is wrong? Could you be more specific? As to politics, that goes without saying. His role in history, Obama guaranteed that. Rob Smith 22:00, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

Modern times

Under this section, this quote may be pertinent:

"[T]he long night of rule by the most reactionary groups on the political spectrum has ended... we extended and deepened our mass connections, we contributed to the historic victory in 2008, we enhanced our presence and visibility, and we increased our membership. We didn't grow as much as we would have liked, but we have a firm foundation on which to increase our size, visibility and readership of our publications in the period ahead. Provided, of course, that we further build and unite the working class based coalition that came together to elect President Obama." Sam Webb, Chair of the Communist Party USA, June 3, 2010. Quoted here[28] [User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212] 10:32, 24 June 2010 (EDT)

Executions

Hello! I don't really understand this sentence:

"The CPUSA did not execute anyone, but many--probably most--of the American Communists who traveled to Russia were killed there. "

What exactly does it mean? Did Soviets randomly kill members of the CPUSA? Randomly killing your supporters doesn't seem to be a good way of expanding your power. Or does it mean that "unorthodox" members of the CPUSA were not executed in the US, but rather sent to Russia where they were executed? As it is, this sentence is not very clear. Reading this sentence literally, I sincerely doubt that "most of the American Communists who travelled to Russia were killed there"! --MarcoT2 15:18, 17 July 2010 (EDT)

Notes

Personal tools