Another fun thing is how they use “CCP” in entries of well known members of the party, but “CPC” is used in articles of less well known ones.
Shows again that “CCP” is used for propagandistic reasons.
Afaik there was a whole debate on the Talk pages about whether to use CPC or CCP on the entirety of Wikipedia (it used to be CPC since, you know, that’s the official name), and “CCP” won because “we don’t care if CPC is the official name or the correct translation, CCP is used more lately on English media, and this is the English Wikipedia”. Obviously some lesser-known articles still use the real abbreviation. Make of that what you will
Wikipedia is the incarnation of a certain type of white suburbanite: affluent, resentful, and snippy because they are desperately afraid of confrontation.
Cool thing about Wikipedia is that anyone can edit it, as long as you give a source for edits more substantial than grammar/sentence structure changes. To prevent “edit wars” as they call them, it’s generally recommended to start a thread on the talk page prior to any large scale edits of an article, or in response to someone reverting your edit.
Cool thing about Wikipedia is that anyone can edit it, as long as you give a source for edits more substantial than grammar/sentence structure changes. To prevent “edit wars” as they call them, it’s generally recommended to start a thread on the talk page prior to any large scale edits of an article, or in response to someone reverting your edit.
Problem is that bots will just change the page back.
I’ll be honest, my experience with Wikipedia is limited to minor spelling, grammar, and sentence structure changes. I only ever got more interested in Wikipedia, and trusting it a bit more, when I read into its governance structure and found it to be fairly democratic, supporting a consensus style of democracy for both edits and admin/bureaucrat positions.
I was under the impression that bots were either banned or maybe only used by sitewide admins for protection against graffiti and the like? I might be misremembering though.
Something Something Communism is a classless, stateless, and moneyless society in Marx’s description of it Something Something Communist Countries technically don’t exist and the “existing ones” are Socialist States striving to be communist societies Something Something Typical Li-bruh-ls and their Political Iliteracy
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !genzedong@lemmygrad.ml
This is a Dengist community in favor of Bashar al-Assad with no information that can lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton, our fellow liberal and queen. This community is not ironic. We are Marxists-Leninists.
If you haven’t already found it, this GitHub page is an excellent collection of sources about socialism, imperialism, and other relevant topics, made by @dessalines and others.
Another fun thing is how they use “CCP” in entries of well known members of the party, but “CPC” is used in articles of less well known ones. Shows again that “CCP” is used for propagandistic reasons.
Afaik there was a whole debate on the Talk pages about whether to use CPC or CCP on the entirety of Wikipedia (it used to be CPC since, you know, that’s the official name), and “CCP” won because “we don’t care if CPC is the official name or the correct translation, CCP is used more lately on English media, and this is the English Wikipedia”. Obviously some lesser-known articles still use the real abbreviation. Make of that what you will
Honestly embarrasing for them. Just following whatever is currently published is contrary to any lexicon.
Simple English Wikipedia even uses “CPC”!
Even the disambiguation page of " CPC" uses “Communist Party of China”!
Wikipedia is the incarnation of a certain type of white suburbanite: affluent, resentful, and snippy because they are desperately afraid of confrontation.
I just looked at the English Wikipedia page for the NKVD; it is so dishonest lmao.
Cool thing about Wikipedia is that anyone can edit it, as long as you give a source for edits more substantial than grammar/sentence structure changes. To prevent “edit wars” as they call them, it’s generally recommended to start a thread on the talk page prior to any large scale edits of an article, or in response to someone reverting your edit.
Problem is that bots will just change the page back.
See also:
EDIT: I don’t see why people couldn’t just contribute to the ProleWiki page on the NKVD instead.
I’ll be honest, my experience with Wikipedia is limited to minor spelling, grammar, and sentence structure changes. I only ever got more interested in Wikipedia, and trusting it a bit more, when I read into its governance structure and found it to be fairly democratic, supporting a consensus style of democracy for both edits and admin/bureaucrat positions.
I was under the impression that bots were either banned or maybe only used by sitewide admins for protection against graffiti and the like? I might be misremembering though.
From my own experience, bots will actually help lock vandalization in through this process:
Vandalization has now been locked in, and only very observing individuals that go through the edit history will notice.
Something Something Communism is a classless, stateless, and moneyless society in Marx’s description of it Something Something Communist Countries technically don’t exist and the “existing ones” are Socialist States striving to be communist societies Something Something Typical Li-bruh-ls and their Political Iliteracy
Yeah… A state of absolute bliss