Unable to load image
Reported by:

  • flownbyanotherplane: top post is just “omg Wikipedia bad liberals”. Drama is nonexistent. Smh.

:marseyobey: The article "Mass killings under communist regimes" is being considered for deletion on Wikipedia :marseyrussiadolls:

en.wikipedia.org

I'm not familiar with wikipedia drama but it seems like the 4th attempt already?

Delete as synthesis, and a violation of WP:NPOV policy. There is no doubt that 'communist regimes' as defined in the article have perpetrated many atrocities, but that isn't the issue. The question that needs to be asked is whether 'Mass killings under communist regimes' is a legitimate subject for an encyclopaedic article. And I would have to suggest that the article in question does little to justify that claim. A few writers have certainly seen it as a legitimate subject for discussion, but by and large, credible mainstream histography tends to neither lump all 'communist regimes' together as a subject for scrutiny when discussing 'mass killing' or to treat them as some sort of special case requiring unique analysis. Proper historiography discusses events in context, and without simplistic presuppositions that events are driven by any specific ideology. As the endless disputes on the article talk page make entirely clear, the article, and what exactly it is that it is supposed to be discussing, has long been a subject of contention amongst Wikipedia contributors. Raththan citing credible histographic sources on such subjects, the debate has instead revolved around exactly what constitutes a 'mass killing', or a 'communist regime'. Debate almost invariably focussed on contributors own arguments and opinions, since sources discussing this are sparse, and generally on the fringes of histography. It is absolutely imperative that Wikipedia covers mass killings, regardless of who perpetuates them and what their motivations were, or are, but this article, with its loaded title and its endless wars over what exactly Wikipedia contributors can or cannot include as a 'killing' is exactly the wrong way to go about it. What Wikipedia should be doing is covering, in relevant articles about specific subjects, such atrocities, sourced to mainstream academia, and written in a manner that does not spoon-feed readers over-generalising and ideologically-driven conclusions that the sources concerned do not themselves support. Let the facts about individual events speak for themselves, and let readers decide for themselves whether they wish to blame 'communist regimes' for such crimes, or to instead blame them on the broader fallibilities of a humanity that was perpetuating such atrocities long before 'communists' arrived, and may well, if a more enlightened discourse isn't available, be perpetuating similar atrocities long after such 'regimes' have gone. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:00, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

Addendum to the above: a few hours ago, I wrote that "Rather than citing credible histographic sources on such subjects, the debate has instead revolved around exactly what constitutes a 'mass killing', or a 'communist regime'. Debate almost invariably focussed on contributors own arguments and opinions". For further evidence of how such endless going around in circles to arrive at a synthesised compromise can't work, one only need to look at this AfD discussion, and at how it is once again going over exactly the same ground, with the same mind-numbing consequences. I might dare to suggest that even if it were theoretically possible from Wikipedia to create a policy-compliant article on the subject matter (I still contend it isn't), per common sense, and possibly WP:IAR, we should give up trying, since in practice it is never going to happen. Or at lest, not until the last 'communist' and 'anti-communist' has been long dead, buried, and forgotten. There are plenty of other topics to write about, or even to waste time arguing over, and leaving this one for future generations might be best for all concerned. AndyTheGrump (talk) 04:17, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

someone shared it on r/destiny but there's no traction: https://old.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/r1767g/wikipedia_is_considering_removing_the_article_on/

Article being considered for deletion - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_communist_regimes (https://archive.ph/Q94AY)

Deletion discussion page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mass_killings_under_communist_regimes_(4th_nomination) (https://archive.md/dxBwv)

strange to see such a detailed article tabled for deletion :marseyhmm:

:marseytinfoil2::marseyobey:


y'all need god to save you

187
       
Comment
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Oh boy I need to get more into wiki drama, this is fun stuff

credible mainstream histography tends to neither lump all 'communist regimes' together as a subject for scrutiny when discussing 'mass killing' or to treat them as some sort of special case requiring unique analysis

And then most of the discussion is examples of mainstream scholars lumping communist regimes together as a subject of scrutiny when discussing mass killing and treating them as a special case requiring unique analysis

:marseypinochet:

There are chapters of recently published books dedicated to Communist atrocities during the cold war, which would be even more expansive than the current title of this article would have us include. And, it's not the true usefulness of a characterization that makes an article worthwhile, it's that a topic has drawn enough coverage as a topic (this is why we have articles like race and intelligence that have each repeatedly survived deletion efforts)

What an articulate refutation from mikehawk10, even managing to drop in a red pill attempt.

:brainletchair: :!seethejak:

The question that needs to be asked is whether 'Mass killings under communist regimes' is a legitimate subject for an encyclopaedic article.

But pornography in Overwatch is?

lmao I checked it up and it's real

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overwatch_and_pornography

When Blizzard made an open beta of Overwatch available on May 5, 2016, Pornhub registered a spike of 817% in searches for pornographic material related to the game.

:coomer:

Nathan Grayson of Kotaku stated that Overwatch makes for "good porn" because of its colorful cast of characters with distinct visual styles.

:marseycoomer:

In January 2017, Pornhub announced that "Overwatch" was the 11th-most search term on their website in the previous year, beating out searches for words such as "anal" and "threesome".

:soyjakfront:

various takedown notices have been issued to creators of such content.

:soyjakyell:

It’s current year plus 6, who needs threesome when we have dozens partaking in an orgy

When Blizzard made an open beta of Overwatch available on May 5, 2016, Pornhub registered a spike of 817% in searches for pornographic material related to the game.

OF COURSE there were more searches after the game was released than before it even existed...? :marseybrainlet:

Futanari imagery was also popular among Pornhub users.[5][6][7]

I am pleased to see fine art is gaining due recognition :marseytea:

I love the conspiracy theory that the high-quality models were seeded by Blizzard in order to drive engagement with the game. God knows its gameplay won't.

From what I can find, it's all very repetitive. After about the fiftieth sexmoan, you start to notice the lack of variety in gameplay.

Any rightoid that has a problem with this can fuck off back to reddit. This is fucking based and a sign that people are ready to stop being held back by the fear of heavily corrupt false form of communism. The revolution is approaching. If you’re not with us, then against us.

What false form of communism? :marseysipping:

Reported by:

  • Totally_not_Donaldinho2: Hang yourself you worthless cute twink and make sure to livestream it for us
  • FunkyDuffy: Pro-anorexia probaganda
  • Hullabaloo: Tankies btfo'd
  • EEE: I just saw a bunch of reports and wanted to contribute
  • Trans_wrongs: É o Xamã, Johnny plays Adoniran, Jimmy Page Compton, rap game Um filme com Nicolas Cage (cof, cof) R

For example all that have ever 'existed'.

:marseycopeseethedilate:

you rn: :ragemask:

That's me all the time

This is imperialist propaganda, Actually Existing Socialism must be supported. Each is a true and valid dictatorship of the proletariat.

Critical support to Pol Pot.

This is offensive to people of hunger

:marseycomrade:

All the ones that have been tried so far, but I swear to you Arthur Morgan we just need to do one last score and we can ride off into the sunset

Those were not communism, it has never been tried but if it were think star trek


Slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them.Prophet! Make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites! ... Hell shall be their home

So luxury space communism? Will it be gay?

Which is ironic as TOS i think both had money and was extremely sexist

the first thing communist regimes always do (try) is the communal ownership of foids

ACAB (Commies)

ACAB (Capitalists)

ACAB (aCronym posters)

ACAB (Centrists)

:marseytwerking: :chadyes: :!marseytwerking:

ACAB (Niggers)

Doesn’t really work because “capitalism” is a slur.

Yikes, communism is a mayo invention, please do better.

Well can we say snippy snippy to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-communist_mass_killings then? Hmm? :marseydoubt:

I don't know how they do it but somehow lefties constantly beat rightoids in the battle for the most r-slurred takes and world views

Cope

I am in favor of deleting because the article is 311,074 bytes large. If it gets deleted then a lot of wikijannies have wasted their time editing it

:marseyjanny2:

:marseyropeyourself:

To be fair, their time is probably worthless so they won't have wasted any.

This is the correct take but only after they appealed to Arbcom for the third time after 300,000 long discussions in the Discussion pages