Talk:Czechoslovak Socialist Republic: Difference between revisions

 

Line 80: Line 80:

::::::::::It’s an alright improvement, I think the fact that it was a federal state after the 1969 federation act could be mentioned as a footnote like how I added previously since the Marxist-Leninist state page makes no mention of federal states only unitary ones. [[User:ErickTheMerrick|ErickTheMerrick]] ([[User talk:ErickTheMerrick|talk]]) 21:04, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::It’s an alright improvement, I think the fact that it was a federal state after the 1969 federation act could be mentioned as a footnote like how I added previously since the Marxist-Leninist state page makes no mention of federal states only unitary ones. [[User:ErickTheMerrick|ErickTheMerrick]] ([[User talk:ErickTheMerrick|talk]]) 21:04, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::Your version is objectively terrible in every single way. Stalinism is not a form of government with specific institutions and, in accordance with totalitarianism, the system was totalitarian from start to finish. And why is Stalinism singled out, but not Brezhnevism. You are just adding unhelpful stuff that clarifies nothing. [[User:TheUzbek|TheUzbek]] ([[User talk:TheUzbek|talk]]) 05:56, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::Your version is objectively terrible in every single way. Stalinism is not a form of government with specific institutions and, in accordance with totalitarianism, the system was totalitarian from start to finish. And why is Stalinism singled out, but not Brezhnevism. You are just adding unhelpful stuff that clarifies nothing. [[User:TheUzbek|TheUzbek]] ([[User talk:TheUzbek|talk]]) 05:56, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

:::[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Czechoslovak_Socialist_Republic&oldid=prev&diff=1309593592 This edit] continues to have the same issue discussed above. [[User:Nikkimaria|Nikkimaria]] ([[User talk:Nikkimaria|talk]]) 00:26, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

:::[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Czechoslovak_Socialist_Republic&oldid=prev&diff=1309593592 This edit] continues to have the same issue discussed above. [[User:Nikkimaria|Nikkimaria]] ([[User talk:Nikkimaria|talk]]) 00:26, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

::::Why haven’t anyone said he has broken 3 revert rule? He is not listening to consensus and trying to force his incorrect views on Wikipedia. He is not about to give up it seems. [[User:TheUzbek|TheUzbek]] ([[User talk:TheUzbek|talk]]) 05:54, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Slovakia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Slovakia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SlovakiaWikipedia:WikiProject SlovakiaTemplate:WikiProject SlovakiaSlovakia High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project’s importance scale. This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia’s coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 20 August 2018 and 14 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Heykay0. Peer reviewers: Kservice78.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:56, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, Domino Theory, you did an amazing job on this article. It looks 200% better. My only concern is the amount of pre-communist, and even pre-war information that was included. I’ll try to trim some of it out over time. Obviously, some is okay to show the changes that occurred, but i’m not sure it’s relevant to mention that the Czechoslovak nat’l team placed second in the 1394 Football World Cup. – TheMightyQuill 18:12, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

People who continue to write that Czechoslovakia was communist should have their accounts deleted. This isn’t a children playground. People who lived there, like me, know it was a socialist country. These errors in the article should be removed ASAP!
—Redstar1987 00:01, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redstar, thanks for your attempts at contributing, but I’m afraid I had to revert them. While I’m happy to agree that there is a difference in the minds of anyone who lived in a socialist country, in the English speaking world, the countries of the Eastern bloc are usually referred to as communist, not socialist. And since this is the English wikipedia…

Secondly, as far as I know, Československá was only hyphenated as Česko-Slovenská for a very brief period, so it makes sense to keep it together for the article. – TheMightyQuill 00:48, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

“…the countries of the Eastern bloc are usually referred to as communist, not socialist. And since this is the English wikipedia…” and suspected under Western Bloc false historics propaganda and intelligence control? “Usually” shows a too uncritical thinking for a neutral and serious Wikipedia. TheMightyQuill, pls remember, every native language has always been under control of the country rulers. Redstar, leave it, the administrative guys here can’t get the Cold War out of their heads as they actually confuse their own western homecountry Capitalist “1984”-like Dictatorships and the simple old Rome-Style “Apart the people in many confusing “election clubs”, so they can no more find the real People’s Party in large election lists and rule against the people”-trick with so called “pluralism and democracy”. Although, many articles show what happend to people who tried such “Peaceful Revolutions” against Capitalist rulers… most of them were shot with their families without mercy, especially in the U.S., remember May Day, cause “Communist” rulers CAN step down at every time if the people demands it, Capitalist rulers never will and will kill You all, because they’ve got massive amounts of “Private Property”, stolen from the people, to loose, if the People demands it back, “Communist” rulers never had that in such amounts. Redstar, if You ex-SSSR guys have a alternative Wikipedia, pls drop me a link, thx. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Woprr (talk • contribs) 15:46, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The problem between “socialist” and “comunistic” country lies in philosophy not in “en” or “sk” wiki. I do believe, that someone who knows something about marxism-leninism doctrine knows, that comunism is ideal state of socialist comunity. Simply, all people of eastern block were “building” comunism in socialistic country in aim to reach comunistic ideals. If some socialistic country would be comunistic, then we all will be in heaven. See also for example USSR: Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). I hope, that nobody is saying, that in fact it is Union of Soviet Comunistic Repunlics (USCR). That argument of TheMightyQuill who found patent on en wiki is not true, and it is demagogical. Jurajda —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.173.80.176 (talk) 01:11, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You’re correct. The USSR was never known as the “Union of Soviet Comunistic Repunlics” Heheh. – TheMightyQuill (talk) 02:29, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The name of this article should be the familiar-to-English-speakers name of the country “Czechoslovakia” rather than the amazingly clunky and I guarantee you unfamiliar name to English speakers “Czechoslovak Socialist Republic.” It is of course standard practice at wikipedia to refer to nations by their familiar common name, then refer to the official name in the lede. So the page on France isn’t titled “The French Republic,” its official name, it’s “France.” Ditto for the United Kingdom page which is not called by the country’s official name, “The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.”

Any agreement? Canada Jack (talk) 16:53, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What are you proposing we should rename our existing Czechoslovakia article as? AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:08, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I came here as a sport flag linked to this page. Clearly, we have two pages on a single subject. Why are there two separate pages for essentially the same subject? Canada Jack (talk) 16:55, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, now I see what is going on. This is a page on one of the phases in the history of CZ, so the link I saw should be corrected to link to the country page rather than the country history page. Never mind. Canada Jack (talk) 17:00, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Czechoslovak Socialist Republic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, “External links modified” talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these “External links modified” talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:00, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dear IP,

the lead is about rule, not state, gain consensus for your change.(KIENGIR (talk) 19:59, 4 August 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Communist Party of Czechoslovakia wasn’t the only communist party that won “free elections” in Europe during Cold War. Parties like Italian Communist Party and Communist Party of Finland were quite successful, and partecipated in governmental positions. —Comrade-yutyo (talk) 08:07, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This edit presents data that is not present in the article body and is overly detailed for this context (see MOS:IBP). It also creates a problem with links placed right next to each other (MOS:SOB). Please don’t restore it without consensus (see WP:ONUS). Nikkimaria (talk) 01:28, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’ll find a more acceptable way for this edit to work. ErickTheMerrick (talk) 00:54, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This version continues to have the same problems. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:39, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What problems? I added the government details specific to this country. It was a unitary state, then a federal state. And it wasn’t officially a socialist republic until the 1960 constitution. These aren’t much to add and I added them as notes so they aren’t taking too much space. I don’t get why you seem to exclusively revert my edits with low quality reasoning and no consensus. Please find a better use of your time and stop harassing me. ErickTheMerrick (talk) 17:42, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As a reminder, edits are not vandalism just because you disagree with them, and the responsibility to obtain consensus is on the person wishing to include the disputed material – in this case, yourself. Please don’t restore this until you’ve done that.

The problems identified in my first post here persist in your most recent edit. The details you added are not discussed or sourced in the body of the article. If you want to add material, that would be where to focus your efforts, rather than continuing with your current approach. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:15, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What details? Specify. I said you edit was vandalism because it over simplified in a destructive manner that was unneeded and unsourced. ErickTheMerrick (talk) 17:09, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just stop with this. You will end up being blocked… TheUzbek (talk) 22:49, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I didn’t ask for your advice and I don’t need it… ErickTheMerrick (talk) 17:27, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am reopening this as simply having socialist state is just plain stupid and neglectful when the previous was more than good enough. This absolutely unnecessary oversimplification is not needed here and does infact feel close to a deliberate worsening of the page on your part. ErickTheMerrick (talk) 04:44, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you ask me its a very strong improvement. Nearly as good as “communist state” TheUzbek (talk) 19:48, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It’s an alright improvement, I think the fact that it was a federal state after the 1969 federation act could be mentioned as a footnote like how I added previously since the Marxist-Leninist state page makes no mention of federal states only unitary ones. ErickTheMerrick (talk) 21:04, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your version is objectively terrible in every single way. Stalinism is not a form of government with specific institutions and, in accordance with totalitarianism, the system was totalitarian from start to finish. And why is Stalinism singled out, but not Brezhnevism. You are just adding unhelpful stuff that clarifies nothing. TheUzbek (talk) 05:56, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This edit continues to have the same issue discussed above. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:26, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]