Talk:Liberation News (Internationalist)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I have issues with this stub.

1. Does anyone have a problem with the fact that the author and predominate commentator on this piece is Steven Argue himself? Hardly an unbiased approach. I personally don’t read the zine so I can’t comment on it. 2. Why all the irrelevant photos? Just because the zine agrees with Rosenberg and Trotsky doesn’t mean the page should have 3 unrelated images of them on it.

An unbiased report would be beneficial. I will take a look at Liberation News later to add any other relevant info.

Contents

[edit] Links to specific articles

User 71.146.30.203; There is no need to add a long list of specific article links, the two external links are sufficient. Ozzykhan 14:23, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:External_links for more information on what to link too. Ozzykhan 14:28, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Indirectly related images

I removed three images: Rosa Luxemburg, "Trotsky with troops at the Polish front, 1919", "Striking Trotskyist Teamsters, clash with armed police in the streets of Minneapolis, 1934", saying Images can only be added to articles if they enhance the reader's understanding of the article. These historical images failed to do so - this article is on a radio program begun in 1996. 71.146.19.108 reinserted them, saying "The group, as is stated in the text, bases itself on the ideas of Rosa Luxemburg and Leon Trotsky". I find that totally unpersuasive - Christian groups base themselves on the ideas of Jesus and the Bible, but we don't illustrate their articles with either (ditto for other religious groups). The reader interested in what the ideas of Rosa Luxemburg and Leon Trotsky were can follow the wikilinks to those aricles, and THERE they can see the images.

No editor "owns" an article. At least one other editor has also removed these images, and until there is a full discussion here, the images stay out. John Broughton | Talk 18:39, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree. My justification was that the images do not have much to do with the actual news organization. They may be "Trotskyist-Luxemburgist" but they have nothing to do with Trotsky or Luxemburg, or the Trotskyist movement of the past referenced in the pic that shows the Trotskyist Teamsters on strike. It does not help the article it just makes it look ridiculous. --Revolución hablar ver 11:40, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

This is clearly a vanity page, dealing with one individual’s web-zine. I argue it be removed; it follows none the of wikipedia guidelines. If we start letting any person come here and claim their personal zine is some great piece of journalism, we are in for some trouble.

[edit] Candidate for speedy deletion?

I agree. This article describes a non-notable email list which seems to be the self-published service for the views of one person. It's just not needed. Comments?--Duncan (talk) 00:10, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Not in my view a candidate for speedy deletion, but I can't find any evidence of notability - let's let the prod expire and - unless someone finds some references which suggest some notability, it can then be deleted. Warofdreams talk 00:48, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] POV

This is POV at points: for example, the debate between Lenin. Trotsky and Luxemburg is more complex than being more or against workers' democracy.--Duncan (talk) 00:10, 19 November 2007 (UTC)