Talk:Workers' International League (US)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Sorry but there were documents released last year by former members of the "Socialist Appeal" tendency that reveal the internal name of the British Grant/Woods group as WIL just as earlier documents by former members revealed that the internal name of the "In Defence of Marxism" tendency is the CMI.AndyL 22:24, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
sorry andy, the Socialist Appeal tendency simply has no "internal" name, it is a fact. if you have any docs i'd like to see them! and the WIL in the US has far more than 20 members!
There was a group that split from the American WIL a year or so ago. Their documents state that both the UK and US groups are called WIL. AndyL 07:15, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I notice you've also deleted rerference to the CMI. Is it also your position that the CMI does not exist?AndyL 07:16, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I used to be a member of the Workers International League and was present at one of the conferences that led to its "official" formation. That was years ago, but I do not recall the British section of what is now known as the the International Marxist Tendency having an "internal" name. Certainly, Socialist Appeal is more than "just a magazine" and I think Michael Crick's book on the Militant Tendency in its heyday is a good source on how this group, even as a split and a fragment of its former self, continues to operate - albeit on a much, much smaller scale, but I just cannot remember an "internal name" fpr the British section.
If AndyL is referring to the "Trotskyist Labor League," which was essentially a few members of the San Diego branch of the WIL that left around the time that this discussion began (I think?), then I have also seen these documents. It would have been absolutely correct, back in 2004, to put their membership at around 20 people. The WIL has never enjoyed "far more" than 20 members. We are talking about an extremely small, Trotskyist sect. However, I think they may have about 40 members now.
I still know people who are in the WIL, as well as other former members. I don't have any of those old documents on me at the moment, but I bet I could find some stuff in order to add more details to this article. I'll give it a try.
[edit] Style change
This article and even more this talk page have the likes of a political police report more than an encyclopedic article. I will be bold soon when I have some time and rewrite it completely. --MauroVan 21:39, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Good Idea, I think it's needed. If there's going to be an article it should be proper instead of people yet again using wikipedia in strange unencyclopedic ways. I can see you already started, keep up the good work 80.167.85.23 19:02, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:WILlogo1.gif
Image:WILlogo1.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 08:57, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
