Talk:IWA–AIT

Latest comment: 3 months ago by Grnrchst in topic Rewrite

[Untitled]

edit

I've done a bit of tidying up and rewording, plus have re-referenced everything. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saii (talkcontribs) 13:39, 29 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

User Hendrick99 and his ip's are on a one-man mission to stop anyone from using anything but British English. This page was originally written in American English (see the first contribs). Thus, it will stay as such without consensus to change.

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on International Workers' Association. 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) 09:07, 15 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on International Workers' Association. 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) 02:10, 12 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

edit

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. Community Tech bot (talk) 22:45, 22 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

ICL

edit

Why do the page for the International Confederation of Labour redirects to here? In every other wikipedia it has its own page, i cant understand what happened here. It need to be fixed. JoaquimCebuano (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 15:04, 27 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Primary sources

edit

@Czar I understand that primary sources are not optimal, but there are little to no secondary sources available for the split which resulted in the founding of the ICL. With this in mind, I really do not see the issue with using primary sources, especially since the Wikipedia entries citing them are written as impartially as possible and only mention the facts of the matter. Sisuvia (talk) 20:49, 8 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

There wasn't any primary sourcing previously about a split resulting in the ICL, no? Primary sources are okay if kept to a minimum but the issue was entire sections based on primary sources. czar 02:27, 9 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Rewrite

edit

Having waded through the material, this article is in need of a full rewrite (TNT). Even after culling unreliable and primary sources, the remainder of the citations are disjointed, don't explain the core of the article, and are mostly citing entire books rather than specific passages. Since it's unlikely to be fixed in this state and been in this way for many years, unfortunately the best path is likely to chop it down to a stub and build it back up with the best reliable sources. czar 16:07, 4 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Working on a rewrite. Just been trying to improve coverage of its member sections first. --Grnrchst (talk) 17:05, 4 August 2024 (UTC)Reply