Talk:Revolutionary Workers Headquarters

Communist Party?

I note that an editor has categorized the RWH with "Communist Parties in the Americas." My understanding, based on personal experience with the RWH, was that it considered itself a "pre-party organization" and not a party per se. Anyone care to shed light on this? --Midnite Critic 04:44, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

You are correct, I think. Creating a category for "pre-party formations" seems too reductive, however. It should probably only be categorized as a Maoist organizations. Even that might be too broad though. It is an historical organization restricted to the US during its existence. DJ Silverfish 00:37, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Generally the intrepretation of a "party", when doing categorizations is quite liberal. It is a communist party or a party-building organization. The Communist parties category include several communist leagues, organizations, committees and other pre-party formations. --Soman 09:37, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

My recent edits: "oral history"

My recent edits are based on memory. While never a member, I was marginally associated with the RWH. So how does one cite that? --Midnite Critic 20:44, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Two online sources

First, the following:

http://www.revolutionintheair.com/chron/chron4.html

The first entry for 1978 reads as follows:

January: Split in the RCP: after over a year of internal controversy, over the assessment of what happened in China (the leadership centered by chair Bob Avakian supported the Gang of Four) as well as strategy in the U.S., about 40% of the RCP membership, mainly in the East and Midwest, led by Mickey Jarvis and Leibel Bergman, split off to form the Revolutionary Workers Headquarters. RCP consolidates around pro-Gang of Four line, issues many documents, and organizes major Mao ZeDong Memorial Meetings on second anniversary of his death in September. (Red Papers 8; Revolution September 1978; Mao Meeting Press Release & Program in D-10; Guardian March 22, 1978 in BTr-4 )

Note that the RWH membership is characterized at this point as being "mainly in the East and Midwest". I will therefore change "Northeast" in the article to "East".

Second, the article itself links to an RWH statement regarding the absorption/merger of BACU into the RWH, which speaks of the RWH thereby expanding to the West Coast. If someone who knows how to do this wants to set up these cites, I would appreciate it. Thanks. --Midnite Critic 22:21, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Not one thing is cited

This entire article seems to stem from independent research, which is against Wikipedia guidelines. Nothing is cited. --Xcuref1endx (talk) 11:12, 6 October 2014 (UTC)