Wikipedia

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anarchism/Archive 7

< Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anarchism
(Redirected from Wikipedia:@CD24)
Latest comment: 1 month ago by Czar in topic Stub expansion project update
Archive 1←Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8

Credibility bot

Latest comment: 1 year ago3 comments3 people in discussion

As this is a highly active WikiProject, I would like to introduce you to Credibility bot. This is a bot that makes it easier to track source usage across articles through automated reports and alerts. We piloted this approach at Wikipedia:Vaccine safety and we want to offer it to any subject area or domain. We need your support to demonstrate demand for this toolkit. If you have a desire for this functionality, or would like to leave other feedback, please endorse the tool or comment at WP:CREDBOT. Thanks! Harej (talk) 17:45, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

  • Support. If other members of the project are up for this, then I'd be more than happy for us to sign up. It would certainly help us with keeping track of reliable sources on a more macro-scale, rather than popping into this talk page any time we have individual queries. Personally, I think the credibility framework sounds like an excellent tool for Wikipedia as a whole. -- Grnrchst (talk) 20:59, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Staffan Jacobson

Latest comment: 1 year ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Anyone have additional sources for this article? Otherwise the next step is AfD. czar 02:59, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

I just spent a bunch of time trying to search for him in English, not much luck there. There's a scientist of the same name who publishes in English, which makes it complicated. Someone should probably try https://www.kb.se/hitta-och-bestall/hitta-i-samlingarna.html. We're definitely missing something, but I don't know if it's anything substantial. -- asilvering (talk) 16:53, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
  Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Staffan Jacobson czar 11:14, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Recent literature (2023 H2)

Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion

For not-as-recent lit, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Anarchism/Recent literature

New thread for the second half of 2023. Feel free to add! czar 04:55, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Books and articles

  • Ansart, Pierre (September 2023). Proudhon's Sociology. AK Press. ISBN 978-1-84935-519-3. – Press
  • Baker, Zoe (July 2023). Means and Ends: The Revolutionary Practice of Anarchism in Europe and the United States. AK Press. ISBN 978-1-84935-498-1. OCLC 1345217229. – Press
  • Bray, Mark (September 2023). The Anarchist Inquisition: Assassins, Activists, and Martyrs in Spain and France. Ithaca: AK Press. ISBN 9781849355148. – Paperback edition of last year's hardcover
  • Chomard, Maria Tarasova (2023). "Research Notes: Comparing Jewish Anarchist Mutual Aid Initiatives in Montreal and Toronto: The Role of Cooperation". International Journal of Canadian Studies. 61 (1): 164–176. ISSN 1923-5291. Project MUSE 903259.
  • dos Santos, Kauan Willian (April 2023). "'Nationalism and Internationalism': The Construction of Anarchism between the Local and the International in Brazil (1890–1930)". Journal of History. 58 (1): 54–81. ISSN 2292-8502. Project MUSE 895749.
  • Frausto, Obed (2023). "Ricardo Flores Magón and Post-Anarchism: His Exile and His Ontological Anti-Essentialism and Becoming". Journal of World Philosophies. 8 (1): 60–75.
  • Laursen, Eric (August 2023). Polymath: The Life and Professions of Dr Alex Comfort, Author of the Joy of Sex. AK Press. ISBN 978-1-84935-496-7. OCLC 1345217286. – Press
  • Liang, Hongling (2023). "Education as Revolution: Theorizing Education and Learning in Xin Shiji (1907–1910)". Twentieth-Century China. 48 (2): 89–109. doi:10.1353/tcc.2023.0010. ISSN 1940-5065. Project MUSE 886328.
  • Scott-Brown, Sophie (July 2022). Colin Ward and the Art of Everyday Anarchy. New York: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-367-56930-3.

Book reviews

Recent literature

Latest comment: 1 year ago8 comments4 people in discussion

Is there any interest in creating a permanent subpage in project space for the "recent literature" lists? I think they're a good idea for coping with ever-growing body of scholarship on anarchism and for providing a way for editors with less time to contribute, but are always at risk of getting archived and forgotten, or simply ignored, on this talk page. We could even rethink the format a bit, e.g. adding space for a brief list of relevant articles for each publication. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 15:53, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

@Arms & Hearts: This sounds like it'd be a good idea aye. I've actually been thinking about us establishing a project-wide bibliography along these lines. -- Grnrchst (talk) 20:57, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
  • I like using this page as a noticeboard, as it's easy to track anything that requires group attention, whether it's a thread/discussion of new sources, new articles, noteworthy page actions (moves, deletions), or anything else that might interest the group. Would this idea to just have a bibliography of all related sources organized by year? The aspect of being archived or forgotten, I think, is part of its nature. At least there's visibility on this page versus burying it on another, and eventually prior years should be archived on any dedicated page as well. czar 10:53, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
    We could use this page as a noticeboard and once the discussion is archived, transfer that to a new subpage specifically for archiving these lists? -- asilvering (talk) 17:56, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
    Sounds good. Started a draft and feel free to edit: Wikipedia:WikiProject Anarchism/Recent literature. czar 04:22, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
    Thanks all; I'll have a look and try out some possibilities in due course. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 16:03, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
    @Grnrchst, Czar, and Asilvering: I've had a go at reformatting the lists as tables that should present the information a bit more clearly and allow some additional information to be included. This is obviously provisional and still needs a bit of tidyig up so anyone should feel free to add/remove/tweak/revert wholesale if you think necessary. If this seems agreeable it could be a foundation for a more comprehensive bibliography that projects further back, and shouldn't at all prelude continuing to have regular "recent literature" sections on this page. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 13:28, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
    Most bibliographies are bulleted lists for easier sorting. I don't find the "Relevant articles" column as needed because the sources will be added there once and don't necessarily need to be categorized in a column beyond that. czar 01:33, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Essay on the member list

Latest comment: 1 year ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I just had a look at our member list and noticed that there is an essay on there titled Solidarity Among Rogues?. While I think that having an introductory essay for prospective members is probably a good idea, I don't think this is it. It's very focused on ideology, spending more time going on about ideological differences between anarchist schools of thought and anarchist Wikipedians than anything to do with the WikiProject. While this may have been relevant to an earlier version of the WikiProject and Wikipedia, I don't think this essay represents what our project is now, and could very much do with a rewrite. Does anyone here have ideas for what an introductory WikiProject essay could be? -- Grnrchst (talk) 10:19, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

I'd remove/delete it as a relic of another time. There used to be a page that showed active editors within a topic area without requiring overt membership but it looks like the bot is down. I found that to be more helpful than signing a roster. In any event, I'm not sure we need an intro essay, no? czar 11:54, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Makhno at FAC

Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion

@Grnrchst's yearlong work on the Nestor Makhno is now up for Featured Article Candidacy. All are welcome to provide a review against the FAC criteria. It's a good place to jump in if you care about quality content and want a good read on a subject important to our project. czar 13:04, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Women in Green's 5th Editathon

Latest comment: 1 year ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi everyone! This October, Women in Green will be hosting its 5th Editathon: Around the World in 31 Days. The aim of this event is to get articles on women and/or women's works from at least 31 different countries reviewed to GA rating, which would help improve both the gender and geographic balance among recognised articles. This is a project I'm very happy to be a part of and I hope some of you will be interested in joining. There's no shortage of anarchist women from all over the world whose articles we can work on, so if you fancy taking some up, here's some suggestions:

I look forward to participating in this and hope to see some of you there as well. --Grnrchst (talk) 12:23, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Busy this month, but if you want to work together on Louise Michel in October I'd be game. Nathalie Lemel also worth adding to this list as a possible one to work on concurrently. -- asilvering (talk) 20:47, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
The @ project got 5 nominations out for this edit-a-thon! Vanamonde93 (talk · contribs) nominated   Le Guin's The Day Before the Revolution (nom) and I nominated   Clara Thalmann (nom),   Olga Taratuta (nom),   Virginia Bolten (nom) and   Margarita Ortega (nom). Ortega and Thalmann were even expanded from stub! -- Grnrchst (talk) 10:05, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Vital articles/Level/5

Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion

  You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5#Remove Leon Czolgosz, which is within the scope of this WikiProject. Grnrchst (talk) 12:53, 1 November 2023 (UTC) --

Category:Massacres committed by anarchists has been nominated for discussion

Latest comment: 11 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Category:Massacres committed by anarchists has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. czar 13:35, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Apologies for FAC comments

Latest comment: 11 months ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Hey @Czar; @Mujinga; @Asilvering. I just wanted to apologise for some of my comments during the FAC process for the article on Nestor Makhno. I went too far and let my frustrations get the better of me, I shouldn't have taken them out on my fellow colleagues and I'm very sorry for that. It appears that the review process may be over now, so I'm looking forward to seeing what comes of it. Wish you all the best with the articles you're improving. Mujinga's article on Phoolan Devi looks to be coming along very nicely. --Grnrchst (talk) 17:31, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

You certainly never said anything offensive at me, no apologies needed there. :) -- asilvering (talk) 10:11, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
No worries, Grnrchst. Everyone gets hot sometimes and I sympathize with what made it frustrating as a first-time nominator. It was a particularly hard topic to nominate but the the resulting article is a triumph, worth printing and framing and appreciating. You've done so much for the articles on the Makhnovschina, so on behalf of readers everywhere, thank you. czar 13:08, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for your kind words. The process has forced me to reevaluate what the FA status means, as what precisely fits into its criteria severely narrows the scope of my potential submissions. Of the dozen or so biographies I've gotten to GA so far, I think only Gaetano Bresci would meet its standards, as Bresci died before 1903 and was high-profile enough at the time that western reports on him are trivial to find. --Grnrchst (talk) 13:49, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5/People

Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion

  You are invited to join the discussions at Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5/People, regarding the proposed removal of Voltairine de Cleyre, Luigi Galleani, Johann Most and Lucy Parsons, which are within the scope of this WikiProject. Grnrchst (talk) 12:53, 1 November 2023 (UTC) --

2023: A Year in Review

Latest comment: 10 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Happy new year everyone! Last year was quite the productive year for our wee project, so I wanted to briefly highlight what we accomplished. This year roughly 250 new articles were created or added to the Anarchism WikiProject's purview; interesting facts about 16 articles were featured on Did You Know?; 17 articles were brought up to Good Article status; 2 articles were brought up to Featured Article status; and 3 of our articles were featured in the news, although sadly these were all recent deaths. Each day we improve the encyclopedia's coverage of anarchism as a subject, and I hope that's something we can all be proud of. Wishing you all the best in the new year, and happy editing. :D --Grnrchst (talk) 10:41, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Drafts and requests revival

Latest comment: 10 months ago10 comments3 people in discussion

Hey all. I noticed a while back that the WikiProject's drafts and requests had been largely stagnant for quite some time. Inspired by Women in Red's redlists, I decided to attempt building it into something more useful for moving forward with the WikiProject over the longer term. So far I've mostly focused on collecting red links for anarchists, and have combed our sister Wikipedias for help expanding. I still need to finish the Spanish anarchists subpage, as the Spanish, Basque, Galician and Catalan Wikipedias have all done such impressive jobs on writing about their local anarchist histories that collecting it all is its own big task. I'll also have a look at organizations at some point. But for now, I think this will be a better resource for users new and old that want to help create more articles for the WikiProject. If you want to help build the redlist, please by all means feel free. :)

I'm not sure what to do with what's left in the drafts section. All of the users that posted the drafts there have been inactive for a fair few years, so there hasn't been any movement with them. Personally I think SwitChar's List of anarchists and Zazaban's Timeline of anarchist history have the most potential for the main space. The other two I'm not sure about, as the "Anarchist defendants" draft strikes me as incredibly synthetic in scope and the Ramor Ryan draft is little more than a collection of the subject's writings. Would anybody be interested in helping take one of these drafts to main space? And does anybody have ideas for how we can use the drafts section more effectively for future WikiProject tasks? I personally prefer to keep my drafts off-wiki in files I can edit offline, so I'm not sure I would end up contributing much to this section. --Grnrchst (talk) 14:23, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much for this, it's extremely useful! Especially all the interlanguage links. -- asilvering (talk) 23:28, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
This list would be great for an edit-a-thon. It's a hard list, though, as many of the interlanguage links are missing sources so it's tough to source, for instance, Haiducii lui Cotovschi without advanced knowledge of the Romanian language and they're likely to stay red for a while if not forever. It's possible to add Wikidata links in place of the {{ill}} for each entry, which would help give some background info to use in search. We also have Wikipedia:WikiProject Anarchism/Missing anarchists to use as a worklist, which sorts Wikidata-tagged anarchists based on how many other language Wikipedias have articles, i.e., most likely for us to have enough to source an article. As for the old draft entries, I think they can boldly be removed based on the amount of work they'd need. czar 02:01, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
Aye, I expected that quite a number of items in the list would probably stay on there a while. Maybe we can make periodical removals of low-information entries as we work down the list. Holding an edit-a-thon in the future would also be a good idea! As for the Haiducii, I know libcom translated an article about them a while back, if you're interested in learning a bit about them. And thanks for informing me about the Missing anarchists worklist! I actually didn't know that existed but think it works nicely as a companion to the longer redlist, so I added it as a link in there. --Grnrchst (talk) 14:03, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
For the entries that are hard-to-impossible to source, it might be useful to split off another page to move those to, once we start coming across them. ie, a "missing anarchists who do not meet GNG in English sources" list, to save someone else the trouble of duplicating that search work. -- asilvering (talk) 15:57, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
I like this idea, but don't think it should be limited to English sources. WP:GNG specifically states that sources "do not have to be available online or written in English." --Grnrchst (talk) 16:36, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
I'd also be into a source-a-thon in which we source a portion of the list to make it easier for someone to take up. czar 19:52, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
Oh sure, I don't mean to say "these don't pass GNG", but "these don't pass GNG on English-language sources alone", ie, someone without multiple-language fluency is going to get stuck. People who do have that fluency can easily pick possible articles off that list. -- asilvering (talk) 20:27, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
Though, I suppose a more accurate way to describe what I had in mind originally was something like "I checked and can't prove that this person meets GNG, but we should keep them on the list anyway since there may be sources in the relevant language". -- asilvering (talk) 20:36, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
No bother! Hope it continues to be useful for our future editing activities. :) -- Grnrchst (talk) 14:04, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Project scope

Latest comment: 9 months ago4 comments3 people in discussion

@Grnrchst, re: adding Martin Buber and Camille Pissarro into project scope[1][2], does either have a strong connection with anarchism? The standard I try to apply is similar to the standard of inclusion in categories, i.e., whether the trait is "defining" of the subject. For example, in the case of Buber or Pissarro, an affiliation with anarchism is not noteworthy enough to include in the lede of the article, so is it a strong enough connection to warrant an anarchism-related category to define the subject or to include in the Anarchism project scope? Some articles need to be expanded to include anarchism-related material that has yet to be paraphrased, so I leave room for that here as well, but if it isn't a prominent connection, I err towards not including these two in scope. czar 04:19, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

I was actually being discriminatory when I was adding people into the project scope. There were quite a few cases where I came across an artist that had been tagged as an "anarchist" in another language Wikipedia, but it either wasn't mentioned in the article or its mention was something like "they were briefly around anarchists" or "they were called an anarchist". I added Pissarro because the French Wikipedia article on him includes an entire section about his anarchist politics and his influence on the French anarchist movement. (Impressionism and anarchism were indeed very closely connected).
As for Buber, he's actually someone I've done a fair amount of research on so I can say with a matter of certainty that he is absolutely relevant to the WikiProject. Buber was a close friend and associate of Gustave Landauer, and together they were part of an anarchist communist group "Neue Gemeinschaft". After Landauer's death, Buber was the main translator of his work. Buber developed a non-state and non-violent socialist approach to Jewish emancipation, which he offered as an alternative to the statism of Herzl's project. Much of Buber's work was exceptionally critical of state forms and was incredibly influential on the Kibbutz movement.
Ruth Kinna depicts Buber's work as in the tradition of "anarchist utopianism",[3] as did Rhiannon Firth, who focused on him as a central anarchist theorist on the subject of utopian communities.[4] Avraham Yassour described Buber as having adopted parts of Landauer's social anarchism.[5] Furio Bagnini said that Buber defined Judaism in religious anarchist terms.[6] Erhard Doubrawa noted Buber's influence on Paul Goodman, and went as far as to call him an anarchist.[7] Uri Gordon claimed him to be a key influence on Bookchin.[8]
I know of more sources, I just wanted to show that I didn't hastily add Buber to our WikiProject's scope without reason. --Grnrchst (talk) 09:26, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
Haha, this reminds me to put Gustave Courbet back in (sorry czar). He has a whole chapter in Allan Antliff's Anarchy and Art, which has been sitting on my desk for probably a year now. -- asilvering (talk) 03:15, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
That's all well and good. I'm mainly saying that unless those same broad strokes are covered in the article, especially its lead, then the connection isn't readily apparent, especially if it's meant to be a "defining" trait of the subject. A sourced sentence or two along the lines you've added here would be a fine place to start, or a link dump on the talk page, but those articles don't have anything like this right now. czar 13:55, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup open

Latest comment: 9 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi all, a reminder that WikiCup signups are open, in case you want to fly the black flag   for the project. I've previously found the Cup to be a good way to get extra visibility for articles that need reviews, as this group tends to be more heavily engaged. czar 14:08, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Decided to sign up. This could be fun :) I decided to use the Zapatista flag. Conceptual symmetry but not monotony like. --Grnrchst (talk) 16:28, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5/People

Latest comment: 9 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

  You are invited to join the discussions at Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5/People, regarding the proposed removal of Voltairine de Cleyre, Luigi Galleani, Johann Most and Lucy Parsons, which are within the scope of this WikiProject. Grnrchst (talk) 13:09, 11 January 2024 (UTC) --

Also one to add Octave Mirbeau   5 czar 20:53, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
Latest comment: 9 months ago3 comments3 people in discussion
 

File:Sergius Stepniak by Elliott & Fry.jpg, a portrait of anarchist Sergey Stepnyak-Kravchinsky restored by Adam Cuerden, will be featured on the main page on February 23. Nicely done! czar 22:13, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

That's great! Nice work Adam! I may be interested in improving his article over the next month, before the featured date. He's popped up a couple times in my research, and seems like quite the interesting fellow. --Grnrchst (talk) 12:58, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
Thank you! Glad I could do something. It's such a nice image, and such an interesting person. Read some of his (English-language) works, and he writes very well. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 00:09, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

May Day on the main page

Latest comment: 8 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I have a little tradition of nominating an anarchism/labor-related article for the main page's WP:TFA section each May Day.

I nominated La Salute è in voi for this year: 👀 Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/La Salute è in voi czar 15:57, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Unreferenced articles

Latest comment: 8 months ago8 comments3 people in discussion

Hi everyone! This month WPUA is holding unreferenced article backlog drive. We currently have only three explicitly-tagged unreferenced articles: José María Leyva, José Santos González Vera and Roland Vila. So now might be a good opportunity to get a citation or two into those articles! --Grnrchst (talk) 12:29, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Found sources for Leyva! --Grnrchst (talk) 12:47, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
Added some sources to Vera and Vila is at AfD. Any interest in a cleanup drive next? czar 14:32, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
I think if we picked specific sections to do drives on, that'd be more manageable than a generalised cleanup drive. Say one month we focus on "Clarification needed" and the next on "Dead external links" or something. --Grnrchst (talk) 15:25, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
Good idea. We could use the existing cleanup categories groupings: BLP, Clarity, Content, General, Links, Neutrality, References. References is the hardest and can definitely be broken into subdivisions but I would be up for starting with:
  1. BLPs, Clarity, and Content at once (66 issues), then
  2. General, Links, Neutrality (61 issues), then
  3. {{citation needed}} (52 issues)
  4. {{refimprove}} (42 issues)
  5. All remaining References and others (106 issues but I also think this count will be lower by then)
Thoughts? And when's best to start? czar 23:36, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
I'd say let's wait until we reach the above stub expansion goal (29 to go!), so we don't divide our energies. Personally I'm rather burnt out right now, so I'm struggling to even do the things I want to do, aside from necessary clean-up work... :/ Grnrchst (talk) 10:31, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
If anyone has ever deserved a wikibreak, it's you. -- asilvering (talk) 19:59, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
+1 Sorry to hear that and no rush to this, of course! Maybe we can revisit as "spring cleaning"?
When that has happened to me on larger projects, I've personally found it helpful to turn my attention to smaller projects, which gives me more steam to return to the larger one (or the realization that it's not worth pursuing). czar 16:01, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Recent literature (2023 Q4)

Latest comment: 1 year ago2 comments1 person in discussion

For not-as-recent lit, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Anarchism/Recent literature

New thread for the end of 2023 and anything we've previously missed. Feel free to add! czar 12:04, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Books and articles

Book reviews

Special issues



The Serna vascectomy article in particular is fascinating. czar 12:04, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

"Anarchist revolutions"

Latest comment: 7 months ago8 comments3 people in discussion

Any ideas what to do with Template:Anarchist revolution and Category:Anarchist revolutions? The majority of the items are not social revolutions in part or whole but more uprisings. Some are revolutionary activities that may have some association with anarchism but, again, not "revolutions" per se. For the category, following the dissolution of the List of anarchist communities, it looks to me that most can either be reassigned as anarchist organizations/groups or anarchist uprisings. Some might be best categorized as both uprisings and a revolutionary commune. Others might be removed as having no "defining" connection. And that leaves whether to rescope or delete the nav template. My take is to depopulate the communities and revolutions category for categories that better fit the category members (organizations and uprisings), and likely to delete the nav template as having no essential connection between the listed articles. Thoughts? czar 11:30, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

@Dimadick, saw you tagging in the category, in case you have input czar 13:19, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
The category seems to handle full-scale rebellions, while the communes category covers provisional governments. None of these topics are "communities", but see if you can fit in the organizations category-tree. Dimadick (talk) 13:23, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
The anarchist revolutions template looks incredibly synthetically-defined. Anarchists were only one faction within the Paris Commune. The Cantonal Revolution was adjacent to anarchism, but I wouldn't describe it as anarchist (anarchists were actually more closely involved in the contemporary Petroleum Revolution, which is not included here). Anarchists were involved in the Mexican and German revolutions, but describing them as "anarchist revolutions" is totally false. The Biennio Rosso wasn't a revolution, it was a period of civil conflict between revolutionaries (including but not limited to anarchists) and reactionaries, immediately preceding the fascist takeover of power in Italy. I'm not sure by what metric the Ruhr uprising was remotely anarchist, as the FAU only played a minor role in the events. The Kronstadt uprising failed to turn into a revolution. I'm not sure the KPAM can be described as a revolution. The May 68 events can dubiously be described as a revolution, but again, anarchists were only one faction of many. The Zapatistas aren't anarchists and it's frankly offensive to continue claiming them as such. The Rojava Revolution is also not anarchist, though the SDF are partly inspired by anarchist ideas and some anarchists participated (in a minor role).
Honestly the only two here that make sense to call "anarchist revolutions" are the Makhnovshchina and the Spanish Revolution, but then why do we need an entire template just for them? --Grnrchst (talk) 16:47, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
  Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 March 5#Template:Anarchist revolution czar 13:58, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Add Template:Anarchies to the mix too, as the navbox for "Anarchist-related territories and autonomous zones" (i.e., the nebulous "anarchist communities" catch-all mentioned above). It probably needs to be split into categories for intentional communities, revolutionary communes, maybe some uprisings. Its designations of "mass societies" and autonomous territories ranging from the Bavarian Socialist Republic to the George Floyd Square occupied protest reads as an indiscriminate grouping. czar 17:45, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

This falls into the same problems as the list, although it's arguably even worse with its "anarchist-related" thing. Some of these entries I don't even understand how they're remotely related to anarchism. --Grnrchst (talk) 16:52, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
  Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 March 8#Template:Anarchies czar 15:33, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Ukraine's Cultural Diplomacy Month 2024

Latest comment: 7 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

In case anyone reflexively clicked away from the giant banner, I thought I'd link this here, since we've got a fair few articles on Ukrainian anarchists already. -- asilvering (talk) 23:06, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Dunno if I'll have the time or energy to contribute to this over the next couple weeks, but will give a broad overview of overall progress on Ukrainian anarchist topics:
  • We currently have 1 featured article and 5 good articles on Ukrainian anarchists, as well as another good article about an event in Ukrainian anarchist history.
  • Biographical articles are largely solid, most based on the available English language literature with some pulling from Russian and Ukrainian sources where necessary. I could probably submit a couple more for GA in their current state, but some (like Maria Nikiforova and Mykhailo Drahomanov) still need a bit of work before they're there.
  • I think the biographical article that still needs the most work, proportional to its importance, is the one on Sholem Schwarzbard. The article isn't in a very good state right now, but Schwarzbard's story is a very interesting one.
  • There's still over 60 uncreated articles on Ukrainian anarchists, which exist on the Russian or Ukrainian Wikipedias. If I had to shortlist what I thought were the most important ones, these would be Elena Ferrari (writer) [uk; ru], Tryfon Hladchenko [uk; ru], Jacob Reich [uk; ru; de], Artem Parkhomenko [uk; ru], Herman Sandomirskyi [uk; ru], Vladimir Shatov [ru] and Osip Tsebriy [uk].
  • The anarchism in Ukraine article provides a decent overview of the history but needs more diverse sourcing. Each section currently pulls largely from single sources.
  • The Revolutionary Insurgent Army of Ukraine article still needs to be worked on. My plan is to eventually split the overly-long history sections into their own dedicated articles, with more robust sourcing. But I am thoroughly exhausted by this topic so an ETA on this is indefinite. Its sections on organisation could also do with expansion, and I think it needs a section on its tactics.
  • Think the article on the Makhnovshchina is as GA ready as it'll ever be at this point. Some of the more focused articles in that subject area are probably there as well. Really the main thing keeping me from submitting more of these for GA is the sluggish uptake of reviews. To my knowledge, there aren't any major gaps in the subject area, more areas where the amount of information could be improved or given greater focus.
  • I recently overhauled our articles on the Revolutionary Confederation of Anarcho-Syndicalists and the Resistance Committee, which were some interesting dives into modern Ukrainian organisations. Other modern organisations' articles, as well as some of the biographies, could still do with some improvement.
  • As more sources are published about anarchist participation in the Maidan uprising and the resistance to the Russian invasion, more information about modern history can be added.
There's definitely still more work to do on this subject area, but I'm quite happy with where we've gotten with it so far. My ability to contribute more is largely limited by my exhaustion with the subject matter. There's only so many times I can go over the same set of information before it gets too boring to bother. If anyone wants to help contribute to this topic, I'd be more than happy to provide advice or guidance on the matter. :) --Grnrchst (talk) 16:34, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Gauging interest in a broader tenant rights and history group

Latest comment: 7 months ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi! I'm LoomCreek and a member of the New York Housing and Tenant Rights Task Force where we've been documenting the history of land ownership and tenant advocacy in the state and city.

Your Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist and I want to gauge interest in creating a larger task force for worldwide history and/or more regionally specific ones. If interested, please add your username to sandbox/Housing and Tenant Rights, let us know about what your interests are and whether you'd prefer a regional task force, a world-wide wikiproject, or both. In a couple weeks we'll start creating them based on requests (5+ for a regional task force, 10+ for a wikiproject). Best regards, LoomCreek (talk) 17:20, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Don't forget to ping WP:SQUAT too! -- asilvering (talk) 20:49, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads up! Will do :) - LoomCreek (talk) 21:20, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Stub tracker

Latest comment: 8 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Recent stubs

With some help from the village pump, here's a new template we can use to catch newly assessed stubs for the project. I'll add it above if it's useful. czar 21:42, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

The Core Contest

Latest comment: 6 months ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hey everyone! In a couple weeks time, the 2024 edition of the Core Contest will be starting. This event has a focus on improving vital articles, and as we currently have 85 vital articles under our project (16 of which are already at GA or FA), I thought it might be worth getting involved. I've already gotten four VAs to GA status, with another getting a review soon (thanks asilvering!), so I'm eyeing up what to do next. I've already started working on improving our article on anarcho-syndicalism, although there's still a lot of work to go there, and have been considering a few of our vital biographies (namely Buenaventura Durruti, Johann Most, Subcomandante Marcos and Sergey Nechayev). Raising this here in case anyone else fancies adopting a VA for this event. :) --Grnrchst (talk) 10:25, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Worth pointing out that Voltairine de Cleyre and Simone Weil are relevant to the WiR/WiG theme this year. Louise Michel too, if you stretch a bit. -- asilvering (talk) 16:27, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
You've convinced me to start work on the article about de Cleyre. It's not in a great state right now, and I think it's got a lot of room for improvement. --Grnrchst (talk) 13:01, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Highlighting Romani anarchists (and anarchist solidarity)

Latest comment: 6 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi everyone! This coming Monday, 8 April, is International Romani Day and Wikimedia is hosting an IRD edit-a-thon in order to celebrate. I thought it would be a good time to highlight some of our articles on GRT anarchists, as written about in María Sierra and Juan Pro's article Gypsy Anarchism: Navigating Ethnic and Political Identities:

  • Helios Gómez was an Andalusian Calé poet and painter who was a central figure in the CNT's propaganda department. If you've seen a selection of CNT propaganda posters from the 1930s, you've likely seen something drawn up by Gómez.
  • Marià Rodríguez i Vázquez, also known by his nickname "Marianet", was a Catalan Calé anarcho-syndicalist who served as general secretary of the CNT during the civil war. He was a key figure in driving forward the anarchist collaboration with the Republican government and before his premature death advocated for a guerrilla struggle against the Francoist dictatorship, which eventually became the Maquis.
  • Konrad Bercovici was a Romanian Jewish journalist who was raised among Romani people and continued to live among Romani community in New York upon emigrating to America. He became publicly known as a "Gypsy-Jew" and his anti-racism is reflected in his writings, which gathered appreciation from the film-maker (and anarchist) Charlie Chaplin, himself of Romani descent.
  • Romany Marie was also a Romanian emigrant to America. She established a number of Bohemian cafés that were draped in Romanian decour and served Romanian food, while Marie herself took on a Romani affect and clothing as hostess. Her cafes hosted numerous radicals and dissidents, with Marie being a personal follower of Emma Goldman.
  • Leda Rafanelli was an Italian anarchist publisher who claimed Romani ancestry and consciously adopted Romani culture, considering it to be an expression of individualist anarchism. She saw anarchism and Romani culture as an alternative to hegemonic Western European civilisation, and continued to practice both even during the time of Mussolini's dictatorship.

I've also come across a couple other Romani anarchists during my research. The one that sticks in my mind is Kasilda Hernáez, a Basque Calé anarchist who supported anti-fascist resistance and played a role in the rise of ETA. Anarchists have also played a role in countering anti-GRT racism throughout Europe: including the Workers' Solidarity Movement in Ireland; Paul Polansky in Kosovo; Raoul Vaneigem in Belgium and Rev Dia in Ukraine. If you know of any other Romani anarchists or stories of anarchist solidarity with GRT people, please share them here, I would be happy to read about them. --Grnrchst (talk) 13:46, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Women in Red's Central and Eastern Europe edit-a-thon

Latest comment: 6 months ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Hey everyone. This month, Women in Red is doing a geofocused edit-a-thon about women from Central and Eastern Europe. We have no shortage of women from this region in our redlist, so if you fancy creating some articles for this event, consider some of these ones:

Belarus
Bulgaria
Croatia
Czechia
Germany
Greece
Poland
Russia
Serbia
Switzerland
Ukraine

I'd be happy to take a look at the Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian entries, and maybe a couple of the Bulgarian ones. --Grnrchst (talk) 11:59, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

@Wikociewie: I notice you've been creating a lot of articles about Polish anarchists lately, excellent work on that by the way! Would you be interested in helping create articles about any of the above-listed Polish women? --Grnrchst (talk) 12:01, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
@Grnrchst:. Thank you for the feedback! Yes, I think I could have a go at a couple of these.Wikociewie (talk) 18:51, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Reminder to anyone reading this that if you're translating from another language wikipedia, you need to attribute the translation in an edit summary. If you're using the translation widget (WP:CXT), it will do this for you. Otherwise, see WP:HOWTRANS for a statement you can copy.
Also a sad reminder that you should always, always check for copyvio first. Copyvio is often accidentally laundered by translation, and it's a real bummer to figure this out when you do a source check after having already translated the article. I've been burned by this twice because I didn't learn my lesson the first time; I just had to CSD a huge article that was recently translated by an en-wiki editor since the original fr-wiki editor added copyvio years and years ago and it was never caught. You can use earwig to catch the obvious stuff - just make sure to set the language correctly (it defaults to English). -- asilvering (talk) 17:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Roll call?

Latest comment: 5 months ago10 comments4 people in discussion

Hi everyone. It feels like this noticeboard has never been as active as it has been these past few months, with collective drives to cleanup articles, expand stub and create new articles, as well as discussions on other parts of the project. But it's also worth noting that, while discussion is active, it's limited to only a few of us. This is in contrast to the dozens of people in our participants list and who have identified themselves as members with userboxes. I was wondering if, in light of more recent collective action, it would be useful for us to do a roll call of participants. Maybe either a mass ping of listed participants or dedicated talk page messages asking if they would be interested in more closely collaborative participation? --Grnrchst (talk) 08:16, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

I'm in favor of sending a one-time message to editors on that participants list and to those who have received a welcome/invite message about this noticeboard. They might not know about recent activity and would want to join in. My suggestion would be that we deprecate the "Participants" list afterwards, as it quickly goes out of date and doesn't necessarily indicate activity. (There used to be a bot that would create an active participant list but it's dead.) Instead, we can create an opt-in mailing list for those who want updates about coordinated efforts, like edit drives or newsletters related to the project. I'll create Wikipedia:WikiProject Anarchism/Subscribe if that sounds good. czar 13:32, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
@czar, do you know anything about why it's dead? I guess what I'm wondering here is whether it's something broken that will take a lot of work to fix, or whether it needs someone to adopt it and perform some comparatively minor fixes. Sorry if I've asked before. I have a feeling I did but can't remember the answer. -- asilvering (talk) 03:25, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
@Asilvering, the bot's maintainer, @Harej, hasn't answered questions about it in a while. My understanding is that there was some funding for the Wikipedia:WikiProject X initiative and eventually it was mothballed. It's a shame because this bot was one of the more generally useful features and ultimately had little to do with the WikiProject X features. In any event, maintaining a mailing list is, to my eyes, even more generally useful than a participant list. czar 03:36, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
I've sent out a talk page message to users in the members list/category that haven't been recent participants either in the subject area or in the project. For people that have been active in the subject area, but not on the noticeboard or the project's collective efforts, I've sent a more personalised message. Also, I left off regular participants on the message board, for obvious reasons. In the category, I ended up doing some cleanup, as almost half of the users were inactive, some for over a decade, some had even been blocked.
Am hoping the messages stimulate some additional activity, but at the very least, it's nice to be able to inform people about what we've been doing. --Grnrchst (talk) 13:38, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Thank you! It's a nice message. Inactive (unblocked) users might still be worth contacting even if they don't participate often, as sometimes they come back. czar 21:12, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Yes, I could conduct an interview. I probably need till June or July, but here is a template with some questions to get started.
Wikipedia:WikiProject_Anarchism/signpost_2024
Coordinate some basic information into this, and then I will come up with some more targeted questions. When we have some content then I will bring this into Signpost's editorial process. Bluerasberry (talk) 17:22, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
I'll see if I can get around to answering some of these soon. I've got a busy week ahead. Thanks for doing this Lane! --Grnrchst (talk) 08:36, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

My citogenesis report

Latest comment: 5 months ago7 comments5 people in discussion

So after probably too long of this sitting in my drafts, I finally managed to put together a report on the "Free Territory" citogenesis incident and The Commoner agreed to publish it. A lot of this is old news on here, but if you're interested in reading: "We Carry a Free Territory in Our Hearts" --Grnrchst (talk) 08:38, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Very, very interesting summary. I noted the problems with the Makhno movement's flag before, but I didn't realize that even the term free territory itself was anachronistic. Nice work, Grnrchst! ときさき くるみ not because they are easy, but because they are hard 13:12, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Great story! Very readable. czar 14:58, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
I actually already knew about the most widely-known flag being technically incorrect and the name "Free Territory" originating from Wikipedia, but I didn't realize that it was that transient as a political area. Iostn (talk) 22:27, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Yes same lostn! I assumed the zone Makhno's forces controlled lasted for longer. Nice one Grnrchst, I stumbled across the article on patreon and was like hang on a minute this must be you know who! I wasn't sure if you wanted it linked to your wiki identity or not (even if it would be fairly easy to connect) but since you've let the cat out of the bag already that's ok :) Mujinga (talk) 10:00, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Oh! Which patreon was it? The Commoner's or a different one? --Grnrchst (talk) 11:18, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Yeah the commoner! Which I must've randomly joined by searching for anarchism or somesuch. I just joined patreon to follow a podcast about the neolithic age which i really like and hadn't realised went paywalled a year ago. Mujinga (talk) 20:01, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Developing Countries WikiContest

Latest comment: 4 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi everyone. Next week marks the beginning of the 2024 Developing Countries WikiContest, which is dedicated to improving articles about the Global South. Articles focused on Africa, Asia, Latin America and Eastern Europe account for roughly one quarter of our project. If you fancy taking on some articles for improvement during this event, feel free to spool through our categories covering Africa, Asia and South America, as well as relevant parts of Europe and North America. We also have some vital articles from these regions that still need improving, so if you fancy taking those on, they are:

I don't know how much I'll be able to participate, as I'm feeling quite burned out at the moment, but I think this would be an excellent opportunity for us to expand our geographical focus. --Grnrchst (talk) 11:49, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Fictional anarchists

Latest comment: 3 months ago9 comments3 people in discussion

The List of fictional anarchists doesn't currently meet the list notability criteria, namely that there isn't sourcing that covers this group as a list. It's more of a collection of original research and primary sources that would be sufficiently handled as a category (if there are enough notable fictional anarchists). Wanted to see if anyone else had sources or thoughts before sending it to AfD or merger. czar 16:04, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

I think categories are probably the way to go in general, but I think there probably is coverage of individual parts of that list - eg there's a whole special issue on anarchists and comics here. -- asilvering (talk) 01:43, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
I could see a potential article about anarchism in fiction based on sources like that but not a list of fictional anarchists. czar 14:07, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
We already have Anarchism and the arts, which is a bit broader in scope. gobonobo + c 01:52, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Too broad, I think, and properly it should be about the interaction between arts and anarchism (ie, Anarchism AND arts), not simply characters who are anarchists, or storylines that are about anarchism (ie, Anarchism IN arts). -- asilvering (talk) 18:05, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
I'd be inclined to !vote keep if that list were nominated for deletion. Per WP:CLN, per academic sources that consider the evolving representation of anarchists across works of fiction (and list them [9], [10], [11]), or per WP:IAR. Aside from a strict reading of NLIST, is there a reason this should be deleted? We have plenty of crufty listicles on wiki that ought to be memory holed, but this list doesn't strike me as egregious. gobonobo + c 01:52, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
It's not that it's the most egregious but it's been tagged for cleanup and sourced to primary or unreliable sources so we should figure out its prognosis. I think the sources you cite make a case for an article on how anarchism appears in fiction but not necessarily fictional anarchist characters as a group or class, unless you're seeing something I'm not. czar 14:31, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
I see that you tagged it for cleanup. And there are primary sources in the article that could be addressed/replaced, but the majority of the references are reliable, citing books for the most part. As to NLIST criteria and the characterization of my sources, I beg to differ. The first source,
is explicitly about anarchists in British fiction, not anarchy in fiction. The paper goes on for 26 pages about the anarchist character in British fiction, exploring specific instances, and treating them as a class. The second, Against Anarchy, also explores anarchist characters as a class in several places, discussing, for example, their association with a set of clichés, preconceptions, and stereotypes in early modernist fiction. gobonobo + c 15:13, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
Having looked into this some more and taken some more time reading the individual list entries, I think I would also be inclined to vote keep in an AfD. At the same time, I don't think this is a particularly useful list article, nor do I think it could become a particularly useful article. Part of the trouble is that there are some works that are entirely about a group of anarchists, so you end up with effectively no reason to exclude any character from The Anarchist Cookbook (film), which starts to become a bit ridiculous. I also see that the characters in each medium really are dealt with in very different ways, so I'm unconvinced that a hypothetical FL-level version of this list would hold together. More reasonable, I think, would be List of anarchists in television, List of anarchists in comics, etc. (Or just Anarchists in television, Anarchists in comics.)
Which is to say, I think we can reasonably remove the notability tag and leave "making this into a better article" as a building-the-encyclopedia project, not an urgent maintenance task. -- asilvering (talk) 18:19, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Anarcho-monarchism

Latest comment: 3 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

This new article needs some attention, if someone has time to review the sources for reliability and depth (describing this concept in more than passing mentions). czar 11:58, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

@Czar: After looking at the sources, I've started a deletion discussion. --Grnrchst (talk) 08:52, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Recent death: James C. Scott

Latest comment: 3 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I missed it in WP:ITN but James C. Scott died a week ago czar 03:10, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Seeing Like a State could really use some work... -- asilvering (talk) 03:57, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Grass Roots Books

Latest comment: 2 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Requesting assistance finding reliable sources and determining notability for Grass Roots Books, a radical UK bookshop. Discussion here:   Talk:Grass Roots Books#Source verification czar 13:00, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Zapatistas within scope?

Latest comment: 2 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I was thinking about @Grnrchst's comment from a few months ago—The Zapatistas aren't anarchists and it's frankly offensive to continue claiming them as such. —and was wondering: Should our project still continue the Zapatista articles in scope or remove the {{WikiProject Anarchism}} banner from them?

They've been historically "claimed" by anarchists in some way, but it hasn't fully borne out in the sourcing. I think of the autonomist movement as being in similar associative circumstances. czar 17:32, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

I think they're relevant to the scope of the WikiProject, I just don't think we should be labelling them as "anarchists" in Wikivoice. --Grnrchst (talk) 13:50, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Batman: Anarky

Latest comment: 2 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Batman: Anarky has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 02:12, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

WP:AND

Latest comment: 2 months ago5 comments3 people in discussion

I've been thinking for a while about our series of "Anarchism and..." articles and how we could rework them. I was motivated to raise a discussion about this after @Czar unilaterally merged the article on propaganda of the deed, a very well-defined topic, into the article on anarchism and violence, which always seemed synthetic in scope (it shoves together unrelated text about propaganda of the deed, anarcho-pacifism and random anarchist views on violence, with no clear structure). Per WP:AND, we are supposed to be exercising caution when using "and" titles, yet we have several:

This makes anarchism rather unique in terms of "and" articles, as most ideologies have few if any. Fascism only has one (Fascism and ideology), socialism only has one (Socialism and LGBT rights), communism only has one (Communism and LGBT rights), Marxism only has two (Marxism and religion; Marxism and Keynesian economics), etc.

Looking at our "anarchism and..." articles, they all seem very randomly cobbled together, with no rhyme or reason to their structure. Their scope is almost inherently broken from the outset, as the "and" opens the door for literally any passing anarchist views on a subject to be inserted in, rather than focusing on sources specifically about anarchism's connection to a certain subject. It could even be argued that it messes with neutrality.

So I wanted to bring up a discussion about these articles. What can we do about them? Are there possible improvements that could be made to them? Should we retitle them to something more well-defined? Or should some of them be deleted or merged/redirected to other articles? From my view, the only one of these I know I'd vote keep on is "anarchism and education", as I know of several sources specifically about it (although it might be better titled "Anarchist education" or something). --Grnrchst (talk) 08:38, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

@Gobonobo and Asilvering: Pinging you two, as I notice you have discussed the "anarchism and the arts" article above. --Grnrchst (talk) 08:39, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
I think most of these would survive a deletion discussion because they're topics that are frequently discussed in relation with anarchism. I see them as summary style splits from the anarchism and former issues in anarchism overview topics. Though they might need some work to get in line with how summary style should work, it doesn't warrant deletion. This said, some of these can definitely be further paraphrased and/or merged since they were written and are mostly unchanged from a bygone era of Wikipedia. Personally, I always figured we'd get to these after repairing the main ideology and country articles. Happy to discuss any of these in isolation, which I believe would be most productive. czar 13:11, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
I'm with czar here. It's a bit funny to me that these stand out as "suspect" topics on wikipedia, since these are, well, exactly the kind of topics you'd expect to see in an actual print encyclopedia! Of course, actual print encyclopedias tend to be written by expert contributors under the aegis of an editorial board, so there's that. I hear you, Grnrchst, about opens the door for literally any passing anarchist views on a subject to be inserted in - but I don't think this is much different from how every article used to have "in pop culture" shoved into the bottom. That is to say, I think that kind of cruft is just an artifact of how wikipedia is a work in progress, and the cure is simply to write a better article. Easier said than done but that doesn't mean it's not worth doing.
imo, Anarchism and religion is particularly underdeveloped. We might want to break it into that and an Anarchism and atheism article (maybe renaming the first Religious anarchism or something, which I see we currently have as a redirect). At least for me, working with various Paris Commune articles, I've really noticed the lack of context on why these anarchists were so fervently anti-religious. -- asilvering (talk) 19:50, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
These are all good points, I'll put a pin in this for now. Thanks for the responses :) --Grnrchst (talk) 08:39, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Cleanup drive

Latest comment: 2 months ago20 comments4 people in discussion

edit this section

Here is the full list of anarchism articles in need of cleanup. Below is a subset for focus during the cleanup drive. Strike out completed items with {{s}} and we'll add more sections as we go.

finished

Biographies of living persons (10)

These articles have any cleanup tag but are high priority because we hold biographies on living people to a higher standard

Unsourced passages need footnotes {{citation needed}} (69)

Search for the passages tagged with {{citation needed}} and either (a) add a source and remove the tag, or (b) remove the passage and the tag if it cannot be verified

Factual verification needed (12)

Search for the passages tagged with {{verify source}} or {{vn}}, which indicate that another editor has requested that our article content is verifiable in the citation. If verified, say so in your edit summary and remove the tag. If not verified, either bring the discrepancy to the talk page or resolve the discrepancy yourself by rephrasing or removing content.

Cites unreliable sources (26)

Search for the passages tagged with {{Better source}}, {{Obsolete source}}, {{Primary sources}}, {{Unreliable sources}}, {{Verify credibility}}, {{Third-party}}, {{Third-party-inline}}, or {{Circular reference}}. This could be, for instance, a primary source affiliated with an anarchist movement or a reference without editorial distance from the subject. Either (a) replace with a reliable, secondary, independent source and remove the tag, or (b) remove the passage and the tag if no reliable reference exists.
Shortcut

Our cleanup backlog has grown since the last drive, so thought we could kickoff another push for the month of May. There are currently 228 articles tagged in total with 386 tagged issues. Can we get it down to zero?

For a place to start, I thought biographies of living people (BLPs) and articles in need of citations would be good. To cross off finished items from the list, there is a link above to edit the section (so as not to bother watchers of this page). Open to any other ideas here as well to make it interesting. Perhaps we should set up a mailing list for editors who have participated in the project previously?

If this is your first time participating in a cleanup drive on Wikipedia, (1) you're invited to be bold and try your best to resolve cleanup issues, and (2) if you have any questions or need a hand, please respond below and someone will help! czar 14:36, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Oof, there is a lot of work to do on some of these articles. Some should be simple enough to fix but damn, others have much deeper problems that I'm not sure simply addressing the CN tags will solve. --Grnrchst (talk) 09:42, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Addressing the {{citation needed}} tags is enough to remove it from this list but if an article needs more support, feel free to bring it to discussion so others can chip in too. czar 03:10, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
Well, we can't fix everything all at once. It's a work in progress. As much as I'd like to fix everything everywhere, as long as we don't have falsehoods or policy violations hanging around... it's ok that some things are a bit crap. -- asilvering (talk) 03:38, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
@Czar: Hey, we seem to have gone way over the limit of templates on one page, which I think has come down to both the cleanup drive transclusion and the recent literature transclusion having introduced a lot more than the page can handle. I manually archived a section and removed a bunch of templates from another, but this problem still persists. I think we may need to consider that striking every resolved entry, rather than simply removing it from the list, is causing problems of its own. --Grnrchst (talk) 08:43, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
Ok no, after doing a bunch of archivals and changes, then just fiddling around with removing random hings, I identified the newly-added "Recent stubs" template as the source of the problem. I have temporarily removed it, just so the entire page doesn't break. We need to figure out what went wrong with it before we add it back in. --Grnrchst (talk) 09:07, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
There is a backlog drive for sourcing unsourced statements starting tomorrow, which can be a good reason for finishing our above {{citation needed}} list. :)
Also nice work on sourcing List of self-managed social centers, @Graveyardpansy! czar 11:48, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
Ooh we're close to finishing this one off! Don't know how much time I can spend on this area this month, as my attentions are focused on the Women in Green edit-a-thon, but I hope we'll be able to address these last few before the end of the unsourced statements drive. :) --Grnrchst (talk) 09:31, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for your citations on Ungdomshuset, @Replayful! czar 12:37, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
No problem, I just thought I could help since I know Danish and could get Danish sources. There's still room for improvement in the article :) //Replayful (talk | contribs) 14:55, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
Just finished the last few articles needing citations and/or footnotes. I'll let the cleanup listing reset this week and add some new targets. I think this week will be a big drop in cleanup issue count and we're already halfway (54%) to goal. czar 00:54, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

We're two thirds (67%) of our way to goal! New cleanup tags added for your consideration above: Factual verification needed and Unreliable source cited. Take a peek and if you struggle with any article, bring it here for discussion as you're likely not alone. czar 04:04, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

This has unfortunately resulted in quite a few articles being stubbified, which has reversed some of the progress we made with the stub expansion drive. So if anyone has the time and energy to expand some of these stubs, that'd be appreciated. --Grnrchst (talk) 10:04, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

We're 85% to goal! Very close to a historical low number of cleanup tasks (56 remain and low is 53, from the 2019 drive). I'll pick up some expansions again once we're down to zero. The way I see it, those articles were stubs but just weren't classified correctly, beneath the cleanup tags and unverified material. czar 12:52, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Down to just a handful now! czar 04:13, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
Seeing those articles as already stubs is a good way of looking at it. Amazing to see the cleanup backlog down so low! There's only a dozen or so left, which has put it down to a fraction of a percentage point! Excellent work on getting through this, to you and everyone else involved. --Grnrchst (talk) 08:13, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Challenges

There are a few cleanups that look particularly challenging and I thought I'd list them here for consideration separate from the list above, in case someone is interested in a meatier project. czar 16:20, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

resolved

Asterisks for discussions that still have further possible follow-up/expansion despite the cleanup being addressed

100%

(386/386)

🎊🎊 100%! We're officially at zero cleanup items—the first time in three cleanup drives since 2017, with over 2200 issues addressed. Since 2017, our scope has tripled to nearly 3000 articles on the strength of new translations, new articles, and revisiting and retagging decades-old articles up to today's standards. Some of these final cleanup items were pretty dense challenges looming for over seven years. Congrats to all contributors and looking forward to the next community drive. czar 17:24, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Viscaaaa! Amazing work everyone. --Grnrchst (talk) 18:17, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Huzzah! Congrats to everyone who's been banging away at this for months and months. I hope I am finally forgiven for adding all those anarchist biographies a few years back, haha. -- asilvering (talk) 23:39, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Timelines on country articles

Latest comment: 2 months ago15 comments4 people in discussion

Do we need Timeline sections on the "anarchism in X country" articles? Since they were added to a few lately (for example) I figured we should discuss before continuing. I'm of two minds: Since they should be sourced to remain in the article, I think they're largely duplicative of what is already in the article. I can see the argument that it's a useful navigational aid, but I'd sooner see that as a sidebar in the related section than rehashing all of the events in the article. I think they make the most sense when the dates can otherwise span multiple articles, like Timeline of the Spanish Civil War or Chronology of the Paris Commune. Courtesy ping @AnarchistHistory czar 22:36, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

First I'd like to say that I am not a big fan of the timelines, even the ones I've made. If there is a better alternative I am in favour of it.
However, my issue is that there is a lot of information about anarchism across Wikipedia that cannot be easily accessed from a central place. So I think if the timelines were to be deleted and those bits of information were slowly added that could be good. AnarchistHistory (talk) 03:51, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
@AnarchistHistory: In terms of a centralised place for links to other articles, we have the Outline of anarchism, the anarchism sidebar, anarchism bottombar and the Anarchism Portal. Are these along the lines of what you're looking for? Would you be interested in expanding and maintaining any of these? --Grnrchst (talk) 08:12, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
Those are very interesting - I wasn't aware of how good Outline of anarchism in particular is. Since you are both more experienced editors of Wikipedia I will defer to your judgement. I will probably do some work on Outline of anarchism soon. AnarchistHistory (talk) 09:59, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
If your aim is to improve navigability, which I think is a very important and valuable task to take on, then the outline and our various sidebars and bottombars are the way to go. I look forward to seeing the improvements you have in store for it! --Grnrchst (talk) 10:32, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
By the way, I'd recommend reading the Manual of Style on Lists as well. It may prove helpful for developing the outline. --Grnrchst (talk) 11:19, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
Believe it or not, the anarchism portal has 2k views/month. That's not huge compared to many articles, but it's miles and miles ahead of the views by page watchers (which is... 9. not a typo). -- asilvering (talk) 22:16, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
I had no idea the portal was that popular! Maybe we should do a wee drive to improve it then, because from the looks of it, it's definitely in need of some TLC. --Grnrchst (talk) 13:15, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Now that AH has explained their reasoning for including them is for navigability, I'm definitely questioning their inclusion more. So many of them seem to just be repeating information that's already in the article, which makes me question why they're needed at all (wouldn't this just make timelines a "see again" section?). Sometimes they introduce new information, but then I'm left wondering why that info hasn't been incorporated into the prose rather than shoved into an undetailed list. Also citations are completely absent from many entries in many of the lists, which carries its own set of problems.
We definitely could be taking more steps to improve navigability and simplify our presentation of information, but I don't think timelines in pre-existing regional history articles are the way to go about it. --Grnrchst (talk) 09:32, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Do you think we might do well to break out the timeline from Outline of anarchism into a separate Timeline of anarchist history? -- asilvering (talk) 22:13, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
I think if the timeline grows long enough it'd be worth doing a content fork, ditto for the other sections in the outline. We'll see how AH's work on it goes :) --Grnrchst (talk) 08:51, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
I'm done with the timeline, but that's only because I'm not including events that I don't think are significant enough to warrant inclusion. If we were to include every time a major book was published or an anarchists was assassinated or executed... I'd be happy to do that but I feel like it could clutter that Outline of anarchism too much. AnarchistHistory (talk) 13:09, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
That's good to hear you're being selective! Don't worry about adding things you think aren't vital to know about, we don't want this to be an indiscriminate collection of information, just the most important events. :) --Grnrchst (talk) 13:14, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Yes, ideally (imo) a timeline should only contain items that are parts of a larger narrative. That is, it should be reasonably apparent to a reader that the items link to each other in some way, which is a higher bar than simply assembling items that are about similar things or could be categorized in similar ways. They don't need to be so directly linked that each entry follows directly to the next (ie, "this happened, and so this happened"), but you'd want them to be related enough that you could write a narrative paragraph (or paragraphs) that included all of them without having to reach too far. -- asilvering (talk) 16:09, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I've removed them. Feel free to restore the text from the article history as non-list prose where there are reliable secondary sources.
I think the best example of a timeline article on Wikipedia is likely Timeline of the far future. If there is a useful way to display the timeline events, perhaps in a multicolumn format (I'm thinking of a bibliography article on I can't remember), it could be worth splitting the timeline from the outline. For now, the outline article is likely sufficient. czar 22:15, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Recent literature (2024 Q1/Q2)

Latest comment: 5 months ago2 comments1 person in discussion

For not-as-recent lit, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Anarchism/Recent literature

New thread for 2024 and anything we've previously missed. Feel free to add! czar 03:05, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Books

  • Johnson, Steven (May 14, 2024). The Infernal Machine: A True Story of Dynamite, Terror, and the Rise of the Modern Detective. New York: Crown. ISBN 978-0-593-44395-8.

Articles

Book/film reviews

Journals

Special issues

czar 03:05, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

FAR for Anarky

Latest comment: 2 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I have nominated Anarky for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 04:40, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Latest comment: 2 months ago7 comments4 people in discussion

The Murder of Björn Söderberg contains no interlanguage links to the Swedish language https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bj%C3%B6rn_S%C3%B6derberg

I tried to do this but get error messages and I'm afraid my knowledge of the more technical aspects of Wikipedia is pretty limited AnarchistHistory (talk) 11:36, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

@AnarchistHistory: This comes down to Wikidata categorisation. en-wiki's "Murder of Björn Söderberg" is categorised as an event, while the other wiki's "Björn Söderberg" articles are categorised separately as biographies, so they each have different separate wikidata entries. It does seem a little silly on the encyclopedia's end not to have these linked, but wikidata can be fickle about these things sometimes. --Grnrchst (talk) 11:40, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
This is strange. It should be possible to add it to the redirect - I recall a relatively recent discussion about that. -- asilvering (talk) 16:41, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
Okay, I sorted that out from the other direction (Swedish to English). Edit here. This could be fixed in the English-to-Swedish direction by creating a redirect page on sv-wiki called "Murder of Björn Söderberg" (but in Swedish) and doing the same type of edit, but since my Swedish knowledge is barely more than zero I'll leave that for someone else. -- asilvering (talk) 16:47, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
wikidata:Wikidata:Sitelinks to redirects is the Wikidata guidance on when and how to add an enwiki redirect as a sitelink on a Wikidata entry. What asilvering did and suggests sounds right but I've also seen Wikidata entries (perhaps mistakenly) just link the event as a sitelink under the biography's Wikidata entry. czar 12:48, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
I'd say linking the event is a mistake these days, since it throws a bit of a wrench into the metadata. Wikidata metadata gets picked up everywhere, so we should be avoiding cludgy fixes where we can. This ability to add redirects to wikidata items is pretty new, so I'm sure there are loads and loads of articles out there still dependent on the cludgy version. -- asilvering (talk) 17:40, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for sorting it asilvering! --Grnrchst (talk) 13:19, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Women in Green's 7th edit-a-thon

Latest comment: 1 month ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hey all. Next month, October 2024, Women in Green is hosting the second edition of our Around the World in 31 Days edit-a-thon. The aim is to write and review good articles about women from at least 31 different countries. In case anyone else here is interested, I thought I'd repost another list of anarchist women from around the world, this time based on the highest number of interwiki links:

If you fancy improving one of these articles, or even some others, I hope you take the opportunity to do so. You'll be able to find me coordinating the edit-a-thon and can ask any questions you have over at the event talk page. --Grnrchst (talk) 15:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Category:Spanish anarchists

Latest comment: 1 month ago8 comments3 people in discussion

This category might need some TLC but I wanted to ask around. Some thoughts:

  1. Remove Spanish anarcho-syndicalists and put everything in Spanish anarchists?
  2. Rename Anarchists from Catalonia to Catalan anarchists?
  3. Remove anarchists from the CNT members category, leaving the CNT members category for people not identified as anarchists who were in the CNT? Similar to how the FAUD in German anarchists and USI in Italian anarchists works.
  4. Potentially add a new category for Basque anarchists?

Link: Category:Spanish anarchists AnarchistHistory (talk) 14:54, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

  1. This category definitely seems redundant. With the exception of Farga i Pellicer and Saperas Mirò, all the entries were members of the CNT. Feel free to submit it as a category for discussion.
  2. See Category:Politicians from Catalonia; the "from Catalonia" thing is standardised as Catalonia is not (yet) a sovereign state.
  3. I would oppose this, the CNT was an enormous organisation (and is still pretty big!) and its membership is independently notable as a category.
  4. I'd go further and say we should have categories for each of the autonomous communities of Spain, following the lead of the Spanish Wikipedia's categories. This would help with the overlap between the Spanish anarchists and CNT members categories, as we could better sort between anarchists of different regions.
--Grnrchst (talk) 15:22, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
For #3, this strikes me as more likely to be a problem with the Germany/FAUD and Italian/USI categories than with Spanish/CNT. -- asilvering (talk) 15:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
@AnarchistHistory: Hey I see you've created the category for Basque anarchists, would you be interested in making categories for the other nationalities of Spain as well? --Grnrchst (talk) 14:44, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
My only issue is that nationalities outside of Catalan and Basque are generally not mentioned in the specific biographies of Spanish anarchists. AnarchistHistory (talk) 17:25, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
@AnarchistHistory: I'd be interested to know what sources you're looking at, as it's quite common to find references for other nationalities. E.g. Joaquín Ascaso as Aragonese;[12] José Pellicer Gandía as Valencian;[13] Francisco Jordán as Andalusian;[14] and Secundino Delgado as Canarian.[15] I understand that the Catalans and Basques are the best known nationalities outside of Spain, but I don't think it's the case that other nationalities aren't mentioned. --Grnrchst (talk) 15:07, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
This might just be my own ignorance of Spain's nationalities then. I can begin work :)
Following up on Category: Spanish anarcho-syndicalists, I have no idea how to submit it as a category of discussion. AnarchistHistory (talk) 16:14, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
@AnarchistHistory: I've opened a merge discussion. --Grnrchst (talk) 16:48, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Stub expansion project update

Latest comment: 1 month ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Following the changes during the cleanup drive, we are almost back to our goal of <20% of articles being stubs. I thought I'd take the moment to draw attention to some of our most popular stubs, which receive many daily average pageviews (DAPV) and as such would benefit the most from expansion:

If you fancy taking any of these on for improvement, please do. Even a little bit of tlc can go a long way. --Grnrchst (talk) 08:53, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Recategorized some miscategorized stubs and we're back at goal :) czar 14:47, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Anarchism/Archive_7&oldid=1255196869#Cleanup_drive"