Talk:Marx's theory of alienation

message: There is three different gender issues going on within this article. There's the use of he or she, they, them, himself, he his. I strongly believe only one should be used, however, I'm guessing most editors on Wikipedia prefer the male gender since I fixed it but it keeps getting revert. --MurderByDeadcopy"bang!" 17:33, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Based on what you just wrote, I don't believe English is your first language. There are three different gender usages in the article right now. I didn't make any grammatical errors, I fixed them. I don't believe you made them either, you just don't want them corrected. Based on that info alone this article needs to be tagged until it is fixed. --MurderByDeadcopy"bang!" 18:31, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammar gender issues 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Marx's theory of alienation. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080508204902/http://media.pfeiffer.edu/lridener/DSS/Marx/ch6.htm to http://media.pfeiffer.edu/lridener/DSS/Marx/ch6.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:40, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: you have two lines of criticism that are largely incomprehensible. what exactly is the criticism? the proles have destiny in their hands? like what? if they overthrow the gov't like in russia? how many russias have there been since that happened? marx was right 9/10 occasions. china and vietnam were not worker rebellions they were political movements against foreign occupiers. so where is this frenchie's criticism at all valid in the last 100 years of history? maybe you can elaborate because this seems like weak 'criticism'.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.74.226.149 (talk) 00:20, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: @174.74.226.149 Malokuir (talk) 21:08, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  critcism 

message: The phrase "at home" in this section is used but not well defined. For example, "The terms Entfremdung ("alienation" or "estrangement") ... indicate that people are "alienated" because they are not at home in the modern social world". Does this mean they do not belong, do not have their needs met, feel isolated? The term is further used to define the forms (eg. "People are objectively alienated if the social world they inhabit is not a home" ). 
The idea of their world being "a home" or not is not well explained and could be confusing— at least it was to me. Given the wide range of similar meanings feeling "at home" can mean, this could use elaboration, in the form of giving context of how Marx or Hegel originally described or defined the term.
I am not confident enough to make this change, and am writing this because it was personally confusing to me. If it seems clear and is just my misunderstanding, I apologize.
 129.110.242.94 (talk) 18:41, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarity on the term "at home" in "Forms of alienation"