Talk:Victims of Communism Memorial

message: See here. --Ghirla-трёп- 15:14, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, yeah, yeah.  Sounds like Vladimir Putin is engaging in WP:OR and disregarding WP:NPOV. :)  Turgidson 17:35, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I don't think it's written like an apology nor should it be. That would presume there's something to apologize for. OTOH, a communist (or aesthetic, etc.) critique of the memorial would be a good addition as long as it's not original research. Could you be specific about where the POV is? --D. Monack | talk 20:00, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

text: So what would be NPOV version? "Among the hundreds of invited guests, there were people who directly suffered from Communism regimes, as alleged by many historians and sociologists."? Quite frankly, I do not understand what is the problem. Are there sources saying that those people did not suffer during Communist regimes? WP:IDONTLIKEIT is not valid reason for POV accusations,  would you kindly come up with specific grievances, present valid, reliable sources supporting the other viewpoint and suggest other wording to improve the article? -- Sander Säde 10:24, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Actually, the Pinochet article uses the terms "dictator" and "dictatorship" at least 10 times (including in the second paragraph) in addition to detailing his regime's many human rights violations. Castro's article uses the term once in the fourth paragraph and couches it in the weasel words of "is largely recognized". That article has much more about the U.S. attempts to overthrow him than the many human rights violations of his regime. If anything, the Castro article is more of a whitewash than the Pinochet one. That said, I welcome any suggestions you have to make this article better. --D. Monack | talk 18:47, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Putin's reply

message: That new section -- it's all fine and dandy, but what does all that stuff about Lantos and Schroeder and Chirac have to do with the Victims of Communism Memorial?  I think the whole thing gotta go, unless there is a clear, direct, and relevant connection with the Memorial -- and even then, it should be waaaaaay shorter and to the point. (On the other hand, it can go into the articles on Lantos, Schroeder, Chirac, whatever.)   Turgidson (talk) 17:58, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Controversies

message: One crucial thing is missing here: a description of the monument. Is it just the replica of the Goddess of Democracy, or is there more to it? LordAmeth (talk) 13:42, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Description

message: There is no explanation in this article as to why this monument is in Washington DC. To my knowledge, there have never been any victims of communism in the United Sates. It's like putting up a monument to Lives Lost at Sea right in the middle of Iowa.
Can we have a little more background?Jarby (talk) 14:42, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Why is this monument in Washington DC?

message: Users at this article may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation‎ which came about as the organisation page lacks any demonstration of notability.  Fifelfoo (talk) 02:34, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Relevant AfD

message: I'm removing the boldfaced text below since it is somewhat misleading; the refrenced link is from the website and is not say, a quote from the sculptor nor does it bear any other relevance to warrant its inclusion in the paragraph. Secondly, the rather specific inclusion of the 100 million figure is just a sentence cherry-picked from the official memorial page. The included link did not directly state a stated purpose (pardon the redunancy), it was just picked from a page titled "History of Communism". Furthermore, the 100 million figure is well known to be an exagerrated figure from the 1997 "The Black Book of Communism"; contributors to the book even later spoke against the author, claiming an obsession to come up with a 100 million figure.
Lastly:
This article is titled Victims of Communism Memorial, the intent of the memorial is within the title.
This seemed like a bit of a dirty writing trick to me. Attempting to either attribute the sculptors intent as a "false" direct quote or to insert a commonly inflated figure as fact or both.
 --Tunafizzle (talk) 04:58, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality issues

message: How can they be a "victims of communism", when communism wasnt built in any country?..omg americans are so pathetic  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.80.170.74 (talk) 15:08, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This talk page is for discussing the article itself, not the subject of the article. Please limit comments to ways the article might be improved. Thank you. —D. Monack talk 01:19, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Victims of communism?

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 09:14, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:The Victims of Communism Memorial.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests September 2011 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 09:16, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Similar attempts to delete Goddess of Democracy images from Wikicommons can be found , and . --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:57, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:012 2007 Monumentul Victimelor Comunismului.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: Does anyone else think it's worth mentioning the Holodomor memorial being constructed one block away? Here is some background info via The Washington Post, The New York Times and Roll Call.  APK whisper in my ear 06:00, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that its worth mentioning, since the Washington Post and New York Times articles both discussed the relative distance between the two memorials. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 06:07, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another memorial one block away 

message: It can be argued that the section labelled "Critical reaction" is a criticism section. It only list negative reactions, and no neutral or positive reactions. As such one can argue that it should be balanced due to neutrality.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:31, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Critical reaction section 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Victims of Communism Memorial. 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/20110728155348/http://www.victimsofcommunism.org/about/ to http://www.victimsofcommunism.org/about/
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) 22:06, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: No, vesti.ru is not an RS as a Russian state owned source, especially on political subjects. As about the lead, I only made a slight reformatting. What was the problem? My very best wishes (talk) 11:28, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: You did not answer my questions. Of course there is nothing wrong with criticizing George W. Bush! But such criticism belongs to page about him. My very best wishes (talk) 16:26, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: You failed to respond to any valid points and questions raised above. This looks to me as a WP:CIR issue. Please do not restore again any poorly sourced and/or irrelevant materials. If that happens, I will have to ask an opinion of administrators. My very best wishes (talk) 16:46, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

text: Well, you say: I only readded the parts about the valid criticisms of George W. Bush ... It's valid anyway because he was accusing America of hypocrisy.. Again, this is not a valid justification for inclusion to this page. You could try to include this to page George W. Bush, but I am sure it will be quickly rejected there as undue and poorly sourced content. My very best wishes (talk) 22:13, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

text: That part is linked to this article. There is no reason to remove it. Mhorg (talk) 14:47, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Unreliable sources