Talk:Socialist Patients' Collective

message: The one RAF action credited to solely former SPK members is the bombing of the W. German embassy in Sweden.  Given that the SPK myth was largely influenced by German and US counter-terror, and the well-documented psyops against Sweden aimed at turning them against the USSR, I'd be interested in learning of any credible sources connecting the two.Healthisinyou (talk) 18:04, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Sweden, psyops, and the SPK

message: Is there any first hand information stating the charges against the SPK and telling what the defense argued at the trial?  The accounts I can find simply says that they refused to participate, and SPK-sources reject that they did anything illegal.Healthisinyou (talk) 18:08, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Trial

message: Jimbo Wales highly recommended to delete the article about the SPK and all links to the Wikipedia-project terrorism. See our recent Boston meeting, see the juridical proceedings of SPK against Wikipedia.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.56.208.239 (talk • contribs) .
*How can you delete the article? Everything in it has been taken from books about the SPK such as Hitler's Children  by Jillian Becker, or Televisionaries by Tom Vague. Its all based on sources and fact. Are you going to delete those books as well? ~ Unfortunate.
**I'd take this with a grain of salt.  Jimbo usually posts things like this himself rather than having anonymous IPs leave unsigned messages all over the place.  I'm guessing this is someone witha bone to pick about the article trying to bully his way through.  Of course, if Jimbo does come forward and say he thinks it should go I'll end up eating my words. --StuffOfInterest 12:00, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The www.psychassault.org site belongs to the CCHR front of the Church of Scientology, who aren't the most reliable of sources on the topic of psychiatry. AndroidCat 11:29, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What WAS 4.250 wrote are libelous, difamatory and punishable lies. 190.27.98.101 (talk) 02:18, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Lies or very badly informed: if anything, the SPK was "Leninist", def. but certainly not "NeoNazi", Horst Mahler (then RAF) was then no Nazi, SPK members did prepare for World Revolution, but why should Huber and his wife have joined in these war games?  This WAS guy also simply confuses SPK and RAF. I can understand if somebody gets carried away and writes complete nonsense, have done this myself, but this is a bit much.--Radh (talk) 06:09, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jimbo Wales highly recommended ... 

message: I made no recommendation about this article.  The anon ip number should be ignored.--Jimbo Wales 23:32, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I made no recommendation 

message: Concerning the lawyer of the SPK/PF(H), Ingeborg Muhler, I found this: 
http://www.spkpfh.de/Europe_against_EuthaNAZIa.htm#Ingeborg_Muhler —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.80.18.136 (talk) 22:07, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Concerning the lawyer of the SPK/PF(H), Ingeborg Muhler 

message: The links from the name Wolfgang Huber seem to point to another unrelated Wolfgang Huber. At least, the target page says nothing about SPK.
Oegat 00:17, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  link points strangely 

message: We are trying to have a (as complete as possible) list of the writings of the early, pre-RAF SPK and IZRU on the German, de WP page.--Radh (talk) 07:53, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Propaganda bibliography 

message: I tried to fill in and clarify the history, but I used a Google-translated page as a reference so it might be off as I couldn't make sense of all of it.  I've found that most histories read like hearsay and focus on Dr. Huber as a leader and a guru, with mental patients and students rallying behind him for no apparent reason, so I tried to fix.  It seems that these accounts conflate Huber with the 500-member SPK in order to condemn them all based on his alleged (an questionable) RAF ties.  While a handful of SPK members may have ALSO been involved with the RAF, this was definitely a distinct movement with distinct goals and theory that should be evaluated in its own right.  Also, many people assert that it was started because Huber got fired, but I don't think that's correct - is it possible that he wasn't fired til after he was let out of prison (a few sources say this, I think - it's Google Translate).Healthisinyou (talk) 18:20, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not saying that you're not making some valid points, but don't you think you simply have to be able to read their papers and essays and the book to be able to say something definite about the early spk? But, you have some valid points (and I for one am not able to answer your question on German WP right now). But: the Spk-Raf ties were not "alleged", although I do not know how Huber really thought about this, but some vocal members of the spk - at least towards the end of the group - really thought that Meinhof, Ensslin, Baader: Das sind unsere Kader! (were their Kader/cadre).--Radh (talk) 18:47, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: I had tried to straighten out the grammar in the lead, made it a bit more representative of the article body per WP:LEAD, and added some sources: edits, revert. Let's work out the problems. --JN466 17:09, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  "I've reverted your editions to the lead despite of your grammar and style could be better than mine. Nothing against you nor against your efforts (thanks!), but I found some inaccuarcies in your edition, that I will discuss here before changing the lead..." ... it continues here:  and here: - ClaudioSantos (talk) 17:38, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  For the long and hard job related to the current lead see:  -- ClaudioSantos (talk) 22:33, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Tidied again and fixed grammer. I've removed terms that, in my opinion, were non-sensical in English like "frontpatient". If you can explain what is meant by this term maybe we can find an English equivalent. FiachraByrne (talk) 05:27, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Revert

message: Forgive my ignorance but, so far as I can make out Huber was/is a psychiatrist. Was the patients' front composed of former psychiatric patients? With the references to illness and disease and using it as weapon, are they referring to all forms of illness or just mental illness? FiachraByrne (talk) 09:54, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I am pretty sure it was only mental illness from what I've read. Totnesmartin (talk) 10:24, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: ThanksFiachraByrne (talk) 10:46, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  No. They refer to all illness and expresively claim that distinction between 'mental' and 'physical' is just a false distinction product of a society based on merchandise and money. And you are also wrong thinking the patient's front were conformed with "former psychiatric patients". See for example: http://www.spkpfh.de/ProposalSPKtext.htm, http://www.spkpfh.de/Iatrarchy.htm and http://www.spkpfh.de/Preface_Sartre.htm -- ClaudioSantos (talk) 15:41, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  This should be mad clear in the article. --Error (talk) 17:47, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Mental illness, illness or both?

message: In addition to reducing the lengthy Lead section, I have inserted the new title, "Patients' Front/Socialist Patients' Collective (PF/SPK(H))", in the body of the article so that the relevant section is consistent with the Lead section. I hope that this is accurate.--Soulparadox (talk) 12:10, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correction of inconsistency 

message: Are there any sources, other than "their" own web site, indicating that this group still exists in 2019, or even after 2000? I'm inclined to question Notability. IAmNitpicking (talk) 12:49, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Real, or just a historical footnote? 

message: Maybe there should be a clarification of how "real" this group actually was. Were these people being completely serious? Was it some elaborate satire? It seems like something conservatives would've made up to parody European New Left groups. 2600:8801:710D:EA00:AC5B:F70F:80FC:CD82 (talk) 20:49, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Joke or serious?