Talk:Communist Party of Kampuchea

message: A POV-check tag was added earlier. It would be helpful if the editor who added the tag could point out which issues in the article are problematic for him/her. --Soman 11:51, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV? 

message: A tag for a merger with Khmer Rouge has been added to this page. I oppose a merger, as the term KR is more problematic than so. KR is used not only to describe the members of CPK, but also its succesor PDK and people around CPK/PDK (like all soldiers of RAK, NADK, etc.). I had instead proposed that the messy Khmer Rouge article be merged with the chapter on Cambodian history 1975-1979, with retaining separate articles for separate organizations. --Soman 11:57, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes I agree. 216.105.64.140 (talk) 02:54, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

text: I think we need a hatnote that clarifies the exact difference between the Khmer Rouge and Communist Party of Kampuchea. What do you think of this?VR talk 06:14, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I don't think it solves the issue - 'KR' is a term used broadly, for political parties (CPK+PDK+CNDP), members of front organizations, the DK government, the DK state, soldiers, military units, etc. It's inherently ambiguous and unsuitable as wikipedia entry. It's preferred only due to COMMONNAME, but as encyclopedia we would be better off having KR as a disambiguation page. --Soman (talk) 14:51, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  ok so what would you move Khmer Rouge to? Something like Khmer Rouge (regime)? VR talk 08:49, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd make KR into a dab page - briefly explaining the history of the term (when it came into use, how it has been applied since), with links to CPK, PDK, NADK, DK, etc. --Soman (talk) 11:17, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  I get that. But Khmer Rouge is still a full fledged article and that needs to be moved somewhere before KR can become a dab page.VR talk 13:10, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger 

message: The veracity of the alleged CPK flag seems highly suspect to me for a few reasons
1: In researching the CPK and associated Khmer Rouge, I have not once seen this flag described or alluded to. All accounts which refer to a flag of the Kampuchean Communist party describe or depict the flag of Democratic Kampuchea, some variant of the Khmer Issarak flag, a plain red flag or (erroneously) the crutch-cross flag of the Monatio movement.
2: The Hammer and Sickle emblem featured is virtually identical to that which appears on the second and third generation USSR flags, having almost the same area of definition with the only divergence to be found near the grip of the round sickle. When scaled up, the USSR emblem is an almost perfect match
3: The file for CPKbanner.svg cites the New USSR flag as a source. When compared, the hammer and sickle matches up perfectly and it appears that this design was arrived at by merely removing the laurel wreath from the New USSR flag. The other source, CPKbanner.png has no verifiable sources (dead link) and is original work
If anyone can cite information which would confirm or deny my suspicion that this is not and has never been the flag of the CPK, it would be very helpful. From what is avalible to me at present, it looks like someone threw together a generic communist flag and posted it as that of the Angka  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.162.243.84 (talk) 23:44, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Look, I created File:CPKbanner.PNG, based on a photo of a CPK conference venue. It was not a generic communist flag, but based on exact measurements of the photo in question. The .svg version is more problematic, as it uses a style of hammer and sickle not generally used by Asian communist parties. --Soman (talk) 15:04, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flag 

message: I believe that the word farmer is wrong here, it should be replaced by slave or forced worker.Xx236 (talk) 08:00, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The project is decribed twice, once labor camps, once collective farms.Xx236 (talk) 08:16, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Farmer vs. slave, forced worker 

message: Please stop adding random ideologies in the infobox. CPK did not adhere to Maoism, although there was a Maoist minority in the party (which was violently purged). --Soman (talk) 17:46, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: See Khmer–Chinese Friendship Association --Soman (talk) 17:51, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maoism? 

message: So the multitude of ideologies listed in the infobox has been a problem for some time. The current version is an absolute mess, with a mish-mash of "CommunismAgrarianism"Cambodia's brutal Khmer Rouge regime". BBC News. 4 August 2014. .AutarkyKiernan, B. (2004). How Pol Pot Came to Power. New Haven: Yale University Press. pp. 19–20.MaoismMilitarismMarxism-LeninismBullock, Allan; Trombley, Stephen, eds. (1999). The New Fontana Dictionary of Modern Thought (3rd ed.). p. 458.Khmer nationalismDuong, Keo (2015). "Nationalism and mass killing: The khmer rouge extreme nationalism against Vietnam". SHS Encounters Cambodia. .National CommunismAgrarian socialismUltranationalism"
The problem here is the attempt to make a random collection of every single statement made by a bunch of different commentators. You can argue that the Khmer Rouge regime 'ultranationalist' in the way it acted, whatever that means, but fielding it as an ideology for the CPK is directly misleading. Same for 'militarism'. 'Agrarianism' is well, completely wrong and not in any way supported by any reference. National Communism is a complete misrepresentation of that term. Maoism is wrong for reason listed above. And so forth. --Soman (talk) 19:51, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur with Soman's analysis and support the recent trimming of the infobox.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 17:51, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ideologies in infobox