Talk:Socialism in one country

message: :..though it was actually developed by Bukharin
Stalin's publications on the issue dated at least by 1924. What are Bukharin's? Mikkalai 23:25, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bukharin's proirity 

message: The current text reads:
:Mensheviks and Trotsky had also come to the conclusion that Socialism in One Country would be impossible at any level, but the latter based their idea on Trotsky's theory of Permanent Revolution, which was disputed by Lenin as potentially reactionary because it appeared to discourage building socialism in the USSR at all, given that the hoped-for communist revolutions in more advanced countries like Germany and France had not been carried through."
This statement includes a claim regarding the cause of Trotsky's (and others) rejection of the theory of Socialism in One Country.  The claim is that the rejection of Socialism in One Country is based upon the theory of Permanent Revolution.  That is certainly a reasonable POV.  However, another reasonable POV is that Socialism in One Country was rejected by the majority of Bolsheviks (prior to Stalin's assumption of power) based upon more general principles of Marxism.  Who deduced the alleged causal relationship?  If the editor has made the deduction, then it is original research and should be removed.
I will wait for 48 hours to allow editors time to provide verifiable sources that Trotsky's rejection of Socialism in One Country is based upon the Theory of Permanent Revolution, rather than upon more general theoretical considerations.  If an editor needs more time to find such a verifiable source, they should make a request here.   If no verifiable sources or requests for more time are made within 48 hours, I will delete the references to Permanent Revolution, both in the text in question, and in the subsequent text related to Lenin's writings against Trotsky. --BostonMA 16:53, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suspected Original Research or Opinion Requiring Attribution 

message: I'm just wondering if the word approbation is used correctly here. Approbation means approval and i suspect that the author is aiming for the opposite meaning.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.2.77.134 (talk) 21:52, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I suspect that the word should be "opprobrium", not "approbation".  DWorley (talk) 02:26, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  First paragraph. 

message: marxism.org being half of the 2 sources which ?legally? post a chapter of a book by an unknown, which references EH Carr who first published the term maybe.  EH Carr, The crucial point about Hitlerism is that its disciples not only believe in themselves, but believe in Germany. For the first time since the war a party appeared outside the narrow circles of the extreme Right which was not afraid to proclaim its pride in being German. It will perhaps one day be recognized as the greatest service of Hitlerism that, in a way quite unprecedented in German politics, it cut across all social distinctions, embracing in its ranks working men, bourgeoisie, intelligentsia and aristocrats. Germany Awake! became a living national faith  Darkstar1st (talk) 13:04, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The article is by the "unknown" writer, Duncan Hallas, who referenced the historian E.H. Carr.  The other passage from "the same blog" was written by Max Shachtman in 1933.  What btw is your point?  TFD (talk) 02:34, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: my point is he used the term national socialist, not socialism in one country.  Darkstar1st (talk) 03:56, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you think we should rewrite Wikipedia based on the terminology used in Trotskyist pamphlets in 1933?  TFD (talk) 04:09, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: that passage was from the lone source in the article, marxist.org.   Darkstar1st (talk) 04:20, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Marxism.org is not the source, it is a website that provide access to numerous sources.  You are aware that Shachtman's article was written before the website was set up?  TFD (talk) 14:12, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  poorly sourced/fringe term 

message: This page should not be speedily deleted because it is a great article that is very beneficial to history and politics learners.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.120.68.158 (talk) 13:19, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contested deletion 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012 
;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) 22:57, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  File:Nicolae Ceausescu.jpg Nominated for Deletion 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests March 2012 
;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.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant 
This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:57, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  File:Joseph Stalin.jpg Nominated for Deletion 

message: The quote by Marx and Engels from their 1882 introduction to the Communist Manifesto requires a secondary source because it is not clear what they were talking about, how it relates to socialism in one country or how subsequent people interpreted it. i can't find it and it should be removed if no sources can be found. TFD (talk) 17:30, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Marx and Engels on the Russian Revolution