User Talk: Goszei

Server-side rendered snapshot of this editor's Wikipedia talk page discussions.

{{Archives|index=none}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
| algo=old(30d)
| archive=User talk:Goszei/Archive %(counter)d
| counter=5
| maxarchivesize=50K
| archiveheader={{Automatic archive navigator}}
| minthreadsleft=4
| minthreadstoarchive=1
}}

June 2026

25px|alt=Information icon ↗ Hello, I'm Zackmann08. Thank you for your recent contributions to :Kowloon Walled City ↗. When you were adding content to the page, you added duplicate arguments ↗ to a template which can cause issues with how the template is rendered. In the future, please use the preview ↗ button before you save your edit; this helps you find these errors as they will display in yellow at the top of the page. You can also install the userscript ↗ found here to help find and eliminate these errors. Thanks. '''Zackmann''' (Talk to me ↗/What I been doing ↗) 00:30, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

Martov Edit

Hi,

I believe that the characterization of Martov opposing the "Bolshevik coup" is loaded language that mars the picture of the historical events.

I believe Martov was more against what the Bolsheviks represented, that is Soviet Power than something intrinsic to the Bolshevik party. The way it is written makes it as if he's just against something authoritarian in nature surrounding the Bolshevik party. Reinassanceman1517 (talk) 18:55, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

:Martov supported the soviets when they re-appeared in February 1917 (seeing as he was a leader of the most famous one in 1905). What he vehemently opposed was the October Revolution, which was the Bolshevik seizure of power (i.e. coup) that this sentence is referring to. — Goszei (talk ↗) 19:20, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
::What was the difference between the Soviets before and after the October revolution? Could it have been that Martov and the Mensheviks were against the broader theme of the Soviets as the some governing body? Remember the Left SRs originally were part of the ruling coalition of the Soviet government, not just the Bolsheviks. What was it that made the left SRs willing to join the Soviet Government and not the Mensheviks? Reinassanceman1517 (talk) 19:30, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
:::To keep things brief and grounded in the sources: Getzler's biography (which I read in full in order to originally write this particular sentence, as well as the article as a whole) makes it clear that Martov wasn't against the soviets as a governing body, but wanted a multi-party soviet democracy. The Mensheviks didn't walk out to protest a "Soviet Revolution" (they were there to participate in the Soviet Congress, after all), but specifically to protest the Bolsheviks' unilateral armed takeover. Because it was a unilateral seizure of power by one faction, "Bolshevik coup" accurately reflects the historical reality and the cited sources regarding what they were protesting. — Goszei (talk ↗) 21:19, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Nomination of :Team Shanghai Alice ↗ for deletion

<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">48px|alt=|link= ↗</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article :Team Shanghai Alice ↗, to which you have significantly contributed ↗, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines ↗ or if it should be deleted ↗.

The discussion will take place at '''Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Team Shanghai Alice ↗''' until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by ''SDZeroBot'' (talk) 01:03, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

GA/FA?

Hey there, I was wondering if you'd be interested in taking some of the articles you've written to GAN ↗ or even FAC ↗ at some point? You've done some truly incredible work, and it'd be great to see it get recognised and more widely shared. --Grnrchst (talk) 19:19, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

:I've already talked with them regarding this and they were open to doing it, it's just seems like they have not did it yet. IMO, the articles need to be polished a bit but are overall in great shape and will be ready for GAN. FAC is a bit tougher task. Vacant0 (talk • contribs ↗) 19:34, 9 July 2026 (UTC)
::Oh aye, FAC isn't to be taken on lightly. I've only done two and they were intense processes. Quite a few of these look GA ready though. --Grnrchst (talk) 19:45, 9 July 2026 (UTC)
:::Thank you both for the compliments. I do plan to eventually pursue GA for the best of my articles. Perhaps you two could point out which ones you have in mind as ready, or which ones are almost there? My free time thus far has been almost entirely consumed by reading, understanding, drafting, and just getting the information out there so readers can benefit. I've noticed a real increase in the quality of online discussions around certain topics I have written about, which to be honest is my core motivation in writing for Wikipedia. Those GA badges would just be the cherry on top, though I think further raising the visibility of some of these topics through a DYK on the front page could be another motivator for me. — Goszei (talk ↗) 19:57, 9 July 2026 (UTC)
::::Honestly I'd consider a substantial amount of these already ready for GAN, but if I were to select the most obvious shoe-ins, I'd probably go with the articles on Eduard Bernstein ↗, Friedrich Engels ↗, Karl Kautsky ↗, Rosa Luxemburg ↗ and ''Das Kapital ↗''. The one on Rosa would probably get picked up relatively quickly, as Poland is covered under the developing countries wikicontest ↗; we'd also appreciate it over at Women in Green ↗, where she's been on our Hot 100 for a while.
::::{{Tq|"I've noticed a real increase in the quality of online discussions around certain topics I have written about"}} This is always wonderful to see, it's a good reminder that what we do here matters. --Grnrchst (talk) 21:16, 9 July 2026 (UTC)