Talk:Socialist Unity Centre of India

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
	This article is maintained by the Indian politics workgroup.
More information about this article... ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

The article on Socialist Unity Centre of India has a number of factual errors and subjective comments of the author. Readers are advised to refer to the official website of the party www.suci.in

An SUCI supporter 19th May 2005

so in such case; exactly which are the so-called "factual errors and subjective comments"? --Soman 15:40, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

Quote from the article: "The SUCI militants call themselves the vanguard of people, believing they will once overthrow capitalism and replace it with their aim, pure Communism."

Comment: I have not encountered a single SUCI militant (and I have met quite a few) that calls himself/herself the vanguard of the people. On the contrary what they say is that their party is the vanguard of the proletariat. Further, I have never heard them say that 'once (they) overthrow capitalism they will replace it with their aim, pure Communism'. What I have heard them say is that an anti-capitalist socialist revolution can alone overthrow capitalism and establish the dictatorship of the proletariat.

The SUCI has so many publications, periodicals and books, many of them in english. Why doesn't the writer of the article refer to those instead of making fanciful comments? Sabyashildeb 17:47, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

This article is not in anyway a real depiction of SUCI and its activities. SUCI is the one and only genuine political party in India. Can you mention any other one who tries to defend people's rights in India? Who ever wrote this article has no idea of what SUCI does. And I plead to the gentleman that he better try to know SUCI by not through any hear and say or stuff that he might encounter accidentally, but by being along with it in its activities. Sekhar 22-06-06

Your contributions are valued, but at wiki one needs to try to write from an outside perspective. Claims needs to be backed up by sources. For example, the notion that "only communist party of the Indian soil" is of course something that is bound to be disputed by many other sections of the Indian left. In change, you could write "SUCI considers itself as the only genuine communist party in India". Moreover, the terms 'Comrade' is not a term to be used, as this is used within the party. The same goes for ephitets as 'Shri' (which followers of other Indian parties like to induct in other articles). Thirdly, the language cannot be as bombastic as in the current version (drops of blood, etc.). That is appropriate in a party pamphlet, but not in an encyclopedia. --Soman 10:57, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 Listed for deletion 2 "POV" 3 Ha ha ha, this shit on Wiki? 4 hi 5 A party of mural painters? 6 Current Page 7 Self-identification of SUCI 8 Attention Soman 9 NPOV 10 Formation of SUCI 11 Minor party? 12 Joynagar 13 Bengal education issue 14 History of SUCI 15 Article 16 For favour of the reading of other Editors 17 Fair use rationale for Image:Sucipe.jpg 18 recent edits 19 Edit Warring 20 silly statement

[edit] Listed for deletion

After the counter-revolution in the erstwhile Soviet Union and other East European countries, our party in its endeavour to defend communism and Marxism-Leninism reinvigorated its ideological-philosophical movement, took powerful initiatives to regroup and rejuvenate the world communist movement and, as a first step, undertook the task of developing a mighty, militant anti-imperialist movement throughout the world with the real communist forces combining in its core as its driving force.

The SUCI vows to uphold the banner of socialist revolution and proletarian internationalism with every drop of blood of its leaders and cadres.

The current SUCI general secretary is Nihar Mukherjee. SUCI has a webpage and the party publishes Proletarian Era, where the imperialists and US warmoners are often criticised. The party has excellent contacts with international communist parties as well.

not only NPOV, but complete communist propaganda. --Constanz - Talk 13:45, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

It would seem that the article is not well developed, and probably doesn't follow the desired goal of NPOV, however the article infers that there are members of the party that have been and are part of the sitting government, which would seem to estabilish notibility. If POV is the concern, my thought is it should be flagged as such and rewritten by someone with an objective viewpoint, not deleted. There's my two bits on the matter, for what it's worth. --Mr Minchin 22:56, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "POV"

I don't see any problem with the article now in terms of NPOV/POV. —Sesel 17:08, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ha ha ha, this shit on Wiki?

SUCI is a closed community of unintelligent cretins. Their leader Ghosh used to speak on podiums that boasted his own blown up photograph clad in red and flowers. The leaders live in debauchery while professing asceticism to the masses and activists.

[edit] hi

hi

[edit] A party of mural painters?

A party of mural painters across India? Interesting! Kuntan 04:22, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Current Page

This page is officially being edited by SUCI and we assure that the information posted here will be according to Wiki style. However, at the moment, what ever has been posted is directly from the party website and needs editing. It will take time for us to edit it. In the mean time we request you not to change the content and we shall ourselves refine it. The only necessity is time. If edited by some one and not acceptable to SUCI, it will be changed. This is a party decision and will be executed. Regards SUCIIndia

A party of nitwits, must you be then. Your totalitarian attitude has no use here. Aren't you ashamed of what you just said? Your party's decision, you say? Why should others bother about it? Wikipedia is an encylopedia. Neutrality is one of its pillars. Do you check and oakay every published material that mentions your party? Maybe, you are not used to being mentioned? Kuntan 17:54, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Dear Kuntan, Don't be angry! It is of no use here as well. It will not help you in any way. It is a party decision and it will be executed. If you try to be constructive with us, we can maintain this page well, else you will spend all your time trying to revert it and we will definitely revert it to one that we feel like. So put in your comments here and we shall see what is acceptable to us and what is not. We are not worried of what press writes about us. If you need to know SUCI work for it, know it from inside and then try to creatively criticize. Anger is of now use, I must say! We are not ashamed of our stand as we are convienced of what we are doing. Neutrality is not carrying the propoganda of the capitalist media. Regards SUCI India

Interesting, really. So, your party decided to make Wikipedia its party organ? You are very optismistic about the execution plan, that sounds really wonderful. Who is this "WE" that you are talking about? The other editors also will be curious to know, I am sure. You didn't say at which level your party made that decision. Kuntan 19:12, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Self-identification of SUCI

User:Kuntan tries, for reasons difficult to understand, to remove a passage that specifies that SUCI considers itself as the only communist party in India. To understand the character of SUCI as a political party the thesis of SUCI that they are the sole communist party in India is highly relevant, since it conditions the relations of SUCI towards the rest of the Indian left. --Soman 14:53, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

If you care to put such theses in, you will also have put in the antitheses from its counterparts to gain balance. Both would better be done without. Kuntan 15:04, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

...isn't obvious that other communist groups in India would not agree to that thesis...? --Soman 15:07, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

What is obvious or not is a matter of opinion. I mentioned a very relevant (obviously so) point earlier that this party has had no place in any major polemics in leftist movement.You chose to axe it for reasons that you didn't care to mention. Kuntan 15:46, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I've rewritten the description of how the party positions itself and its ideology, with some extra details and a specific source citation. All of this is seems relevant to me; what good is an article about a political party that doesn't describe its political positions? Wikipedia doesn't need to rebut every claim described in an article, though if there are reliable sources describing a notable response to the party's platform, then including that might make sense. CDC (talk) 21:30, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

The fact is that none of these says anything that can place this party. It is more like a cult group than a political party. The personality cult fostered around their leader should have been mentioned before anything else. But Soman won't allow it to be included, which is bad. Kuntan 21:48, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

SUCI India writes: We (our party) is interested in as well keeping up with the spirit of Wikipedia. But we will not be accomodating capitalist propoganda about us being highlighted as facts. Secondly we will as well want our political stand clear to public. Mr. Kuntan says that we are a cult group which simply not the fact. If you count the shear number of districts that SUCI has activities in, it will already prove to you that we are larger than many so called communist parties in power. And we are not at all worried of numbers, as our interest is in quality and not quantity. Mr. Kuntan may post the so called 'anti-thesis' on 'WHY SUCI' to our email address. We will clarify ourselves to you, if you are really interested. Thanks to Mr. Soman for understanding that we dont intent to use Wiki as a means of promulgation. Those who have observed us closely will know that the capitalist media does not write about us and it is only our publications through which you can know about our activities. For this we suggest you refer to PEra which is freely available in our website. Regards SUCI India.

I have been engaged with the student's organisation of SUCI, AIDSO for about 5 yrs.(1999-2004) And I can tell with all responsibility that AIDSO is a highly undemocratic organisation.

It is  a handful of leaders who enjoy the rights to take all the decisions and the ordinary cadres have to agree with it.
There is no platform for voicing their grievances.  In our unit not a single unit conference was held in 5 yrs.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.93.163.137 (talk) 13:05, 11 October 2007 (UTC) 

[edit] Attention Soman

Hey Soman, Since you don't pay heed to message put on your user page I choose to talk here. You are trying to accommodate the interests of some unscrupulous editors who repeatedly vandalised and removed tags at random, it seems. You have not even bothered to correct the murals, which I explained to you were irrelevant here. although you reverted my edits unminduflly. Your reaction or lack of it looks monopolistic. Kuntan 15:00, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I really don't see any reason to change the term 'mural' in the text. At least not to 'graffiti'. 'Graffiti' generally refers to something quite different, implying that it is a form of vandalism. Usually, 'wall-paintings' is the general term in Indian politics, but for me 'mural' is more or less synomynous to that. --Soman 15:09, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Where did you find that graffiti implied vandalism? Wall-writing is the term, not wall painting. And if you think it is synonymous with mural, you are wrong. You could check a dictionary before you are positive about that. Kuntan 15:35, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

You may read the article mural, and find out that it refers to the exact same phenomenon. --Soman 10:03, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I find there exactly the opposite of what you say. I find graffiti and understand that it could be slogans written on a wall. You are wrong and your defence is so wretched. Kuntan 18:58, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, we obviously have different interpretations of this. Of course boundaries are not always exact. For me [1] is a mural, whereas [2] is graffiti. For me the SUCI wallpaintings fall in the former category. --Soman 13:02, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV

The neutrality aspect. At the given moment what we have posted is a very brief description about SUCI. We have also not put in our party website material straight away. The flag will be repalced with a static one soon. SUCI India

Nowadays we don't say "we" to mean I. Kuntan 09:23, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

We are we as though it is an individual who is editing the text at the moment, it is as a collective decission. So Mr. Kuntan don't worry about the grammer. SUCI India

I have put the NPOV back. User:SUCIIndia deleted it without any discussion. After the edit of User:SUCIIndia it is a clear POV article. Statements like "This led him to organize SUCI strictly following the Marxist methodology with a handful of compatriots", "These preconditions being fulfilled in the course of a relentless ideological, philosophical, political and cultural struggle over several years, the SUCI emerged through a founding convention on the 24th April, 1948" , "As the continuer of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Mao Zedong, Shibdas Ghosh contributed to the growth and development of the world communist movement; a fact asserted by the international collaborations that SUCI has with other communist parties world wide.", "As with every revolutionary party, innumerable SUCI cadres and leaders have been victims, are still being victims of state terror, brutal repression, imprisonment, and assassination. "etc. are not only POV but not verified as well. You can say SUCI claims so and so, but this is different. Please revert this to an earlier acceptable version and remove the tag. Clt13 10:04, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

It does not make a POV article because that it is posted by activists of SUCI. The paragraph that you have mentioned is very factual and any one who needs to verify can do so by going detailed into our website. A claim is to be varified by the reader and not you. Well you read E=MC^2 and it is upto you to verify it, not upto Einstein to prove it to you every time you ask for a proof. SUCI India.

You are right when you say "It does not make a POV article because that it is posted by activists of SUCI." But one cannot verify the claim that "SUCI strictly following the Marxist methodology " or " Shibdas Ghosh contributed to the growth and development of the world communist movement" or the claim that "SUCI is a revolutionary party" by looking at SUCI website. You very well know that many political parties in India claim to be communist or revolutionary but you may not accept it by visiting their website. Please do not present your claims as facts. As you mentioned, whether a party is revolutionary or not is to be decided by the reader; not by me nor by you. It is not decided by publishing a research paper as well. SO there is no comparison with E=MC^2 nor is it appropriate to put such claims in an encyclopedia. Please also understand that, in a discussion you should listen to others. If you remove the POV tag, immediately after adding some comments, it might appear that you are not willing to listen to others and you are merely interested in an edit war. Keep the tag until a consensus is evolved. It means that there is a debate going on this dispute Clt13 12:03, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

There is a percpective difference here. You don't consider science as part of marxist ideology; whereas for us Marxism is the science of all sciences and thus it has direct relationships to E=MC^2. The existance of a communist party as a communist party can be varified as objectively as any scientific principles. If not, then it is not a communist part and thus we say that there are preconditions for even forming a real communist party. So one can verify whether SUCI strictly follows Marxist methodology and whether Com. Ghosh contributed to the growth and development of the world communist movement. His analysis of world wide political situation during his time of existance and the continuence of his idiology and philosophy but his followers and how they are appreciated world over is enough as varifications for such claims. SUCI is a revolutionary party and this is more than a claim. Our cader strenght proves and the fact that we are not ready to accept the registration as a formal party in India by signing up to defend Indian constitution is already well enough for any one to suggest that we are for revolution and we don't believe in this so called 'democracy' which is more of hipocracy. A reader has no choice of deciding whether the party is revolutionary or not, unless he/she gets to see an organization from inside. So we say that if you need to know us more come to us, work with us and then critically assess. Else don't be a carrier of the capitalist media. If some one is determined to propogate about us, things that are not facts, we will not let it happen just like that. As being new to this, we were not sure of what this POV tag was about. As now we are clear, we will keep it there till a consensus is evolved. But for sure, till then we will maintain what has been decided by us collectively. So I suggest please dont try to alter the present shape as we dont think that it is propoganda material. The statments are factual and as concise as possible. We as well don't intent to fight with any one including CPI (M). If any deaths have occured due to some issues, irrespective of which side has been killed we value the human life involved. So we are not trading charges with CPI (M) for any claims to the number that they killed or what ever. These are minor issues which diviates the attention from what we want to really communicate to the masses. We are no more a minor party. You must understand that our trade union is already India's 4th or 5th largest and in cader strenght we are far bigger than many so called communist parties in India. We are not interested to be a registered party and thus you may not see us listed with membership numbers. SUCI India

Your arguments are false, naive and not worth replying. Your party has been registered with the State Election Commission in West Bengal, isn't it? Your party swore that it wanted to overhrow the Indian State to get registered thus? Do your MLAs swear by your Ghosh when they are elected to Legislatvie Bodies? So, when you say "we are not ready to accept the registration as a formal party in India by signing up to defend Indian constitution" it is either falsity or remarkable ignorance. No one in his right sense would consider science to be part of an ideology, however great it is. Statements like "Marxism is the science of all sciences" smack of extreme naivety and intellectual cretinism. You seem to have no idea of a very famous letter one Mr. Frederich Engels wrote, in which he said ideology was necessarily false. Kuntan 17:56, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Infact it is you who does not deserve any comments. We visited your page and found how much you are worth of replying. And thus sorry we dont entertain comments from you any more. SUCI India

Regarding Kuntan's comment, he should study the electoral archives at [3]. SUCI were registered for some elections, but not at this point. Currently the party contests elections only through independent candidates. Furthermore Kuntan seem to have no idea of the irony of first stating that a comment is not worth replying and then write a reply. --Soman 09:35, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Soman, your lack of understanding is pitiable. When I say "has been registered" it doesn't necessarily mean it is registered now. I deliberately used Present perect tense because I was not sure if it was registered now, though I was sure of its past registration. If you think I have bothered to reply to his points (as you do at some length), I don't have anything to say about that. For me, it was just an exposé of lies,ignorance and hypocrisy. Anyone can guess why he suddenly took recourse to moralist idignation at my user page. If you want an instance of irony, here it is. Their leader Ghosh, they always say, urged them to accept criticism irrespective of the person criticising. Maybe, he was one like their secretary in Kerala who preached atheism and got married in a church. In any case, a worthy follower our friend here is! Kuntan 10:33, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

First of all, stop talking like a feudal lord, with your "we". Secondly, answer my points, if you can and stop commenting on matters (on my user page) that are none of your concern. Thirdly, get somebody who can write better English to edit this article (if you are implementing your party decision). You have made it poorer not only in content but also in language. Kuntan 18:24, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

user:SUCIIndia is welcome to wikipedia. Please understand that an encyclopedia is not the place to settle questions like whether a party is the only communist party or whether fascism is better than communism. You can try to put " Marxism is a science of all" in the page for Marxism and perhaps even claim that it was formulated by Mr. Ghosh. But it is not part of any wikipedia policy and any discussion cannot be made based on that. Please also see the policy "Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought"WP:NOT. I think that your comparison with E=MC^2 is silly. Einstein did not publish his result in his personal website and asked everyone to accept it as proof. No one with any familiarity with the process will not expect any to believe such claims. Results are subjected to peer review, submitted to independent expert referees and is then published in independent journals which is again open for review. I think this issue cannot be subjected to such a process. If you think otherwise, please give its details. It would then be a very interesting wikipedia article. Clt13 04:45, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I have changed the sentence "As with every revolutionary party, innumerable SUCI cadres and leaders have been victims, are still being victims of state terror, imprisonment and assassination." as the citation that was provided does not establish that
1. innumerable SUCI cadres and leaders have been victims, are still being victims of state terror, imprisonment and assassination.
2. These terror acts occur because SUCI is a revolutionary party
3. Such terror acts occur against every revolutionary party.
I have also given a few more citations to show that the description in an earlier version of the page is more appropriate. Clt13 08:12, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Formation of SUCI

User:Suciindia has claimed in his/her last series of edits that SUCI was not formed out of a split from RSP, which is in contradiction to my own understanding of the history of the party. It would be interesting if User:Suciindia could share more details about the pre-history of the party, since it could not have emerged out of a political vacuum. --Soman 15:03, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

So it is wise that you don't write what you are not aware of? You should have written an email to us earlier and asked what we are before you started off writing this about us. However, we are happy that you started a string on us and invited so much attention about the party. You will receive a formal clarification from our side on these issues in a short time. SUCI India

My understanding still is that Ghosh came from the same Anushilan Marxist stream as the RSP, and that some of his initial criticism of the official CPI goes in line with those of the RSP. Furthermore, my point of view is based on that UTUC-LS emerged out of a break-up of the RSP union, UTUC. --Soman 09:26, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Minor party?

User:Suciindia has objected to the description of the party as a 'minor party'. I think that such an assertion should be looked at the backdrop of a comparison between major parties in Indian politics (BJP, Congress, CPI(M), BSP, etc.) and minor ones. However, the intention of my wording was to point that although SUCI is not a part of the political mainstream (it lacks MPs at the moment, has MLAs only in one state), it is highly active in a variety of states. --Soman 15:06, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Well having MPs and MLAs if is the consideration then we must ask how many of the parties other than those mentioned by you can stand alone and win any election? For example CPI, RSP, Forward Block and so on. The real strength of a communist party is in how many cader full time professional organizers it has. And in that sense SUCI is far ahead of those and you must also take into account the amount of activity that we have through out India and the simple number of states and even districts that we are present in and able to undertake activities. So to compare it with the so called big parties of India is not fair to be accepted. This is why we say that to know us you need to work with us. Our count of strength is not in MPs and MLA but in the integration that we have an organization and the ability to function as a single organ throughout the country. So we are not accepting the statement that SUCI is minor and as we already mentioned our trade union strength is more than an indication to our strength: SUCI India.

[edit] Joynagar

see [4]. --Soman 15:46, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

What is your point here? That there is mutual killing? Well then why don't you place it in the CPI(M) page? Our point is that we are not interested in any blood shed and that it is not our main agenda to embarge upon killing every one who criticizes us. And we are not interested to state that we are being killed by CPI (M). We restrain ourselves by stating that as every revolutionary party in the world is subjected to state terror we are as well. Whether it is CPI (M) government or x or y or z we are not bothered. For us they are all bulls tagged to the same cart and those who are favouring capitalism. We don't want to divert our attention or a reader's attention to such issues. For us it is all part of our struggle. SUCI India

There is definatively relevant to discuss the situation in Joynagar in the SUCI article, since the area is the single area in entire India where SUCI is the dominant political force. It is also highly notable that, perhaps not to yourselves but to a wider readership, that there is a conflict between the locally governing communist party and the communist party in control of the state government. Why not put it on CPI(M) article? Well, CPI(M) loses hundreds of cadres every year all around India, the Joynagar feuds is just one of many violent confrontations the party is involved in. However, its bad that the comments on Joynagar are only focused on negative issues. More should be written about the recent political history of the area, and how SUCI developed into the local dominant political force there. --Soman 09:23, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

And how do you think SUCI developed its political force in Joynagar? SUCI India

Well, i hoped you could shared some light on the issue. --Soman 12:49, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

User:SUCIndia, please don't try to hide criticism. Please do not remove verifiable relevant content. This is an encyclopedia. You cannot say that "We don't want to divert our attention or a reader's attention to such issues". Let the reader decide where to focus attention.

Dear Mr Soman, It is just not criticism that you are posting here. According to Wiki it is supposed to be an encyclopedia, which implies that it gives brief and relevant information about what ever is there in. And the mishaps in Joynagar or else were is just irrelevant an info. If you insist, then you should have the same attitude to all political parties and should have a section Political Violence in all those pages. From your previous message it is evident that you consider the loss of CPI (M) as part of their so called path to revolution while ours us some politically motivated act to gain what ever you thing that we gain. We are not happy that we lost lifes, whether it is of our own party members or that of any one. If such mishaps could have been averted we would have. Your own citation about SUCI's denouncment of naxal movement is an excellent example for this. --Suciindia 06:14, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bengal education issue

This passage should be introduced in the article at some point: "One of the major campaigns of the party in West Bengal has been its agitations against the educational policy of the Left Front state government. The decision of the Left Front government to remove English from primary education in xxx (1981? 1982?) sparked a mass movement led by the SUCI for the reinsertion of English." With some further elaboration of the current stand on the issue. Related links: [5], [6], [7], [8] --Soman 12:48, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

We are working on preparing a document in these regards and soon will be posted here. SUCI India

[edit] History of SUCI

Much more needs to be written about the history of SUCI. Some topics that ought to be covered are:

• Its early history, pre-foundation history
• Electoral history, 1952 electoral understanding (see [9], material at www.eci.gov.in)
• SUCI during 1962 Indo-China war (see [10])
• SUCI in United Front governments in West Bengal
• SUCI and developments in China (analysis of Cultural Revolution, response to emergence of Naxalite movement)
• SUCI during Emergency.

--Soman 12:55, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

We are working on preparing a document in these regards and soon will be posted here. SUCI India

[edit] Article

An article, out of which material could be added to this wikiarticle, at www.cgnet.in/N1/suci/html2pdf. --Soman 14:28, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] For favour of the reading of other Editors

Dear Comrade Soman, Our party has noted that you are doing great service to the communist movement by gathering and presenting valuable informations here. We are very much and deeply thankful for your committed efforts. But our party has now taken care of this article and decided to have it state truth in simple and clear way. So our comrades all over the country will be adding and improving informations here. So please don't remove informations thus gathered by our comrades through painstaking struggles and studies. Although comrade Soman is deeply involved in his heart in communist history and practice our party noted that he is still having some misconception about our great proletarian party, SUCI and its great leader Comrade Shibdas Ghosh. Please contact our comrades to get correct information about us. We expect comrade Soman to cooperate with us. Thank you. Khudiram

Dear Editors, We are not interested in having anything about violent mishaps that we went through in this document. It is just part of our struggle and if we had any chance to avert them we would have. Our approach towards blind violence in the name of revolution is clear from our denouncment of the naxalite movement itself (see the article cited by Mr. Soman in the previous section). The reason for not agreeing to that piece of text is that it will divert the attention of any new reader who is trying to understand us. Our purpose of contributing to this article itself is that we want it to serve as a simple but good enough text for readers to be introduced to SUCI. Such minute details of our struggle will be known to people irrespective of it being stated here, once they are ready to know us closely. So please don't try to put the text back. Hope you will understand this. --Suciindia 20:45, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I think that a passage about Joynagar ought to be included in the SUCI article, as it is the only place in India where this party has MLAs and control over municipal administration. In that context local conflict with CPI(M) cannot be avoided to be mentioned. However, I have previously stated that it is sad the the current text focuses only on negative aspects on the Joynagar situation. I would appreciate if user:suciiindia could expand the passage on Joynagar in a way that the text would look more balanced, and give an historical background. However, simply removing the passages (with its sources) is not the way forward. --Soman 06:45, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Dear Mr Soman, Wiki is supposed to be an encyclopedia, which implies that it gives brief and relevant information about what ever is there in. And the mishaps in Joynagar or else were is just irrelevant an info for the reason that it is part of revolutionary struggle. The history of a true revolutionary party is not devoid of loss of life, though it alone does not make a party revolutionary. If you insist in keeping those lines, then you should have the same attitude to all political parties and should have a section 'Political Violence' in all those pages. We are not happy that we lost lifes, whether it is of our own party members or that of any one. If such mishaps could have been averted we would have. Your own citation about SUCI's denouncment of naxal movement is an excellent example for this. --Suciindia 14:28, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Sucipe.jpg

Image:Sucipe.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 12:00, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] recent edits

regarding [11], some things should be noted;

• Whilst it would be preferable to have independent academic sources rather than the suci website, replacing suci website sources with no sources at all is not an improvement. For the statements 'suci considers itself the only genuine communist party in india', 'It rejects political ideas such as glasnost and perestroika as revisionist' or the Nihar Mukherjee became GS in 1976, are claims were I'd say the suci publications can function as source.
• There is absolutely nothing wrong with providing lists of publications, state committee secretaries, historical events, etc.

--Soman (talk) 12:31, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Soman, you can make any tall claim couched in NPOV like construction using own source. The whole point is, if it is relevant here, if it is encyclopedic. This is a fringe group. Can you deny that? Wherein does this group figure in any leftist polemic? Their leader is posed to be "one of the foremost thinkers of this era". Can you cite just one academic publication discussing this guy? This boy will have a ready answer for that. But Soman, what can you tell about that? Some guys from the group have apparently decided to use Wikipedia as a platform to voice their propaganda. I can't understand why you should bother about this group which is beyond the pale of leftist politics. If you ever happened to meet the members of the group in real life you would realise that they are more of a cult sect than a political party. You are responsible for the upkeep of hundreds of articles. Stop wasting your time on this lunatic group. Please don't abet the sect in using Wikipedia as a propaganda medium. 59.91.253.7 (talk) 15:57, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

The hatred of the User talk: 59.91.253.7 towards SUCI is known from the words above. This user should be banned from Wikipedia. We believe he was once banned. --Suciindia (talk) 16:39, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Hatred? Yes and no. I hate your hypocrisy young man. I have many friends among your comrades. I particularly dislike people who advocate atheism in public (and denounce Namboodiripad as a hypocrite because he visited temples with his wife, or Harkishan Singh for his religious turban) and conveniently get married in church. You know who I have in mind. The same guy, as party's state secretary in Kerala, while insisting on the party members to send their children to Malayalam medium school, very conveniently gave his own progeny English medium schooling. Is it mere coincidence that you are his namesake? [12] 59.91.254.40 (talk) 12:46, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Edit Warring

There have been numerous reverts by two editors over the past day. Can I remind both editors that this is extremely unhelpful, and may get one or both editors blocked? For the life of me I fail to see any significance difference between the two versions, and I consider myself fairly well attuned to the subtle nuances of left-wing politics! I have previously attempted to suggest a compromise between the two editors, and would be happy to do so again - can I suggest that we discuss a compromise wording on the talk page (i.e. here) and then place it on the main article page when there is consensus?

Fraternal regards,  This flag once was red  21:43, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Dear Editor, this issue is being dealt in the edit war administrators section. You must notice that Suciindia is only reverting to the agreed versions by reputed editors like User: Soman. It is a puppet of User: Kuntan who was banned from wiki, who is causing trouble. This puppet is also abusive as you may see in the comments that he has made. Please refer to the edit war administrators page for the ongoing discussions. You will notice that most other editors have agreed to the stand of User: Suciindia regarding the issues dealt with. --Suciindia (talk) 21:47, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:This_flag_once_was_red" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Suciindia (talk • contribs) 21:49, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

My apologies, I understand the matter is being discussed at [13]. I have removed the 3RR warning from both editors' talk pages.

Best wishes,  This flag once was red  22:40, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] silly statement

"SUCI denounced the court ruling as a 'conspiracy of CPI(M)." As if CPI[M] made the verdict. How can people insert such silly allegations in an article and pretend that they are balancing it? Lujaven (talk) 18:47, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Because the silly allegation is cited. Presumably SUCI made the allegation, so (no matter how silly you believe it is) it can be referenced. By way of example, if Joe Bloggs blamed a US Supreme Court ruling on "a conspiracy by elements of the New Zealand government" that could be cited in the Job Bloggs article, even though it should be clear to anyone with any understanding of (a) the USA and (b) New Zealand that the New Zealand government has minimal influence over any aspect of US law. Put another way, people read this article and see that SUCI made this allegation; readers do not automatically believe the allegation. Hope that helps,  This flag once was red  18:58, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Oops, I have been trolled. I was replying to a sock-puppet of a banned user.  This flag once was red  19:56, 2 April 2008 (UTC)