It is in fact precisely such highly political historical topics that wikipedia is most untrustworthy about.

What makes it trustworthy on historical events?

all of these sources come from western analysts during the cold war, all of whom belonged to western think tanks designed to propagate misinformation against communism.

Your sources are inflated by people long dead and their relatives pump this same shit for you to consume. Gulags existed, so does labor camps in america, america also regularly massacred students and workers. And caused a silent famine to happen in the midwest, yet you scream communism to drown out any forms of alternative information you feel uncomfortable about.

Kronstadt comes to mind

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kronstadt_rebellion

[Genie meme]

You: I wish [“tankies”, or whatever else you want to call us] stopped worshiping dictators.

Genie: Granted

You: Nothing changed.

Genie: Correct.

–

I understand that you can’t understand our comments. I mean, if you did, you’d realise we don’t worship anyone.

But… damn, you can’t even read the image in the post.

You need to stop telling us what we believe. We don’t worship anyone.

The CIA admitted they invented the hogwash about Stalin being a dictator, and admitted he was merely the “captain of a team.”

The only reason we think of him as a “dictator” here in the West is because anybody that has resisted the West’s demands for total prostration is a “dictator.” If you want examples of REAL dictators you should look to all of the right-wing egotistic maniacs the U.S. government sponsored from centuries past to the present.

There is a difference between a “dictator” who kills fascists, capitalists, monarchists, slavers and saboteurs trying to actively destroy a system that is saving and uplifting hundreds of millions of lives, and an ACTUAL dictator who kills twice that number in women, children, socialists, racial minorities, sexual minorities, religious minorities, while plundering the country and essentially enslaving their own populace.

You can find plenty of communist criticisms of Stalin. They appear on this forum from time to time.

Maybe try engaging earnestly and give specifics. You may get even more context from us that might change your view. Or, hell, we might even agree with you. Stalin did good things. He also did some shit things.

Instead, you’re relying off of the Stalin boogeyman myth that even the US government has admitted is false.

He was never a dictator

You may want to read the biography of Marx and the historical events of the 19th century. Wikipedia offers a good recap and data for further reading.

Usually Wikipedia is okay if, as it says, you use it as ‘a starting point for serious research, not an endpoint.’ The problem is that, in practice, roughly 95% of the people referencing it don’t use it this way and instead mistake it as a substitute for serious research.

It’s basically the Walmart of educational materials.

Everyone knows teachers love it when you use Wikipedia in school, it’s a real problem in some high schools because it’s a trick to get an easy A, if your teacher assigns you a topic for a paper you can just send them the wikipedia link for it and they’ll be forced to give you an A because you don’t actually need to do the work yourself in school

You can’t! Except the ones where they say Stalin was the best.

Wikipedia is notoriously untrustworthy and gets brigades heavily by the CIA, especially on topics like this.

For better sources, use this. Look for gulags and the purges you mention and see what is written.