[[Communist manifesto]]

OK i'm really sorry, after i wrote this comment and after everything i wrote was deleted again, i got an explanation in the edit history. This explanation was "We don't need a chapter by chapter poorly formatted summary." So i', really sorry, i wrote this complaint withoout a reason, as i had to anticipate that sometimes in the future someone would explain it to me. I kneel before you guys.

Okay. We can be pretty rough-and-tumble around here, so let me know if you need a helping hand.

Yes so am i, but i don't think i would want to contribute to this wiki any more. Because certain people here clearly suppress certain political opinions, which is evident in that they delete or make invisible certain summaries of certain books from all places where they can find them, including places which are not articles.

A smart and useful thing to do may have been to link to the full-text version of the Manifesto over at Marxists.org. Deciding that we don't really need to host the full text of a pretty commonly-available document =/= "suppressing an opinion." It's more "making a coherent, on-mission wiki."

There was a link to the Manifesto in the article, but it didn't work, so i fixed it. Wikipedia articles contain summaries of the books and other writings, so naively i assumed that it is so in this wiki also. But trying to write such turned out to be some terrible misconduct so efforts were taken to remove even traces of such attempt.

-looks at the article history- Still there. I'd need some fancy powers to be able to hide History.

Highest admins have these powers. Or are they hackers. At least i have seen parts of the history deleted in Wikipedia, without any notice whatsoever that this was done. So never lose hope.

Making an edit completely disappear is "oversighting," and no one on RationalWiki has that ability. The closest we have is revision delete, and that leaves a placeholder with greyed-out text behind for everybody to see.

Doesn't server have oversight-like powers?

Technically, yes. But as far as I know, it's never been done. Furthermore, Trent (the only one currently with server access) doesn't even have time to address actual problems these days. Suggesting he'd waste the effort needed to purge a random edit by a random user is laughable.

why exactly is this being confused for an actual issue? What does it matter if some marginal website "suppresses" a document that is easily available in any public library, most decent bookstores, and about 100 different places on the web?