Exhibiting the same kind of behavior on the Castro article as on the Stalin article will not be tolerated. Your IP address (64.7.89.54) may be blocked. This will keep you from editing anonymously, editing as Trey Stone, or as any of your sockpuppets.

Do not restore your latest edits as This is Trey on Fidel Castro:

• Your playing around with words like totalitarianism in as many articles as you can stumble across in a day is childish and getting old already. Read what NPOV means.
• Invasion is not a proper noun in "Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia.
• Re: Many traditional Soviet allies were questioning the brutal putdown of the Czechs. First of all, it is Czechoslovaks, because it was not the Czech Republic back then. Second, the Soviet allies that condemned the invasion, such as Ceausescu's Romania, did not condemn it based on the violence of the crackdown. They cared about the infringement of Czechoslovakia's sovereignty, as they were uncomfortable with the specter of that kind of Soviet leverage looming over their own regimes. If you took a look at their statements, you’d find that they are condemning it as imperialistic.
• Re: dubious at best I will not weigh in on this one way or the other. But if you are going to reinsert it, attribute it; otherwise it is an editorial aside.

172 20:05, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Excuse me, "totalitarian" deserves mention and it is not stated as a fact. And it is true that several in the West call Castro totalitarian, as they call anyone who possesses that kind of control -- I am sick of you saying it should not be mentioned in regimes which are commonly identified with it. "Dubious at best" is a fact because there is absolutely no evidence we are engaged in any kind of subversion campaign like we were in the early '60s, and as such his claims are just anti-U.S. propaganda. J. Parker Stone 22:04, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Take your argument to politics of Cuba. Like the Encarta article, this article will not stray off topic and go into political science modeling. [1] 172 22:58, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

How is a single mention of a common critique of El Líder Maximo "straying off topic?" And I don't care what Encarta's version is like. J. Parker Stone 04:50, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

And I don't see how you have a rationale to ban me, considering this is a legitimate dispute. If this is banworthy the Master Ruy oughta have been banned 100 times over given his Stalinist propaganda edits. J. Parker Stone 22:05, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

You have never been blocked for POV edits; and you will not be blocked for POV edits. You were blocked because of your sockpuppet trolling on the Stalin talk page; this is the kind of the conduct that will get you blocked-- just a word of warning. 172 22:50, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll remember that the next time I do that. J. Parker Stone 04:51, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)