Talk:Advance Country

Politics: Political parties Low‑importance

	Politics portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Low	This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This redirect is supported by Political parties task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Peru

This redirect is supported by WikiProject Peru. This project provides a central approach to Peru-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.PeruWikipedia:WikiProject PeruTemplate:WikiProject PeruPeru

WikiProject Peru To-do:

Assess and prioritise articles (log)
Check for copyvios at Special:Contributions/Priscilla D, tag as {{Db-copyvio}} where appropriate
Create:
Expand: new articles; top importance articles
FAC / FLC: Peru national football team
GAN:
Merge requests: Amazonas before the Inca Empire, Chachapoyas culture
Review: Shining Path, Universitario de Deportes
Translate: National University of San Marcos
Work on Lima, the current article improvement drive
Wikify: articles needing attention

Title is an inaccurate and confusing translation

Seems to me that "Avanza País" means something more like "Country, Advance!" or "Country, Get Ahead!" or "Country, Forward!". I don't see how "go on" is the right translation here. I don't think a political party is likely to tell a country to "go on" (to continue existing, or to move on from something). It's telling Peru to get ahead.

In the form of the name of an organization or political party, I'd propose "Country Forward". One sign that this is an appropriate translation is the similarly named Forward Parties elsewhere in the world.

Is there a reason why previous editors here used "Go on Country" instead, and any objections to renaming this to "Country Forward"? Andresj (talk) 03:45, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Position on political spectrum

@WMrapids and me have been facing over what's the position on the political spectrum of the party. The first user claims that it has been considered as "far-right" while me claims it is a "center-right" party. Since neither of us wants to be accused of edit warring, I want to know if other parties can also participate to the debate.

For my claim, I label the party as center-right not only based on the sources I presented for the claim that call it "center-right", but also for the ideology the party supports during and after De Soto's leadership, which is liberalism. Sources presented by him to claim that is "far-right" seem more like the using of that term as a vague buzzword rather than an actual claim. For example, "New Internationalist", a left-wing newspaper, calls it "far-right" without any explanation nor based on any context, "Pagina 12" calls it "derecha radical (radical right)", which is not the same as "far-right", "La Mula" never calls it directly a far-right party. the quote claims "Far-right: Fuerza Popular since then marked its line of voting against all the cabinets that Pedro Castillo names from now on. ... To these votes against were added those of Popular Renewal and Avanza País", being the only party called with that term Fuerza Popular, not Popular Renewal nor Avanza País. The source of "El Buho" seems to qualify any opposition party as "ultraderecha", which really seems suspicious. The addition of all those sources seem to commit WP:SOURCECOUNTING and WP:CHERRYPICKING since there are plenty of sources outside of Peru that also refer to the party as center-right or right-wing, that are also getting deleted by the mentioned user. Alejandro Basombrio (talk) 17:01, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is no problem with describing the party as "center-right to far-right" according to reliable sources. If you can provide sources that call it center-right, include them, but it does not take away from the other reliable sources that describe the party as "far-right". WMrapids (talk) 17:28, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I literally included sources that call it center-right [1]. You're literally deleting them without proving any reason [2]. Alejandro Basombrio (talk) 17:45, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Go on Country – Social Integration Party" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Go on Country – Social Integration Party has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 1 § Go on Country – Social Integration Party until a consensus is reached. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 17:41, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Split

These are legally two different parties, with different leaders, different ideology and even a different symbol. The only thing which connects the two is apparently some continuity in the membership but i don't think it is enough to say they are the same party in this case. Braganza (talk) 12:16, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]