Jump to content

Talk:Edelweiss (political party)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Title

[edit]

The title should be Edelweiss (political party) (correct disambiguation) --Maremmano (talk) 09:57, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed.--Autospark (talk) 16:44, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly disagree per Socialist Party (France), Socialist Party (Chile), Union of the Democratic Centre (Spain), Union of the Democratic Centre (Argentina), etc. It is true that party names including terms as "party" or "union" are slightly different cases from the current one, but I still think that it is more important to identify the place than the nature of the subject in the article's name. --Checco (talk) 07:59, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Actually - I think that Checco has a point there, looking at precedents from other political party articles, so I now disagree with Maremmano's proposal, as things currently stand.--Autospark (talk) 10:57, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
On third thoughts, unlike say 'Socialist Party' or 'Union of the Democratic Centre', the name 'Edelweiss' doesn't automatically connect to being that of a political party, being a common plant name, so I've now come round to neutral, but leaning towards the idea that Maremmano has suggested. I will need to think on this.--Autospark (talk) 11:25, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand the opposition of Checco: a disambiguation with the country is necessary only when there are other parties with the same name. In this case the best disambiguation is "Edelweiss (political party)". Which is your position, Autospark?--Maremmano (talk) 22:51, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Haven't quite yet decided - both your arguments are convincing to me. However part of me wants to suggest using a literal translation (Alpine Star), ignoring the plant name, although I realise that would be technically incorrect!--Autospark (talk) 00:21, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I do think it is quite important to locate the party, thus "Edelweiss (Aosta Valley)" remains my choice. --Checco (talk) 07:12, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think that specifying the typology of page is more important than the location, the title "Edelweiss (Aosta Valley)" seems that the page concerns a typology of Edelweiss and not a political party...--Maremmano (talk) 23:42, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Checco, Autospark : This disambiguation is incomprehensible, there is only one party with this name, the correct disambiguation is (political party). Can I move or not this page? ––Maremmano (talk) 22:28, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As I wrote above, I disagree with that proposed move. --Checco (talk) 11:30, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
However I have not understood the position of Autospark yet...--Maremmano (talk) 19:33, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think that we leave the article where it is for now.-Autospark (talk) 21:55, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Edelweiss (Aosta Valley). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:00, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Edelweiss (Aosta Valley). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:53, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 4 May 2019

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Consensus to move. An alternative name of Stella Alpina was also mooted, but there was insufficient comment on this proposal, so the current title of Edelweiss is retained for now — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:30, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edelweiss (Aosta Valley) → Edelweiss (political party) – "Edelweiss (Aosta Valley)" does not mean anything, the Edelweiss is a flower that also grows in Aosta Valley, but in this case the page concerns a political party of Aosta Valley. The disambiguation is useful to distinguish various types of subjects, therefore the pages are entitled Edelweiss (beer),Edelweiss (train) or Edelweiss (magazine). The title instead seems to refer to the flower that grows in Aosta Valley, the disambiguation is evidently wrong. Wololoo (talk) 18:51, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:08, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Wololoo and Checco: queried move request Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:09, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for consistency with virtually all articles on Italian political parties. Additionally, I think that shrt names are better. --Checco (talk) 19:45, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Edelweiss (political party)" is not a long name, furthermore the indication of the Nation/Region does not contribute to explaining the difference from the other pages with this name. The nation/region must be indicated as disambiguation when we are talking about the same type of subjects, for example to distinguish parties of different nations with the same name. In this case the disambiguation must concern the type of subject. --Wololoo (talk) 19:51, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. The current title is very ambiguous and does not meet neither WP:NAMINGCRITERIA nor, particularly, WP:PRECISE, i.e. that "titles should unambiguously define the topical scope of the article" and "distinguish it from other subjects". This is not the case at all for "Edelweiss (Aosta Valley)". As has been explained by the nominator, edelweiss is a flower which grows, among other places, in the Aosta Valley (to the point that this political party takes its name and logo from the flower itself!), which makes the title very ambiguous and unclear on what is the article's actual scope. Titles should not be established according to one particular person's preferences contrary to established naming conventions and guidelines. Impru20talk 11:54, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose current name is fine, and has been established a while without incident (although I’m be open to changing it in future if notable clashes occurred).—Autospark (talk) 09:14, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well, doesn't the fact that there was a move attempt followed by this very same RM constitute proof that there is an incident on it? The current name does not abide to current WP naming conventions and is open to confusion as explained above, as it is unprecise. There does exist a previous discussion on this very talk page discussing the opportunity of such a name. Significantly, I don't think that the argument that "it has been like this for a while" is a valid one, specially because if it has not been contested for a while doesn't mean it can't be contested later on. It is never late to make an article title to comply with WP guidelines. Impru20talk 12:31, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Good points there, although I currently prefer the existing title. (Aside: if we are to think of alternative article titles that do not include “Edelweiss”, I would prefer Stella Alpina, the party’s native language name. I prefer translated English language titles for political parties wherever possible, but this feels like a possible exception, and would provide WP:NATURALDIS.)—Autospark (talk) 13:01, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
My take on this is as follows: The structure of the title for articles on political parties under current WP naming guidelines and conventions (namely, according to the joint interpretation of WP:NAMINGCRITERIA and WP:NCPP) would advise for not using disambiguation unless it is required to distinguish the subject from:
1) two similarly named parties from different countries, i.e. Socialist Party (France) and Socialist Party (Italy). In those cases, however, the article's topic (what you would call the what) is already unambiguous (in the sense that it refers to a party named "Socialist Party"), with the only need to clarifiy the where (the location, as there are various similarly named parties around the world).
2) articles where the point of conflict is the what; i.e. Vox (political party) (as a disambiguator for Vox), or, when parties with similar names do exist elsewhere and the name is ambiguous, then the Podemos (Spanish political party)/Citizens (Spanish political party) formula is used.
In this case, "Edelweiss" would fall under the second group: there isn't other parties around the world named like this (so the disambiguation "(Aosta Valley)" is entirely unneeded), but it is not clear what the article's topic refers to (as it could refer to Edelweiss (Leontopodium nivale), which is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC on the term, a flower which also happens to grow in the Aosta Valley).
Stella Alpina could be a valid alternative choice, though, but it would depend on whether that name is predominantly used by English reliable sources over "Edelweiss" (otherwise, if "Edelweiss" is preferred, then the article would have to be named Edelweiss (political party) as the correct disambiguator). Impru20talk 13:34, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Impru20 has perfectly expressed the reasons why this page should be moved, the current title "Edelweiss (Aosta Valley)" is the classic example of how a disambiguation should not be used: the flower (Leontopodium nivale) is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC on the term and just for this reason the disambiguation must concern the subject. The title would be wrong even if the flower (the PRIMARY TOPIC) didn't grow in the Aosta Valley, but the fact that the Edelweiss is a typical flower of the Aosta Valley makes the title of this page totally unsuitable and misleading. @Checco and Autospark: your motivations seem too hasty to me, also because the title of this page is clearly contrary to Wikipedia rules. I have not found English sources quoting this party but I think that "Edelweiss (political party)" is the best title, anyway even "Stella Alpina" would be better than the current title, so also this second solution would be fine to me.--Wololoo (talk) 07:57, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support unless there is another political party with the same or similar name. Article Four (Sicily) should also be disambiguated as "political party". Peter James (talk) 15:26, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support current title is imprecise, as it could refer to the flower in the Aosta Valley. While there are two other party articles that disambiguate using regions of Italy (Greens (South Tyrol) and Mouv' (Aosta Valley)), in these cases the geographic name is unambiguous, and 'Greens' is a common name for political party, so geographical disambiguation is required. The precise location of the party does not matter for disambiguation, but (Italian political party) or (Valley Aostan political party) could be used if required. Danski454 (talk) 21:13, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Edelweiss_(political_party)&oldid=1196407330"