Talk:Party of Italian Communists

Italy Low‑importance

	Italy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy 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.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Socialism Low‑importance

	Socialism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism 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.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics: Political parties Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Political parties task force (assessed as Low-importance).

regional

Why is the number of regional councillors/seats deceptive?--Communist-USSR (talk) 15:11, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Because regional councils have a highly disproportionate number of seats when compared to real population. Just an example: Lombardy has 9.9 million inhabitants and 80 councillors, Sardinia has 1.6 million inhabitants and 60 councillors. Thus, the number of regional councillors in the infobox would be only deceptive and misleading. We discussed about this before and there was never a consensus on it. Secondly, tracking all the movements of regional councillors is quite a big deal. Consistency and updateness are all-important in en.Wiki! --Checco (talk) 15:02, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

New name?

On 14 December User:Nick.mon moved the article to Communist Party of Italy (2014). I moved the article back because, from the party's website, it seems like the party is still named Party of Italian Communists, while its renaming is under way. Depending on the outcome of this process (rename or entirely new party?), the article will be named Communist Party of Italy (1998) (rename) or Communist Party of Italy (2015) (new party). --Checco (talk) 09:18, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, it should be noted that the "Rebuiling the Communist Party" trascends party affiliations. Many signers of the appeal are currently members of the Communist Refoundation Party (see here). --Checco (talk) 09:24, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the page also because someone have already do it in it.Wiki; anyway I think that the party remained the same one, it just changed the name, so we should not create another article. But I agree with you in waiting until the new party's name will be official. -- Nick.mon (talk) 09:27, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Union with the page of Communist Party of Italy (2014)

I have united to this page the Communist Party of Italy (2014), because they were the same party, indeed the statute was the same, the assignments had remained unaltered and also the sources said that there was only a change of name. Therefore the PCdI wasn't a new party, but it was only the PdCI that changed its name --Wololoo (talk) 16:07, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I oppose your non-consensual edits, as argumented at Talk:Communist Party of Italy (2014), and will rollback them. Please discuss at the aforementioned talk before editing again these pages. Thanks! --Checco (talk) 15:32, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Far-left, left-wing or both?

On principle, I agree with User:Soman that the party can be considered as simply left-wing, but we have to be consistent. There are several mainstream right-wing parties in Wikipedia for which we have also "far-right", so I do not understand why we should not have also "far-left" for this and other fringe communist parties. This is not a discussion we can have here, but I would much appreciate a complete revision of political positions. Anyone interested? --Checco (talk) 08:48, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think the global problem here is that the left-right axis needs to disappear from infoboxes. Left/right markers are incredibly subjective. Comparing PRC and PdCI in the early 2000s, which party was further to the left? PRC was more activist oriented, more keen on diluting the ideological doctrine with postmodern ideas, whilst PdCI on one hand wanted to retain more of the orthodoxy of the original PCI identity but was more flexible on entering into pragmatic government coalitions. --Soman (talk) 10:37, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the left-right axis should be taken away from infoboxes. Could you put the proposal forward? Thanks, --Checco (talk) 07:05, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]