Talk:The Left (North Macedonia)

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
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
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).

North Macedonia Low‑importance

	North Macedonia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject North Macedonia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of North Macedonia 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.North MacedoniaWikipedia:WikiProject North MacedoniaTemplate:WikiProject North MacedoniaNorth Macedonia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Undue weight tag

The article as currently spends too much of its space detailing various ideological stances, cited to the party's own publications. We should only really be covering aspects of the party's ideology if secondary sources discuss them, and should only be citing the party itself to provide additional context for claims made by aforementioned secondary sources. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 23:16, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Rosguill: Hi, I've expanded the article by adding plenty more secondary sources. As for the one or two cases where the party's position is taken directly off its own manifesto, I've reworded the paragraphs to make it clear, that this is the party's own declared position, as per WP:PARTISAN. I hope I've addressed your concerns. Best regards, Goodposts (talk) 14:20, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I just tagged Republika as potentially unreliable, considering that I find articles describing it as a party's mouthpiece and it's currently used to label this party "far left". Disclaimer: I'm not very familiar with Macedonian politics and its papers and neither are WP:RSN archives. —Paleo Neonate – 08:55, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Euroscepticism

Would it be right to describe The Left as Soft Eurosceptic on the ideology list? They claim EU membership to be a positive thing but not at the expense of the name change. In other words, if acceptance of the name change is what stands between Macedonia and membership of the EU then this party openly decides to dispense with becoming a member - much like the majority who boycotted the referendum. --Coldtrack (talk) 18:22, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fascism

Would it really be right to label "The Left" as a fascist party? This party declares itself as antifascist, defends the antifascist struggle in Macedonia through ASNOM (Antifascist Council for the National Liberation of Macedonia) during World War 2, and celebrates Victory Day on 9th of May. I think the efforts by some editors to label this party as "fascist" are ungrounded and of an extremely biased and subjective nature. JohnCringeton (talk) 09:01, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What the party declares is not so important. It is important how the researchers and scientific sources describe it. Benito Mussolini was socialist and thought of himself as such, though he is the founder of fascism. Read the scientific analysis by Ivo Bosilkov who is Professor at University American College in Skopje. It is published in peer-reviewed academic journal called Contemporary Southeastern Europe, published by the Centre for Southeast European Studies. Thanks. Jingiby (talk) 09:22, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A biased source. The fact that a journal is peer-reviewed doesn't make it a valid source either, if I'm not mistaken wikipedia accepts only news outlets as valid sources and academic papers as secondary sources. 94.189.193.233 (talk) 04:41, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Levica logo + tekst.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:11, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Far-left label

Seeing as the first paragraph has a source calling this party far-left, there is no source for "left-wing," and the party is literally a member of a Communist international, why exactly is this not considered far-left? 141.154.49.21 (talk) 16:41, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are sources for "left-wing" as well. Note that the party is not called "far-left" in wikivoice. Why should we label it far-left on the basis of one source? However, if it is described as such predominantly in the literature, then I will not oppose the change. StephenMacky1 (talk) 16:59, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again, when a party is quite literally a member of a Communist international, it should be the "left-wing" source - of which there are two, one of which is not fully reliable, compared to the one for far-left - that comes to question. At very least, "to far-left" should be in the title. 141.154.49.21 (talk) 21:51, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at some sources, some of which are currently cited. The Anadolu Agency source mentions the party as far-left but only in passing which is not good for assessment. So here is what is written in other sources:

(Perspectives on Populism: Diverse Voices from the European “Periphery”, ISBN 978-3-7489-1728-1), p. 275. The only exception is the radical left-wing party Levica (The Left), which also strongly relies on right wing nationalist ideology.

(Memory Politics and Populism in Southeastern Europe, ISBN 9781003109297), p. 168: Levica also shapes its discourse along similar lines. As a radical left party, it takes pride in its antifascism and nurtures the traditions set by Yugoslav socialism.; p. 174: Levica [The Left] is a political party formed in 2016 that arose from the anti-VMRO-DPMNE protests. It is a self-proclaimed radical left party, although its leadership flirts with nationalism and their attitudes often coincide with the right wing. At the parliamentary elections of 2020, it entered Parliament with two MPs.

Ivo Bosilkov's source describes the party as far-left.

To be honest, you are right. None of the sources in the lead that are currently cited are appropriate to label it as left-wing. None of the sources in the second paragraph of the lead (except for Bosilkov's source) are suitable for analysis of the party's ideology too, so I think the second paragraph should be removed. Inserting a bunch of labels without any explanation is not encyclopedic, nor does it summarize the article. I support replacing left-wing with far-left but this should be in the lead and the body too, not only in the infobox. StephenMacky1 (talk) 23:01, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another option would be to replace the left or far-left citation in the lead with "Leftist," which encompasses a broader point, and then put far-left in the infobox. 141.154.49.21 (talk) 19:10, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did not get this part. What citation? StephenMacky1 (talk) 19:49, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]