Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics/Archive 7

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10

Help on this party article

On the article and discussion page for the Svoboda Party there has been an edit war and now a debate over the use pipe linking 'Social-Nationalism' to the Left-wing nationalism article. The argument by me is that SN (their stated platform) and LWN are synonymic, while the other user is saying that since the party is both Right-wing and they have a nationalist platform, that this makes some sort of contradiction between the two. I've already provided a journal citation stating that Left-wing nationalism is also known as social-nationalism, and figured that would be enough. Also, the Left-wing nationalism article in Ukrainian and Russian are both called "social-nationalism" when translated in their respective languages (but apparently this doesn't "count" as a reliable source, somehow). Can anyone chime in?--Львівське (talk) 19:32, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

My thanks to Lvivske (Львівське) for bringing this here, but the above is a mis-statement of my position. Lvivske is inserting a piped link to left-wing nationalism for "Social-Nationalism" in the infobox section of the ideology for Svoboda (e.g. [1]), but there are no sources that describe the party as "left-wing" or "left-wing nationalist." (I have appealed to Lvivske to find such sources many times.) On the contrary, I have found various reliable secondary sources (such as the Kyiv Post, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, the Stephen Roth Institute for the Study of Contemporary Antisemitism and Racism, and others) which state that the party is right-wing or right-wing nationalist (see our talk page discussion [2]), but Lvivske refuses to accept any of these sources, since his assertion is that they are "all out of context" - and actually demands to see sources that state they are not left-wing nationalist ([3]). My position is that Wikipedia is written according to reliable secondary sources, not our own (or Lvivske's) interpretation of primary sources (per WP:SECONDARY, "All interpretive claims, analyses, or synthetic claims about primary sources must be referenced to a secondary source, rather than original analysis of the primary-source material by Wikipedia editors.") I guess it is his burden to find secondary sources that state they are "left-wing nationalist" - because he is the one insisting on adding that into the ideology section in the infobox. Could somebody hitherto uninvolved please weigh in on that? Zloyvolsheb (talk) 19:45, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
There are both sources stating that their ideology is for "Social-nationalism" and there are sources confirming that "Left-wing nationalism" is also called "Social[ist]-nationalism", these together should eliminate any dispute over whether "Social-nationalism" should pipe link to "Left-wing nationalism". They are social-nationalist, and thus, the are left-wing nationalist. That they are a right-wing leaning part is neither here nor there in regard to the form of nationalism they adhere to and you should not be applying WP:SYN reasoning that, because they are right wing, they cannot be left-wing nationalist (and thus social nationalist? even though that is their stated policy?)--Львівське (talk) 22:47, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Secularism

I've listed this article here because I am hoping to get this up to the status of a Good Article but I need major helping doing so. The article is in really bad shape and needs some major work on it. I wish I can get some editors to work on it and maybe help me because I honestly dont think I can get to GA standards on my own. We can have a standard article for other wikipedia projects to translate from seeing how all of them are not up the standards that we have.

Thanks, The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 04:26, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Tiananmen Square deletions

Image:Tank Man (Tiananmen Square protester).jpg and Image:Tiananmen Square protests.jpg have been nominated for deletion. 64.229.100.45 (talk) 07:04, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Image:TankMan.JPG has also been nominated for deletion. 65.94.45.160 (talk) 06:09, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Burkina Faso government reported toppled

News reports tend to be very unclear but there is some sore sort of protests/uprising/revolt/revolution going on in Burkina Faso right now, including a curfew on Ouagadougou and some reports that president Blaise Compaore has fled. How about an article, 2011 Burkina Faso uprising, based on the French version or its translation here? If there really was a government shift, then this is an urgent article to be created. Metaknowledge (talk) 14:52, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Renaming Instant-runoff voting

Instant-runoff voting has been proposed to be renamed Alternative Vote (apparently, the British term), see Talk:Instant-runoff voting. 65.94.45.160 (talk) 03:46, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Declaration of independence

There is presently a debate over whether the list article Declaration of independence ought to include a hatnote pointing specifically to the United States Declaration of Independence. Those in favor argue that historical, demographic, and practical factors justify this treatment, while those in opposition argue that no country's document should receive special treatment under any circumstances. I am bringing the discussion to your attention because Declaration of independence and United States Declaration of Independence are both included in this wikiproject. Please see here if you are interested in weighing in on the matter. Thank you. —Bill Price (nyb) 17:45, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Page move discussion

Please comment at Talk:Rod_Blagojevich_corruption_charges#Requested_move on moving Rod Blagojevich corruption charges → United States v. Blagojevich.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:04, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Quick notability advice

Hi people, does this project have a specific guideline for the notability threshold of political parties? Or do you recommend the WP:GNG? For example, English People's Party - as far as I can tell, there is no "significant coverage in reliable secondary sources", but is being registered with the Electorial Commission enough for inclusion? Thanks, Marasmusine (talk) 16:00, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Santorum (neologism)

Santorum (neologism)

This article has recently been expanded with additional sources and referencing improvements. There is also some ongoing discussion about that, at the article's talk page. If you are interested, please have a look at Santorum (neologism) and the associated talk page discussion at Talk:Santorum (neologism). Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 20:50, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Infobox legislature improvements

{{Infobox legislature}} now has parameters for the language of the native name (|native_name_lang=; for example "RO" for "Parlamentul of României" in Parliament of Romania) and date of creation (|Foundation=). Please make use of them! Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 12:10, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

International Monetary Fund

Please help moderate the page and stop people from adding information on DSK's sexual affairs on it.Other dictionaries are better (talk) 18:55, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I think a brief, neutral, and balanced discussion would be better. Removing any mention at all, despite extensive coverage in reliable sources, is no way to write a good article. However, you could shop around some more forums if you don't like the response you get here. bobrayner (talk) 21:06, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Again, I repeat, the current managing directors personal actions (or supposed actions since he's not found guilty yet) is of no relation to the IMF's operations. Simpel analogy: Does your bosses extramarital affairs depict your comapany's operations? You can't tell me of going else where if I don't like the answer.Other dictionaries are better (talk) 21:25, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Environmentalism as a Religion

I am seeking assistance in writing a section to the article Environmentalism regarding a significant minority opinion that Environmentalism can be viewed as a religion. As the primary subject is tagged as falling under this wikiproject perhaps there would be interested parties willing to assist in this endeavor. Please see the current discussion at Talk:Environmentalism#Enivironmentalism. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 02:33, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

National cabinets

Your comments are requested at a discussion about the titles of national cabinet articles here. Any constructive contributions would be appreciated. Neelix (talk) 19:43, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

The navigational template {{Political neologisms}} has been nominated for deletion. Please see discussion, at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2011_May_25#Template:Political_neologisms. Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 22:53, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Recently expanded article

Skipping Towards Gomorrah - I recently expanded this article. Check it out, if you are interested. Feel free to suggest additional secondary sources, at the article's talk page. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 06:51, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Request for NPOV review

  • Recently an editor has raised concerns regarding NPOV with some articles I had worked on prior to an extended wikibreak.
  • I have committed to no longer edit or watch these pages.
  • However, I would appreciate it if others could look them over with NPOV in mind, and discuss on their talk pages and make appropriate changes if need be.

Here are the articles:

  1. Joel Anderson
  2. Jose Peralta
  3. Hiram Monserrate

I will not object to any changes proposed, discussed, or implemented.

Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 20:43, 28 May 2011 (UTC)


Notice of RfC pertaining to Kosovo

The placement of Kosovo on List of sovereign states is currently being debated. We need further input from uninvolved editors about how best to proceed. Your participation would be greatly appreciated. The discussion is being held at Talk:List of sovereign states/Discussion of criteria#Kosovo's placement on the list. Nightw 00:12, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs - the final surge

Since early in 2010, many editors have assisted in the referencing or removal of over 90% of the Unreferenced Biographies of Living People, bringing the total down from over 50,000 to the current 4,862 (as of 16:19, 1 June 2011 (UTC)). Thank you for all of the work you've done to date, but we are now asking for your help in finishing this task. There are two main projects which are devoted to removing UBLPs from en.Wikipedia:

All you have to do is pick your articles and then add suitable references from reliable sources and remove the {{BLP unsourced}} template. There is no need to log your changes, register or remove the articles from the list. If you need any help, or have any comments, please ask at WP:URBLPR or WT:URBLP.

Thank you for any assistance you can provide. The-Pope (talk) 16:19, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Safe Planet

I think that this recently-created article falls within the scope of this wiki-project.

On the talk page, a user has raised concerns that it is overly dependent on primary sources; I think that is true. So, if anyone can help improve it, trim out anything inappropriate, etc. - please do. Best,  Chzz  ►  03:28, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

United States Bill of Rights has been selected as the United States Wikipedians' Collaboration of the Month for June 2011

The United States Bill of Rights, an article within the scope of this project, has been selected as the United States Wikipedians' Collaboration of the Month for June 2011. The goal this month is to get this article to Good Article standards by July 4th, 2011. All editors interested in improving this article are encouraged to participate. You can also vote for next months article of the Month here. --Kumioko (talk) 16:03, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Request for comment - Santorum (neologism)

Request for Comment discussion started, please see Talk:Santorum_(neologism)#Proposal_to_rename.2C_redirect.2C_and_merge_content.

Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 06:24, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Spanish general election, 1936

I can't find a reassessment requests bit of the project, I've expanded the article and it's no longer a stub. I've been told off before for removing ratings tags by other projects (even blatantly incorrect ones). Could it be reassessed please? Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 19:15, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Created new portal = Supreme Court of the United States

I've created a new portal for this topic. Collaboration and help would be appreciated, just drop a note at Portal talk:Supreme Court of the United States. -- Cirt (talk) 17:07, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

I have nominated List of Prime Ministers of Canada for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. 117Avenue (talk) 20:26, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Portal:Supreme Court of the United States at peer review

A new portal Portal:Supreme Court of the United States is now up for portal peer review, the review page is at Wikipedia:Portal peer review/Supreme Court of the United States/archive1. I put a bit of effort into this and feedback would be appreciated prior to featured portal candidacy. Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 17:50, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Merge Lawmaking procedure in India with Parliament of India

Please comment on the proposed merger of Lawmaking procedure in India with Parliament of India at Talk:Parliament_of_India#Merge_Lawmaking_procedure_in_India_with_Parliament_of_India.-- R.Sivanesh ✆ © 20:34, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Daniel Webster FAR

I have nominated Daniel Webster for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Brad (talk) 00:56, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Article or redirect?

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Sexual preference#Own article. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:03, 10 July 2011 (UTC) (Using {{pls}})

Portal:Supreme Court of the United States is a candidate for Featured Portal, with discussion at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Supreme Court of the United States. — Cirt (talk) 16:03, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949

Unfortunately, I've placed this article up for featured article review (here). Your project may be interested. The FAR is open to comment. I'll hopefully find the time to look into the article over the coming months myself. Thanks, Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 16:29, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Politics/Archive_7&oldid=1137368433"