Talk:Transition Korea

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Political parties task force.

Korea Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a collaborative effort to build and improve articles related to Korea. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how use this banner, please refer to the documentation.KoreaWikipedia:WikiProject KoreaTemplate:WikiProject KoreaKorea-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Pragmatism

Should we include pragmatism amoung the parties ideologies? It does not seem to be listed on list of political ideologies. Helper201 (talk) 21:35, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It may not be an ideology per se, however like many ideologies it is a philosophy, and one that has relevance for politics. Besides, many things that are not ideologies or even philosophies tend to be listed in ideology-sections, neither decentralization nor basic income are technically ideologies either, yet are often listed in the infoboxes of parties where these are relevant! Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 21:47, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Helper201, Do you have a reliable source for that? If so it should be no big deal to include? CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 00:57, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

CaptainEek, for what exactly? That pragmatism is or is not a political ideology? No, I have neither. I'm not trying to push in any one direction, just opening up the question of whether it should be included. I also don't know of the validity of the current source as I can't read Korean. What is regarded as pragmatic and what is not seems very variable upon personal judgement/views, i.e. I'm not sure if something could factually and concretely be regarded as pragmatic; but that's aside from the question of whether or not it constitutes as a political ideology or not. Helper201 (talk) 01:05, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think there has been some confusion on your end that I have just realised, CaptainEek. Pragmatism is already included in the infobox as an ideology of the party, my question is whether or not it should be there based upon whether or not it is a political ideology. Helper201 (talk) 01:09, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Helper201, I would say that pragmatism is indeed a political ideology. Is it appropriate to include here? If one of the sources says as much about the group, then we should say the same. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 01:23, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment What reliable sources state that "pragmatism" is one of the organization's ideologies? If a substantial number of them say that, we should too. If not, we shouldn't. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 01:56, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- The biggest problem with this party is that it does not advocate any particular ideology other than political pragmatism.--Storm598 (talk) 02:14, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment reply Seraphimblade, according to the main page citation number 1. I can't read Korean so I have not tried to verify this, though perhaps a translator tool may suffice, but ideally it would be useful if someone that can read Korean could verify it. Helper201 (talk) 08:19, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, if there are any Korean speakers who can read it, that would be much more helpful than trying to rely on machine translation. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:55, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]