Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics/Archive 4
 | This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:WikiProject Politics. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 10 |
Passports
I am not sure which project or page to raise this at, but this is probably the closest large project I can think of, so I'll raise my concerns here. I have a problem with the 'visa-free' sections at the different passport pages (Template:Passports). These sections are far from encyclopaedic and deep inside the territory of legal advice, which we claim on every page is not what we're about. These sections are impossible to maintain, difficult to source given the political state of much of the world, and often enter the territory of de-facto arrangements in a way that Wikitravel may feel comfortable with, but we don't and shouldn't. So I propose removing the visa-free sections and maps off all the different passport pages for conflict of interest, legal and practical reasons. Thoughts/ideas? +Hexagon1 (t) 07:24, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Main project page needs updating
Has the main project page been updated in a while? Many of the listed Featured articles are no longer Featured. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:35, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
- Have a look at the talk too, it appears as though this project may be bordering on dead. +Hexagon1 (t) 02:48, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Social Policy
Social Policy should be included in this project. The article at the moment needs some TLC. I'm going to go ahead with it unless anyone objects. The only thing stopping this would be that the idea of Social Policy appears to be quite marginalised in the US sphere where it may be covered by individual articles on healthcare, social security, social rights etc. Anyhow, it deserves something from at least a Anglo- if not Euro-centric focus. Prylon (talk) 01:11, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Party political offices
Please come discuss policy regarding party political office inclusion in infoboxes, navbox templates, succession boxes and WP:LEADs Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Biography#Political_Party_offices.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:46, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Cantonese independence
Cantonese independence has been nominated for deletion. 76.66.198.171 (talk) 04:24, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Obama task force or WikiProject?
Would people here be interested in establishing a WP:task force for Obama-related articles? The task force could be a shared subgroup of WP:WikiProject U.S. Presidents, WP:WikiProject Politics, and "inactive" tagged WP:WikiProject United States Government. A simple prototype is at User:Mike Serfas/Obama, which would be moved under a WikiProject, preferably WikiProject U.S. Presidents.
Alternatively, J JMesserly proposed a WikiProject for the Obama administration, focusing mostly on the Obama technological agenda at User:J JMesserly/WikiProject Obama administration which has attracted some support. Mike Serfas (talk) 07:34, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Election templates
I wanted to bring to the attention of people in this WikiProject, the following Templates for Deletion decision which deleted an election template I had created: Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2009_January_14#Indian_state_assembly_election_results_in_2008
Their point was that these templates only linked to one article - which was true when they were nominated. I explained that they can also be used on the "Politics in" and "Elections in" articles and expanded a Politics in article so it was used in two articles but it was deleted anyway.
Can I ask if people think that these templates should have been deleted? If not, is it worth asking for a deletion review?
If yes, do we need to rethink how election templates are created as they do seem to be very commonly used even if only for a single article. AndrewRT(Talk) 00:01, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
Political stability
There does not seem to be any article on political stability or instability, in general. The closest I could find is Hegemonic stability theory. Novangelis (talk) 15:40, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Saxbe fix
This year marks the 100th anniversary of the first Saxbe fix, which became effective on March 4, 1909 and facilitated a March 6, 1909 appointment. I have been trying to get this through the WP:FAC process so that I can propose it at WP:TFAR to be a WP:TFA. Because of its centennary and its membership in an underrepresented category of articles, it would have extremely high priority and almost assuredly be approved for the main page on either the 4th or the 6th if it is promoted to WP:FA. I intend to renominate it at WP:FAC in five to seven days for one final attempt at FA promotion. The article could use any assistance that you may be able to lend in terms of copyediting so that it represents the best of WP. This is your chance to get invovled not only in a FA if we get this cleaned up, but an FA that would surely go to the main page. Please come help clean this up. Also, any details on the Hilda Solis fix that you may be able to find to properly cite that eventuality would also be helpful.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:49, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
- Commentary welcome at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Saxbe fix.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:41, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Libertas: Help!
Libertas is the name of a lobby group, political party and Eurofoundation founded by Declan Ganley, an Irish businessman. The party incarnation is the one currently making the most news. The party is organizing on a pan-European basis and intends to field candidates in all 27 EU member states in the 2009 European Parliament elections. It is also attempting to gain official EU recognition as a political party at European level. Whether its affiliates in each member state are legally parties in their own right, or are subsets of the single pan-European party, has not been explicitly stated. One French party (Mouvement pour la France) is reported to be renaming itself to Libertas. This lack of a explicitly specified structure, its break from the traditional structure for political parties at European level and (because it's organising in 27 EU states) the fact that sources are in languages such as Dutch, Polish, Estonian...(the list is quite large), makes the structure for its associated articles unclear and the workload involved quite large. So if anybody out there wants to help out with the possible multiple articles required for this one, I'd appreciate it. Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 00:23, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
ALERT - ND HB 1572
North Dakota HB 1572 is the first bill to pass in a legislative body that would contradict the precedent established by Roe v. Wade. This has the potential to be a real brouhaha, and yet WP:Abortion appears to be inactive, so I am calling for help here.--Muboshgu (talk) 12:56, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Congressional candidacy infobox problems
I've tried to add the following text to the infobox at James Tedisco, but it causes a problem. This current NYS Assemblyman (minority leader) is running for Congress in New York's 20th congressional district special election, 2009. The infobox puts the opponent and incumbent under the state assembly section rather than the upcoming election section. Anybody know how to make it work correctly? ~ ωαdεstεr16«talkstalk» 04:13, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
- |candidate = [[New York's 20th congressional district]]
- |party_election = [[Republican Party (United States)|Republican]]
- |election_date = [[2009-03-31]]
- |opponent = [[Scott Murphy (politician)|Scott Murphy]]
- |incumbent = Vacant (formerly [[Kirsten Gillibrand]])
Coordinators' working group
Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.
All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 06:19, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
List of Israeli politicians and List of foreign-born Israeli politicians have been proposed for deletion via WP:PROD by some people 76.66.193.90 (talk) 05:51, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.
If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.
Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.
Thanks. — Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 09:34, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)
Article about German Pirateparty?
are there any requirements for an article about a party in germany? Elvis (talk) 09:37, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Moral authority
I there a place in the Wikiproject where you can request an article or stub ? I would to see one on the topic of moral authority and/or institutional trust. ADM (talk) 06:22, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Michelle Obama/archive1
Be advised that there is a WP:FAC discussion at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Michelle Obama/archive1.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:25, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
Third opinions requested for Veneto nationalism
The article name is currently disputed and, in the interests of consensus building and obtaining a neutral and objective assessment, I invite opinions from the community over at Talk:Veneto nationalism#RfC on article name. ColdmachineTalk 15:33, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Opinion requested on Republic
An article on an important subject that tends to cause a number of debates. As one source states "there is no consensus among scholars or citizens as to exactly what a republic is" and untangling the various sometimes contradictory definitions is always complicated. I've been doing some work on it today, and another user has been commenting on those changes, but extra eyes would be very welcome. - SimonP (talk) 20:23, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Hillary Rodham Clinton GAR
Hillary Rodham Clinton has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Articles are typically reviewed for one week. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:38, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
- Discussions have been moved to Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Hillary Rodham Clinton/3.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:03, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Just to let you guys know that this article has been started. Please feel free to contribute. Thanks. Quantpole (talk) 11:18, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Election articles nomenclature
I don't know if this has been brought up before, but the naming of articles on legislative elections is confusing and inconsistent. There are a variety of systems in use:
- Federal election: Canadian federal election, 2008
- Legislative election: Austrian legislative election, 2008
- Parliamentary election: Zimbabwean parliamentary election, 2008
- General election: New Zealand general election, 2008
- Election: German election, 1930
Nor is the usage of systems within countries necessarily consistent; German elections, for instance, are suffixed both "election" and "federal election". Standardization is important. ¿SFGiДnts! ¿Complain! ¿Analyze! ¿Review! 00:31, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
GA Sweeps invitation
This message is being sent to WikiProjects with GAs under their scope. Since August 2007, WikiProject Good Articles has been participating in GA sweeps. The process helps to ensure that articles that have passed a nomination before that date meet the GA criteria. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. Instead of reviewing by topic, editors can consider picking and choosing whichever articles they are interested in.
We are always looking for new members to assist with reviewing the remaining articles, and since this project has GAs under its scope, it would be beneficial if any of its members could review a few articles (perhaps your project's articles). Your project's members are likely to be more knowledgeable about your topic GAs then an outside reviewer. As a result, reviewing your project's articles would improve the quality of the review in ensuring that the article meets your project's concerns on sourcing, content, and guidelines. However, members can also review any other article in the worklist to ensure it meets the GA criteria.
If any members are interested, please visit the GA sweeps page for further details and instructions in initiating a review. If you'd like to join the process, please add your name to the running total page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles from the worklist or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. With ~1,300 articles left to review, we would appreciate any editors that could contribute in helping to uphold the quality of GAs. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:34, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Proposal to change the election naming convention such that the date comes first
I propose that the naming convention for elections changes such that e.g. Indian general election, 2009 becomes 2009 Indian general election, since the former is clumsy and the latter is used a lot in articles. I am not sure whether this is the best place to start a discussion about it, but the Elections Wikiproject doesn't seem very active. sephia karta | di mi 09:44, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
- I personally prefer the current naming convention and therefore I oppose the change. --Checco (talk) 10:17, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
- I echo Checco's comment and I thus oppose the change.--Petrovic-Njegos (talk) 12:05, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
- Which is perfectly fine, but could you please explain why? I find that with the current naming convention, I always have to pipe my links, and also in my opinion the current style of article titles is less descriptive than the alternative. As in: what is the article about? The 2009 Indian general election. Not, it is about the Indian general election, 2009. sephia karta | di mi 13:05, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
- No, I would argue that it is the Indian general election that happens in 2009, where the "Indian general election" part is primary and the "2009" secondary. ¿SFGiДnts! ¿Complain! ¿Analyze! ¿Review! 21:00, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- Which is perfectly fine, but could you please explain why? I find that with the current naming convention, I always have to pipe my links, and also in my opinion the current style of article titles is less descriptive than the alternative. As in: what is the article about? The 2009 Indian general election. Not, it is about the Indian general election, 2009. sephia karta | di mi 13:05, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
- I echo Checco's comment and I thus oppose the change.--Petrovic-Njegos (talk) 12:05, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Binational relationships
A series of almanac entries are being deleted on the relationships between pairs of countries. Here are typical ones: Greece-Kyrgyzstan relations and Germany–Uruguay relations. Anyone who has an opinion either way come and read the article. If you have an interest in foreign affairs and diplomacy help add references to the articles in the series. Here is the full list]. About 50 or 60 have already been deleted. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 04:28, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
This issue has already been raised at WP:FOOTY as he has been making a large number of hoax edits about football, but he has also done some rather dubious work on politics as well. I've been unable to verify any of his edits in this field myself, but can someone more versed in this field check them out and take the appropriate action? Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 12:00, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
I have tried to expand the article Presidency of Shimon Peres. Any comments and/or edits would be appreciated. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 01:07, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Why are so many different templates needed? Couldn't they all just pass parameters to {{Infobox Political party}}, or redirect to it, or something? Then there would be more consistency and it'd be easier to change all of them at once. - Jarry1250 (t, c) 16:33, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
On political affiliations.
Just a quick question (because I haven't found a policy regarding this.)
Should an elected official have his political party affiliation listed? I know this is a must during elections, but should this information be carried on after the politician in question has won the election and is incumbent in office? I mean, democratically elected officials supposedly govern for the people, not for their parties. Just my 2 cents. RUL3R (talk) 01:46, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Geraldine Ferraro FAC
The Geraldine Ferraro article has been nominated for Featured Article status. Support/opposition/comments welcome at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Geraldine Ferraro/archive1. Wasted Time R (talk) 01:41, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Request for Comment - Template:Politics of Wales
We'd be grateful for any comments on the most suitable image to depict Welsh politics & government on this template. Please comment at Template talk:Politics of Wales. Thanks for your help. Pondle (talk) 13:24, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
Help needed
There is a dispute about political philosophies in Category talk:Anarchist communists. The dispute is whether anarchist communists are communists or not (or whether the category should be included as a subcategory of cat:communism). Any opinions are welcome. Thanks in advance, Kotiwalo (talk) 15:53, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
FLC for List of districts of Sri Lanka
The List of districts of Sri Lanka is now a featured list candidate. Reviews are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured lists; any input there would be welcome! Thanks! ≈ Chamal talk 14:46, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
GA Reassessment of Richard Francis Burton
Richard Francis Burton has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Malleus Fatuorum 16:31, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
GA reassessment of Idi Amin
I am posting this here as the project banner appears on the article talk page. I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the article which you can see at Talk:Idi Amin/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:23, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated Territorial evolution 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 "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.
GA Reassessment of Monarchies in Europe
I have done a GA Reassessment of the Monarchies in Europe article as part of the GA Sweeps project. I have found the article to be very solid except for the need for some more references and the repair of reference links that have expired. My review can be found here. I have put the article on hold for a week and I am notifying all interested projects and editors. Please contact me on my talk page with any questions. H1nkles (talk) 18:11, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
List of Portuguese monarchs nominated at FLRC
I have nominated List of Portuguese monarchs 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 "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.--Crzycheetah 05:16, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
GA Reassessment of Suharto
Suharto has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.
Assessment Request for The Political Cesspool
Hi, I would like a class and importance assessment for this article. Stonemason89 (talk) 21:14, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
"write-in candidate" vs. "candidate"
If a political candidate loses a primary election and continues as a write-in candidate, should, on their bio page, they be called "a candidate for foo", "a candidate for the fee party nomination for foo and a write-in candidate for foo", a "write-in candidate for foo" or what? Thanks! - Richfife (talk) 00:11, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
Thomas Jefferson GAR notification
Thomas Jefferson has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:42, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
Ratifiers for Democracy - PROD
The above article has been PROD'd by myself (it was originally nominated for Speedy Delete by someone else, but that was so obviously wrong, I removed the SD).
I was unable to find significant sources of information about this movement(?), hence the PROD.
However, I have been advising the creator of the page (Musicaloyster - talk) and they have found some sources of information - but I do not know the subject of politics well enough to be able to judge if they are any good as references for Wikipedia - and just as importantly, I wouldn't know where to look for more sources.
Could anyone from this Project possibly have a look at the article/references and see if they can find suitable references/expand the article?
The prod expires 2009-09-10 08:16.
Regards, -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 06:31, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
List of micronations status review
I have nominated List of micronations 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 "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Regards, Piano non troppo (talk) 02:33, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
The article is tagged with this project, so I'd appreciate some third opinions related to crowd estimates. Gracias. APK is a GLEEk 00:57, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Mark Lloyd FCC diversity/censorship chief is protected stub
Attempts to add a controversy section have led to the protection of the Mark Lloyd page, and the scrubbing of any information outside that available on the FCC biography. It's completely blocked from editing, not just from new users. Any thoughts on whether this should be added as a page that needs additional work and inclusion under this project? How would that be done? Lloyd has been quoted on video as approving of Hugo Chavez "incredible, democratic revolution", and pundits have note that Chavez has taken a novel approach to the press, namely shutting down radio stations and pressing for the creation of a "media crimes law". This topic has been covered largely in the conservative press, and in the writings Lloyd in a scholarly book, but admins in charge say that it is a violation of BLP to use Glenn Beck or even opposing liberal bloggers to document the existence of any controversy, even though NPOV says that all significant points of view should be reflected in the article. Even quoting from a book passage Lloyd wrote is disallowed. Some editors have left comments complaining this amounts to censorship since any websearch of "Mark Lloyd" and "Hugo Chavez" turns up a zillion hits. This whole idea of an admin telling people "if you even think of adding something you first heard about on Beck or Limbaugh, you can expect to be blocked", while wholesale deletion of referenced edits with the explanation "removing vandalism" is overlooked, is that becoming a problem? Thoughts? Bachcell (talk) 16:12, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Discussion input requested
Your input is requested at a discussion here. Neelix (talk) 01:23, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
GA Reassessment of Benjamin Disraeli
Benjamin Disraeli has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Malleus Fatuorum 17:17, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
Featured Article Review (2009)
Please note, Wikipedia:Featured_article_review/Hungarian_Revolution_of_1956/archive1 Fifelfoo (talk) 14:38, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
Hones Abe FA
I'm trying to get Abraham Lincoln up to FA, and his article is within the scope of your wikiproject. It's a big job, but the article is in pretty good shape. Anyone want to help? Drop by the talk page if you're interested. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 04:25, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Why are infoboxes used at all?
They are cheesy. They are not useful. They make WP look schlocky. A properly-written article will include sufficient links that an interested individual can find further information with a simple click out of the text. The most obnoxious examples of pointless infoboxes are THIRD CAMP and TROTSKYISM and DELEONISM, which are quite simply advertisements for political movements, as nearly as I can tell. Others like SOCIALISM, COMMUNISM, and FASCISM touch microscopic portions of the whole and add nothing of value. These things are very annoying and if people are obsessed with their continuation, they should be reworked as less intrusive footers, to my way of thinking. Carrite (talk) 02:55, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
John Marshall GAR notification
John Marshall has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:38, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
Voting System FAR
I have nominated Voting system 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 "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.) Feinoha Talk, My master 06:40, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Please expand this article. Information yes (talk) 14:22, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Low-grade edit war going on over Greenland & Faroes being 'constituent countries' of K. Denmark. (Same editor had previously denied the same for the UK.) I can find direct refs for Greenland, but not for Faroes, though overall wording suggests the latter is also considered a country. kwami (talk) 12:26, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Geraldine Ferraro FAC
The Geraldine Ferraro article has been nominated for Featured Article status. Support/opposition/comments welcome at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Geraldine Ferraro/archive1. Wasted Time R (talk) 01:41, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Request for Comment - Template:Politics of Wales
We'd be grateful for any comments on the most suitable image to depict Welsh politics & government on this template. Please comment at Template talk:Politics of Wales. Thanks for your help. Pondle (talk) 13:24, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
Help needed
There is a dispute about political philosophies in Category talk:Anarchist communists. The dispute is whether anarchist communists are communists or not (or whether the category should be included as a subcategory of cat:communism). Any opinions are welcome. Thanks in advance, Kotiwalo (talk) 15:53, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
FLC for List of districts of Sri Lanka
The List of districts of Sri Lanka is now a featured list candidate. Reviews are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured lists; any input there would be welcome! Thanks! ≈ Chamal talk 14:46, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
GA Reassessment of Richard Francis Burton
Richard Francis Burton has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Malleus Fatuorum 16:31, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
GA reassessment of Idi Amin
I am posting this here as the project banner appears on the article talk page. I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the article which you can see at Talk:Idi Amin/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:23, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
GA Reassessment of Monarchies in Europe
I have done a GA Reassessment of the Monarchies in Europe article as part of the GA Sweeps project. I have found the article to be very solid except for the need for some more references and the repair of reference links that have expired. My review can be found here. I have put the article on hold for a week and I am notifying all interested projects and editors. Please contact me on my talk page with any questions. H1nkles (talk) 18:11, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
List of Portuguese monarchs nominated at FLRC
I have nominated List of Portuguese monarchs 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 "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.--Crzycheetah 05:16, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Assessment Request for The Political Cesspool
Hi, I would like a class and importance assessment for this article. Stonemason89 (talk) 21:14, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
"write-in candidate" vs. "candidate"
If a political candidate loses a primary election and continues as a write-in candidate, should, on their bio page, they be called "a candidate for foo", "a candidate for the fee party nomination for foo and a write-in candidate for foo", a "write-in candidate for foo" or what? Thanks! - Richfife (talk) 00:11, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
Thomas Jefferson GAR notification
Thomas Jefferson has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:42, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
Ratifiers for Democracy - PROD
The above article has been PROD'd by myself (it was originally nominated for Speedy Delete by someone else, but that was so obviously wrong, I removed the SD).
I was unable to find significant sources of information about this movement(?), hence the PROD.
However, I have been advising the creator of the page (Musicaloyster - talk) and they have found some sources of information - but I do not know the subject of politics well enough to be able to judge if they are any good as references for Wikipedia - and just as importantly, I wouldn't know where to look for more sources.
Could anyone from this Project possibly have a look at the article/references and see if they can find suitable references/expand the article?
The prod expires 2009-09-10 08:16.
Regards, -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 06:31, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
List of micronations status review
I have nominated List of micronations 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 "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Regards, Piano non troppo (talk) 02:33, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
The article is tagged with this project, so I'd appreciate some third opinions related to crowd estimates. Gracias. APK is a GLEEk 00:57, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Mark Lloyd FCC diversity/censorship chief is protected stub
Attempts to add a controversy section have led to the protection of the Mark Lloyd page, and the scrubbing of any information outside that available on the FCC biography. It's completely blocked from editing, not just from new users. Any thoughts on whether this should be added as a page that needs additional work and inclusion under this project? How would that be done? Lloyd has been quoted on video as approving of Hugo Chavez "incredible, democratic revolution", and pundits have note that Chavez has taken a novel approach to the press, namely shutting down radio stations and pressing for the creation of a "media crimes law". This topic has been covered largely in the conservative press, and in the writings Lloyd in a scholarly book, but admins in charge say that it is a violation of BLP to use Glenn Beck or even opposing liberal bloggers to document the existence of any controversy, even though NPOV says that all significant points of view should be reflected in the article. Even quoting from a book passage Lloyd wrote is disallowed. Some editors have left comments complaining this amounts to censorship since any websearch of "Mark Lloyd" and "Hugo Chavez" turns up a zillion hits. This whole idea of an admin telling people "if you even think of adding something you first heard about on Beck or Limbaugh, you can expect to be blocked", while wholesale deletion of referenced edits with the explanation "removing vandalism" is overlooked, is that becoming a problem? Thoughts? Bachcell (talk) 16:12, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Discussion input requested
Your input is requested at a discussion here. Neelix (talk) 01:23, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
GA Reassessment of Benjamin Disraeli
Benjamin Disraeli has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Malleus Fatuorum 17:17, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
Featured Article Review (2009)
Please note, Wikipedia:Featured_article_review/Hungarian_Revolution_of_1956/archive1 Fifelfoo (talk) 14:38, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
Hones Abe FA
I'm trying to get Abraham Lincoln up to FA, and his article is within the scope of your wikiproject. It's a big job, but the article is in pretty good shape. Anyone want to help? Drop by the talk page if you're interested. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 04:25, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Why are infoboxes used at all?
They are cheesy. They are not useful. They make WP look schlocky. A properly-written article will include sufficient links that an interested individual can find further information with a simple click out of the text. The most obnoxious examples of pointless infoboxes are THIRD CAMP and TROTSKYISM and DELEONISM, which are quite simply advertisements for political movements, as nearly as I can tell. Others like SOCIALISM, COMMUNISM, and FASCISM touch microscopic portions of the whole and add nothing of value. These things are very annoying and if people are obsessed with their continuation, they should be reworked as less intrusive footers, to my way of thinking. Carrite (talk) 02:55, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
John Marshall GAR notification
John Marshall has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:38, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
Voting System FAR
I have nominated Voting system 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 "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.) Feinoha Talk, My master 06:40, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Please expand this article. Information yes (talk) 14:22, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Low-grade edit war going on over Greenland & Faroes being 'constituent countries' of K. Denmark. (Same editor had previously denied the same for the UK.) I can find direct refs for Greenland, but not for Faroes, though overall wording suggests the latter is also considered a country. kwami (talk) 12:26, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
World domination
There is something wrong happening with the page World domination; see bottom of its talk page. I am attempting to restart the article in a scholarly/wikipedian way in Talk:World domination/New text. Please help. Since the term is widely used and quite wikilinked in wikipedia, we have to have here something serious, otherwise there will be an endless struggle with well-meaning but hopeless essayists. - Altenmann >t 16:44, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
Article idea
Like Media bias, there are multiple webpages dedicated to the idea of bias (whether liberal or conservative) in academia. Being that as it may, I understand it would be a controversial article to write, however, is it not notable enough to have its own article? Ask this here because I would imagine it falls into the scope of this wikiproject, and not the ones that I am a part of. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 09:05, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Relevant AfD
Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/101 People Who Are Really Screwing America. Cirt (talk) 06:37, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Fringe theory promotion at Human rights
A number of Iranian editors are attempting to add poorly sourced or unsourced claims to Human rights concerning a 6th century BC artifact, the Cyrus cylinder. They claim that it is supposedly the world's first charter of human rights, and that the Persian emperor Cyrus the Great effectively originated the concept of human rights. (To summarize, this is a fringe theory promoted by the late Shah of Iran in the 1970s as part of his regime's propaganda and has subsequently been promoted by Iranian ultranationalists, particularly in the pro-Shah diaspora. Mainstream historians reject this viewpoint as tendentious and anachronistic.) This has previously been discussed on the fringe theories noticeboard on two previous occasions. It's now being discussed at Talk:Human rights#Religious tolerance and Achaemenids. Human rights is listed as a high-importance article for this WikiProject so some input from outside editors would be appreciated. -- ChrisO (talk) 19:21, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
GA Sweeps Reassessment of Ollanta Humala
Ollanta Humala has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Malleus Fatuorum 15:29, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Wikiproject:Social movements
Would there be editors interested in developing such a Wikiproject? Please direct reples here so we can centralize the discussion. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 22:25, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Some individuals might wish to voice their opinion about the article Larry Ceisler at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Larry Ceisler.--Blargh29 (talk) 01:22, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Last year it was proposed that WikiProject Elections and Referenda would be merged with this project. Does this project now cover the elections in general? I was wondering because I want to create articles for the upcoming elections (and join the appropriate project) but I don't particularly have any preference towards editing a political article. Any help would be appreciated, thanks! –Nav talk to me or sign my guestbook 20:07, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Conservatism in North America
There is an ongoing AfD discussion about the Conservatism in North America article here. Your comments would be greatly appreciated. Neelix (talk) 17:21, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Politico-Media Complex
I'm a student participating in a University based group Wikipedia project. We're writing the Politico-media complex page as our semester final. Our goal is to bring the article to good article status. We're all new to Wikipedia and would greatly appreciate any and all advice, on everything from fact verification, links and citations, to style. Please post any advice/criticisms/comments to the PMC talk page, or our individual talk pages. Thank you all! ColleenHelen (talk) 02:45, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Relevant AFD
Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dan Fefferman. Cirt (talk) 06:50, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
GA reassessment of City and Town Hall
I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the referencing which you can see at Talk:City and Town Hall/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:57, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
User:Mosedschurte has twice removed the WikiProject Politics banner from above articles talk page, when the topic obviously falls within the project. Please keep an eye out in case he removes it again. Willy turner (talk) 09:23, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
A user is removing our project banners from talk pages
Please see my comments here. Please add any thoughts you have on the issue here or on the users talk page.Willy turner (talk) 09:12, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Liberal Party of Canada leadership convention, 1968 - Featured Article Review
I have nominated Liberal Party of Canada leadership convention, 1968 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 "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Tom B (talk) 15:00, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
The current article at Affirmative Action is fully about social equality with various phrases such as "positive action" redirecting there. I have suggested moving to and merging with Social equality and both are part of this project. It shouldn't require much change to either articles basis so I could do it but please go ahead and chime in at it on Talk:Affirmative_action#Social_equality or Talk:Social_equality#Affirmative_Action ~ R.T.G 08:57, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
I have recently rebooted this WikiProject. Please take a look. @harej 04:24, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
Book-class
Since several couple of Wikipedia-Books are politics-related, could this project adopt the book-class? This would really help WikiProject Wikipedia-Books, as the WP Politics people can oversee books like Political science and Confederate government of Kentucky much better than we could as far as merging, deletion, content, and such are concerned. Eventually there probably will be a "Books for discussion" process, so that would be incorporated in the Article Alerts.
There's an article in last week's Signpost if you aren't familiar with Wikipedia-Books and classes in general. If you have any questions just ask. Thanks. Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 01:22, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
It doesn't sound right. Atleast controversial.
1ihminen (talk) 00:00, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Citations needed for Rosa Parks
Citations are needed for Rosa Parks. If they are not supplied, this article could be delisted from FA status! WhisperToMe (talk) 18:30, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Just thought I'd let everyone know that there's a collaborative effort underway to take this article from its current condition to at least Good Article status. If we succeed, this will trigger a donation to wikipedia (details can be found here), as well as giving this wikiproject yet another piece of recognised high quality content. Regards, WFCforLife (talk) 18:42, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated V for Vendetta (film) 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 "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 20:36, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Use of the word Incumbent in elections template
I feel this is misleading as the term implies that the leader is currently in office wheras at the time of the election that is not necessarily the case in law. Previous would be a safer word. I raised the issue on the template talk page but there seems to be no discussion there. --Gibnews (talk) 19:37, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
- A few quick questions; which elections template, where did you raise the issue, can you provide an example of an article with the problem? Is the issue specific to a single political region/country or does it affect articles across multiple regions? Road Wizard (talk) 19:43, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
- The discussion was here Now it may seem a trivial point, and indeed I might be wrong - but my understanding is that at the time of an election the assembly has been dissolved and there is no (in the case of Gibraltar_elections) Chief Minister until the new one is appointed. So the word should not be incumbent but previous as incumbent implies continuity and the office is dissolved before the election. --Gibnews (talk) 22:34, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
- That sounds a little strange as every other political body based on the British model that I have encountered leaves the Prime Minister/Chief Minister in charge during the election campaign. For example, if there was a terrorist attack in the UK during the United Kingdom general election, 2010 campaign the Cabinet would still be in post to make decisions even though the members of the House of Commons have lost their seats and may be up for re-election. It is only the day after the election that the previous government steps down in favour of whoever is taking over.
- Are you sure the Gibraltar regime does not work in the same way? Road Wizard (talk) 01:53, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
- I have managed to track down a draft copy of the 2006 Gibraltar constitution, which clarifies the position:
- Section 45, (9) "Upon the dissolution of the Parliament the Chief Minister and Ministers in office at the time of such dissolution shall remain in office and shall discharge their functions until new elections are held and a Chief Minister appointed..."
- Proper verification would have to be from either the final version or, preferably, an analysis of the constitution by an independent source but it is unlikely the clause would have altered too much from the draft. Road Wizard (talk) 02:42, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
- OK, you are right, FYI the document is Here. I thought they were acting in a caretaker capacity rather than a continuation of the appointment. --Gibnews (talk) 13:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
- I have managed to track down a draft copy of the 2006 Gibraltar constitution, which clarifies the position:
- The discussion was here Now it may seem a trivial point, and indeed I might be wrong - but my understanding is that at the time of an election the assembly has been dissolved and there is no (in the case of Gibraltar_elections) Chief Minister until the new one is appointed. So the word should not be incumbent but previous as incumbent implies continuity and the office is dissolved before the election. --Gibnews (talk) 22:34, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
Denoting militancy vs nonviolence in Political Party infobox
Just wondering if people are for the inclusion of a party's stance on force as a means of promoting their ideology in the Political party infobox. By this I mean I'm interested in seeing the Political party infobox describing in a few words whether the party permits the use of violent means as an expression of their ideology. Forgive me if this is the wrong section. BabyJonas (talk) 10:36, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
- I would be against it. A few words will generally be insufficient to describe a party's stance on violence, especially as their views may have changed over time. It would also be a recipe for disaster with constant edit wars.
- An example: Sinn Féin is often linked to the Provisional Irish Republican Army though the party leadership denies any direct interaction. Unionists in Northern Ireland are likely to try emphasising the relationship with militants while Nationalists are likely to try playing them down. Other parties on both sides of the divide in Northern Ireland will face similar difficulties in editing. Road Wizard (talk) 10:55, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
- Sounds a bad idea, and in any event parties in Government engage in violence, using their armed forces, but there is no way to reliably measure or describe it in neutral terms. --Gibnews (talk) 22:49, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
POV of Fair trade
We are having a discussion about the addition of a block of text and wondering if someone could give us a further opinion? Talk:Fair_trade#Segment_at_issue Thanks Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:47, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
Request for involvement at MigrationWatch UK
Three single-purpose accounts have been making numerous comments at Talk:MigrationWatch UK about the reliability of sources used for the article and suggesting material that is critical of the organisation be removed. I'd appreciate the views of others on this. The comments start under this heading and continue to the bottom of the page. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:30, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
Expansion of Government ministries of Afghanistan?
According to the President of Afghanistan official website, there are 25 Afghan ministries. I created a stub for them, but only found info on 16. The category Category:Government ministries of Afghanistan only has articles on 12. Anyone else interested in helping to expand WP coverage to encompass all the Afghan ministries? Given the current media focus on this country and its politics, it seems a worthwhile endeavor. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:43, 31 December 2009 (UTC)