Talk:Movement of Democratic Socialists

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Number of seats[edit]

The congress has been dissolved about a week ago, prior to the elections that are taking place in 3 weeks, so it makes no sense to have the party listed as having 5 seats. Gts-tg (talk) 22:09, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is not whether the Parliament is dissolved, but whether if those people still retain their legal condition of parliamentarians even after dissolution. I don't know if it happens as such in Greece (in other countries it does), but by that rule of three, we should show all Greek parties with 0 seats, since Parliament is dissolved and, theoretically, no one has seats. Yet ND is shown to have grown up to 131 seats after the dissolution and PASOK is shown down to 24 (this as a consequence of Papandreou's split). Consistence in all articles, please. Impru20 (talk) 22:21, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Impru20, the combination of the parliament having been dissolved, this being a new party, and parliamentarians not having anything more to do in parliament as they are busy in their election campaigns, justifies a 0 in my opinion. With regards to the counterexample you mention and relating it to a potential consistency issue, this is a minor detail as the elections will soon occur. If the parliament was dissolved and elections were to take place in, say, 3 months from now, then yes all seats should be reset, or alternatively as a smoother measure, maintained and instead have a note(in the form of a reference) saying that the parliament has been dissolved and elections are coming. If you feel strongly about this issue, then go ahead and make the change, the elections are in 3 weeks time anyhow. Gts-tg (talk) 22:44, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The parliament has been officially dissolved on 31 December 2014, so strictly speaking, MPs need to be set to 0 for all parties. For now, we however need a both pragmatic and consistent solution, whatever that may be. But I agree that in the long term we also need a both consistent and adaptive solution for these kinds of problems regularly arising from MPs changing party and/or group affiliation. --PanchoS (talk) 15:22, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

KDS or Kinima?[edit]

Which would be the correct party acronym? The logical acronym would be KDS (short for Kinima Dimokraton Sostialiston), but both the party logo and webpage put a clear emphasis over "Kinima" over all other words. Impru20 (talk) 22:24, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that Kinima would be the correct shortname, at least for now, for the reasons given and as it is frequently cited. We should certainly not come up even with a "logical" acronym, if it isn't backed by sources, as this would constitute WP:OR. --PanchoS (talk) 15:37, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding your last edits I have to say sorry, my fault: Google indeed does give quite a number of hits for "ΚΙΔΗΣΟ".
Still, IMHO the made-up acronym isn't sufficiently sourced if it has been used by newsbomb.gr, newsbeast.gr and some other opinion blogs that might have come up with the acronym as it resembles ΚΟΔΗΣΟ. AFAICS, quality newspapers such as Kathimerini however haven't used the acronym once, and I don't know why it is so important to come up with an acronym, if an established one simply doesn't exist. --PanchoS (talk) 04:17, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Proto Thema has also referred to them as "KIDISO" (I put a link of it yesterday). Yet today Alco's latest poll shows them as "KDS". We would have to wait for further polls to see how they call the new party, but I believe that, while all three denominations seem sourced (and thus should be shown in the article in some way, since the are different sources refering to the party as such, so that people know that they are referring to the party when they use those acronyms) we should stick with "Kinima" as the main acronym, as its the only one the party has officially used for now (despite the other two being also possible). Impru20 (talk) 17:30, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Democratic Socialists or Democrat Socialists?[edit]

I believe the correct translation from Greek is Democrat Socialists = Δημοκρατών Σοσιαλιστών vs the current Democratic Socialists = Δημοκρατικών Σοσιαλιστών Gts-tg (talk) 22:50, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless of the actual translation, "Democratic Socialists" is grammatically correct English while "Democrat Socialists" isn't, so we should stick with the former.--Autospark (talk) 23:13, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the issue comes from the place the "Democrat" word is given. "Democrat" is a noun, and gramatically it makes no sense to say "[Movement of] Democrat Socialists" or "Democrats Socialists". You would say "Democratic Socialists" (since "Democratic" is the adjective) or, alternatively, "[Movement of] Socialist Democrats".
If you translate the name using the Google Translator it gives you "Socialist Democrats' Movement". Maybe this translation would make more sense? Impru20 (talk) 23:15, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"[Movement of] Socialist Democrats" sounds better to me, but I guess we can wait until they produce some sort of announcement or indication of their name in English in their website or in Papandreou's website http://papandreou.gr/en/, in which case it won't matter whether it's grammatically right or wrong in English, as they will be identifying themselves officially as such Gts-tg (talk) 23:41, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The page has been moved around a few times, and I really believe we should settle with this name for now, until there is some semi-official hint how the party intends to be called in English. For now, the current translation seems to be reasonably good, with the word order also reflecting the exposed position of the word "Kinima" = "Movement". I agree that Movement of Socialist Democrats (Greece) would be a good, possibly even better alternative, but IMHO we should rather leave it in place for now. --PanchoS (talk) 11:28, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Movement of Democratic Socialists. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:09, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Movement_of_Democratic_Socialists&oldid=1207442221"