User talk:Autospark

Dominionism

Hi, please read Dominionism. The SGP is that and theocracy is a word to describe a rule by the church, or by a religious authority like the Vatican or Iran. The SGP advocates Dominionism. The sources use the word "theocracy" but in context of Dominionism and not in the way Wikipedia says theocracy and not in the way political scientists say theocracy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.172.33.82 (talk) 11:49, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello there. I realise that your edit may be in good faith, but I am trying to represent the referenced sources accurately, which say "theocracy" or "theocratic", without any reference to dominionism. Perhaps you could list dominionism separately in the Infobox, preferably with sources?--Autospark (talk) 14:15, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

If you are trying to represent the sources accurately, then represent them in the way that accurately reflects the meaning. Look up the definition of theocracy and look up dominionism and tell me which one better fits the description. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.172.33.82 (talk) 13:54, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Irrelevant. The sources say "theocratic" or "theocracy", not Dominionism.--Autospark (talk) 14:37, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Very relevant. Different meanings behind the same word are often used in the dictionary and it is good to properly represent them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.172.33.82 (talk) 00:46, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Social liberal policies

Thank you for your "thank you" and your recent improvements to many articles that I saw. You seem knowledgable of the subject matter and I was hoping to ask a question. Currently in the infobox for Labor Party (Israel), the party's ideology includes "social democracy" (with which it identifies) as well as Third Way. I have not been able to find a source verifying the latter ideology explicitly. I have, however, found the recently added source that indicates the party's socialism has evolved into "a political program that supports a capitalist economy with strong social welfare programs." Would this mean Third Way or social liberalism? Also, I found this source, that says, "While it retains membership in the Socialist International, it has a social liberal platform." What are your thoughts? --Precision123 (talk) 18:20, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

I wouldn't categorise the Israeli Labour Party as social-liberal, to be honest. While Third Way type social democracy and social liberalism are very alike and overlap, the Israeli Labour Party's history is that of a social-democratic party rather than a liberal party, as are its international affiliations.--Autospark (talk) 14:07, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

UK Independence Party

Please see the discussion at Talk:UK Independence Party#Request for comment about whether academic sources describing the UK Independence Party as far-right are reliable. LordFixit (talk) 07:13, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Autonomy Liberty Participation Ecology

Why you have moved Autonomy Freedom Participation Ecology to Autonomy Liberty Participation Ecology? Consensus or not consensus Freedom is is a more appropriate term than Liberty!--Maremmano (talk) 21:40, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Why do you think? I think it's not and, anyway, before moving established articles, you should bring the issue to talks. --Checco (talk) 12:20, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Do you not reply? Alle the parties with the term "Libertà" have been translated with the term "Freedom" (PdL, SEL etc.). Why this case should be an exception?--Maremmano (talk) 16:07, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

The French word Liberté translates into Liberty accurately enough, there is no consensus to change the article names, which itself would disrupt Wikipedia (many redirects, etc), and I see no pressing need to rename the articles at this time. If Autonomy Freedom Participation Ecology and Autonomy Freedom Democracy are or become widely-used English language translations of the organisation names in third-party sources then there would be a argument that we should alter the article names on Wikipedia, but that would require agreed consensus first.--Autospark (talk) 16:52, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

The french word "Liberté" also translates into "Libertà" and this word has always been translated into "Freedom". This is a question of consistency, some parties are named with Liberty and others parties are named with Freedom! If a page of a party is created with a name, this name becomes immovable?--Maremmano (talk) 20:53, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

If you don't participate in the discussion I'll can remove te pages--Maremmano (talk) 21:54, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

I've concluded what I have to say - and have no more on the subject - altering names of articles should not be done unilaterally without consensus.--Autospark (talk) 14:14, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Reference that cites Wikipedia as a source.

Hello Autospark,

I have seen that you have cited this page (Jeff Haynes; Anja Hennig (3 July 2013). Religious Actors in the Public Sphere: Means, Objectives, and Effects. Routledge. pp. 17–. ISBN 978-1-136-66171-6.) in several articles. However it is problematic, because it cites Wikipedia as its source! For understandable reasons, sources that use Wikipedia as a source are not considered reliable. Otherwise we could directly cite Wikipedia articles as a source, as well. In my opinion, it would be best to remove these references. Do you agree?

Kind regards, --RJFF (talk) 12:10, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I really hadn't noticed… Best remove it then for sake of accuracy.--Autospark (talk) 12:12, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

P.S. I have a question about your citation style: You often write "pp. xx–" (i.e. "page xx and the following pages") instead of just "p. xx" (i.e. "only at page xx") when the statement you are referring to is actually only on one page. If I read "pp. xx–", I expect to find further relevant information on the following pages, but sometimes there is not any. I wonder if this is an accident, or if I just read your abbreviations incorrectly? --RJFF (talk) 12:17, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

No answer? --RJFF (talk) 16:16, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Please compare Template:Cite book: use "page" if the number of a single page in the source that supports the content, use "pages" if a range of pages in the source that supports the content. Thank you. Kind regards. --RJFF (talk) 16:21, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for the slow reply RJFF! Thanks for the tip. I admit that I use the auto-citation tool a bit too heavily.--Autospark (talk) 18:13, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

I understand. No offense! --RJFF (talk) 18:51, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

None taken!--Autospark (talk) 19:01, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

SI expulsions?

Hi. What's the reference for the various expulsions from SI? --Soman (talk) 21:12, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict)I notice you have edited a number of articles with edit summaries indicating that these parties have been expelled from the Socialist International. I have been unable to find a source for this (but I am not doubting the accuracy of your edits). What is the source of your information? These parties will need to be moved to the former members section of Socialist International with a suitable reference.-gadfium 21:17, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply Soman and gadfium. To be exact and honest, there is no exact reference for the expulsions, other than the removal of those parties from the listing on the SI membership page, which is why I have not explicitly written in those article texts "party x was expelled from SI", and so on, merely amended their international affiliation from the relevant infoboxes. If you look at the minutes from the December 2014 SI Council, you will notice the sentance: "Following the decision of the previous Council to enforce the statutes in regard to non-payment of membership fees, he presented the list of parties and organisations that would cease to be members of the SI with immediate effect, having not paid their fees for three or more years. The decisions were adopted unanimously". The SI website does not list the expelled parties, and almost certainly never will mention them, but you can judge from the recently amended official SI membership list whom those parties are (most were parties who were demoted to Observer status a couple of years ago, if you compare earlier versions of the webpage at archive.org).--Autospark (talk) 03:23, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you.-gadfium 08:15, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for writing a brilliantly sourced article! smileguy91talk 02:52, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

This notice should have been posted by a different user, but they didn't. The relevant section is here John Smith the Gamer (talk) 20:46, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Panhellenic Socialist Movement (PASOK)

Thank you - I'm very well aware that democratic socialism is not the same as social democracy: it's precisely the reason I added the description! The party was founded as a democratic socialist party, based on Marxist principles - certainly NOT as a social democratic party, which in Europe is usually the description of Centrist parties. Where in PASOK's Constitution has it changed its status to that of a social democratic party? It has embraced some social democratic policies - but it ISN'T a social democratic party! Zhu Haifeng (talk) 19:40, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Democratic Party (Italy) color

Hi Autospark, sorry if I write you here, but I think that we need your opinion on this page. We are discussing about the color which must be used for the Democratic Party. I supported the one currently used, which is red, because it is used in rallies, in the symbol and in the PD Assembly and is also more appropriate for a social democratic party; the other user instead support the use of orange, because red was used by DS and the PD was not formed only by that party. Moreover he said that orange is used in the website of the Senate, but I don't think that parties' color should be choose from the site of an House of the Parliament, and in these site parties like NCD or Civic Choice are in purple and black (which are not absolutley their colors). So it will be great if you can give us your opinion, because you are on of the main contributors concerning politics. Thanks -- Nick.mon (talk) 17:34, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Now he have reached an agreement changing the colors of PDS and DS, anyway if you want express your opinion it would be great! -- Nick.mon (talk) 18:29, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Nick.mon. I will write my opinion, but I'm not entirely sure what the PD's official colours are, or if any Italian parties other than Lega Nord even have official colours! Here in the UK, the official party colours are all very well-known (well, apart from the parties in Northern Ireland), but less so in Italy. Still, I think for simplicity's sake I will support you in identifying red as the de facto official colour of PD, and TBH I can't remember the PD identifying with orange apart from at its founding congress in 2007.--Autospark (talk) 12:09, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes you are right, there is no official colors in moder IItalian politics, anyway I think that red is the most correct one, thank you! -- Nick.mon (talk) 12:15, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

No problem, happy to help! (Aside: Has anyone else ever noticed that the PD logo looks like that of PG Tips?)--Autospark (talk) 12:23, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Lol, yes it is very similar! Maybe no one noticed it because in Italy is not very common, for example I have never seen it before today! Please forgive my ignorance! :) -- Nick.mon (talk) 12:29, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

PES

Hi autospark, Can i know why did you revert my edit, thanks Barjimoa (talk) 18:59, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Please discuss this on the article talk page.--Autospark (talk) 19:54, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Ok I will thanksBarjimoa (talk) 18:42, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Progressive Alliance

Better now? --Orange Mike | Talk 23:30, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Lib Dems

please stop that partisan troll ToryBoy from deleting citations over and over again.

I've been monitoring the page and he does it every day without fail, even removing half dozen citations.

Surely he should have been warned/banned by now? I've been reprimanded for less. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.24.107.174 (talk) 22:52, 26 April 2015 (UTC) 1

ALFA

Dear Autospark,

How great to have the party already represented in Wikipedia!

I am wondering about the "right-wing" designation in the info-box under Political position. Is that really the case? Do you see a problem with using "Centrist" instead? That seems to me to be both more accurate and less misleading.

I also wonder about the term "euroscepticism" under Ideology If you follow the link you get an article containing both much too much and much too little as far as ALFA is concerned. What about something like "euro-currency critical; economic liberalist" (the latter with an internal link to the Wikipedia article "economic liberalism")?

Thanks for any consideration of these suggestions. I just expanded the short English text by adding a translation of the German Wikipedia article (I'm former AfD member No. 38 and the person who translated the AfD Politische Leitlinien and the Europaprogramm)

With best wishes, --Remotelysensed (talk) 16:17, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alliance of Liberals and Democrats (Romania), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Daniel Constantin. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Democratic Action Party page moves

Hi, could you please comment at this discussion? Thanks, --doncram 05:22, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pentapartito, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Liberal Democratic Union. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:37, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Political groups of the European Parliament, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Classical. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:11, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Democrats

There is a reason why I wouldn't pursue changes to the meta color template. That color has been changed to the Democratic Party's official blue, #34AAE0, in the past. However due to the expansive nature of this template, changing its color code adversely affects many applications wherein the official color does not blend well with certain graphs, etc. and there are accessibility issues with some of that template's specific applications. I used the color code specifically because this example is one wherein: the color should be used an can easily be used without issue. The present blue simply works universally for that template, but there are places, such as this, where #34AAE0 works perfectly, and should be used.   Spartan7W §   21:35, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Social democracy

Hello there. Could you check on this page (especially the second paragraph)? Because, I was sure that social democracy, while rejecting Marxist approach on socialism, still wanted to replace capitalism with socialism. — B.Lameira (talk) 20:36, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 13 November

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Georgian Dream page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:18, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Défi

Hi, could you please undo your title move on this? It's covered under Wikipedia:Naming conventions (political parties). They keep their original name (here undisputedly French) unless there's a good reason - plus "Défi" (almost an acronym) is as meaningless in French as it is in English, yet it's the name they've rebranded to, not the extrapolated title.—Brigade Piron (talk) 11:41, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Foundation for European Progressive Studies

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Foundation for European Progressive Studies, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. DGG ( talk ) 00:50, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:38, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:United Left (Poland) Logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:United Left (Poland) Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:53, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Euroscepticism of Civic Democratic Party (Czech Republic)

Hello, in article Civic Democratic Party (Czech Republic) we are using terms Euroscepticism and Soft euroscepticism as description of parties which have ideology more close to wanting leave EU or not within political system of the Czech Republic. So if you want to change English Wikipedia-wide term you should firstly change it on profile of the Tory Party. --ThecentreCZ (talk) 03:03, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Utterly irrelevant! The source says "Euroscepticism" - not "soft Euroscepticism", which itself is a controversial invention of terminology. If you are completely unable to do something as basic as use a source as a citation properly and correctly, then you have no business being here on en.wiki, particularly with your written English being so borderline unintelligible.--Autospark (talk) 10:54, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Change that TERMINOLOGY on article of the Conservative Party! This is like retardment u are attacking other countries and can't do your job about putting Euroscepticism to tories. Two used neoligisms for same thing u are crazy labour bureaucrat.--ThecentreCZ (talk) 14:25, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

English Democrats

Hi. Back in September 2015 you made this edit to English Democrats; do you still have the book by Tonkiss? I ask because of this edit, with the summary "the author of this book has explicitly stated that it does not support this description". I'm intrigued to know what was said on page 120, to get some idea why the author should contact otrs to distance herself from it. Cheers. Keri (talk) 10:14, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Revert

Hello!
You reverted my edit here. What makes you think the source is invalid for this claim? I could agree centre-left is a bit exaggerated (I'm totally not of the opinion it is possible to categorise a party into that scheme objectively), but the polls actually state what the public "considers" the party to be. And that is, as of today, not centre-right. --Vogone (talk) 15:57, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

May I expect a reply on this issue anytime soon or are you still investigating? --Vogone (talk) 14:40, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Revert

Hello. I accept your recent reverts, based on WP:RECENTISM. If the next parliamentary elections confirm the current situation in the polls, I will edit the articles once more. The one exception is the SPÖ article, where the heading says that it is one of the two major parties in Austria. This is cast in severe doubt after the first round of the presidential election. Therefore I sustain that this point should not be highligted in the heading, and I have thus removed it. Narssarssuaq (talk) 14:08, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Bare URLs

About this, would you please provide complete citations for your refs? Please see WP:Bare URLs. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 23:28, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

CDI

The links in the old/reverted section are all in the timeline section now (sans the dead link). The intro that I had edited is material taken from the idc-cdi website (I just forgot to add the link itself ). If I add that link, would it be appropriate to revert the reversion? The alliance (talk) 16:50, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi there The alliance. Basically, I don't think on en.wiki we should be using a political organisation's self-description verbatim. --Autospark (talk) 13:47, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

That makes sense. I'll have to see what a better intro would look like. The reason why I added the timeline section was because the intro was so confusing and didn't really add to actually introducing the CDI. The alliance (talk) 14:32, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

References

Left-wing SP

Autospark, this Party is officially considered in Switzerland as Left wing. In their program they want to get rid of the capitalism system in Switzerland, plus the latest sources as the swiss media specific states that the party is left-wing. Take a look on their politics first on their German website. Can I ask you not to change sources? We already had this discussion six months ago and we should aim to stay neutral in Wikipedia. I know that you are a proud socialist, but putting false statements shouldn't be done here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.65.152.92 (talk) 14:41, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

World of Spectrum

Hi, I see that you have added a COI maintenance tag to World of Spectrum because of editing by 'owner' Lee Fogarty. For your information, Lee Fogarty is not actually the owner of the site. He, and some others from the site are currently involved in repeated edits to remove the true owners name (cited with a reference to the ICANN domain records) and other facts about the site. I have requested temporary protection for the page. MrMajors (talk) 17:15, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Autospark. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

About the edits in National liberalism

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Rupert Loup (talk) 13:25, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:DemocraticCoalitionGreeceLogo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:DemocraticCoalitionGreeceLogo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:08, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Autospark. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Trentino Tyrolean Autonomist Party.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Trentino Tyrolean Autonomist Party.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:13, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Democrats of the Left, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page End of Communism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:20, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 17

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Borrelli (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:20, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey

Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.

Take the survey now!

You can find more information about this survey on the project page and see how your feedback helps the Wikimedia Foundation support editors like you. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement (in English). Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through the EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys to remove you from the list.

Thank you!

WMF Surveys, 18:25, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia survey

Every response for this survey can help the Wikimedia Foundation improve your experience on the Wikimedia projects. So far, we have heard from just 29% of Wikimedia contributors. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes to be completed. Take the survey now.

If you have already taken the survey, we are sorry you've received this reminder. We have design the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. If you wish to opt-out of the next reminder or any other survey, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement. Thanks!

WMF Surveys, 01:23, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey

Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 23 April, 2018 (07:00 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.

If you already took the survey - thank you! We will not bother you again. We have designed the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. To opt-out of future surveys, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement.

WMF Surveys, 00:32, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ndppeilogo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Ndppeilogo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. clpo13_(talk) 18:56, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

New Zealand Labour Party

@Autospark: Hi, since you have contributed to the article in the past, I wonder if you might weigh in on the question of the New Zealand Labour Party's ideology. I have posted on the article's talk page. Thanks. --Hazhk (talk) 15:32, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

La République En Marche!

The recent delete that you made on the La République En Marche!, why would radical centrism not be considered an ideology? Many political parties are considered radical centrist and have it in their ideology. For example,

• Citizens (Spanish political party)
• Yesh Atid
• The Opportunities Party
• Bareunmirae Party

– Social Studies Rules (talk) 16:33, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

3DB (Melbourne)

Hi the creator of this article keeps re-inserting language justifying the racism of the station's Minstrel Show.

PiS reverts

Hello, I'm ObserverEU. You have reverted my edits in Law and Justice. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions. You seem to be an experienced user. I am a new enWP user but seasoned in real life. My understanding is that we strive for neutral point of view and balance based on verfified sources. Your revert to Law and Justice seemed not neutral to me, so I will revert it for now. Have you reviewed the talk page of PiS before reverting? You find there the discussion and reasoning for my edits. You find there e.g. more than 30 exemplary sources from all types of media incl. governments/insitutions/science/public and private media/wikipedia articles describing PiS as conservative. Lets engage on Talk:Law_and_Justice to find a consenus on a balanced description. Kind regards --ObserverEU (talk) 22:52, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Autospark. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Autospark. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 20

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited United Farmers of Ontario, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page United Farmers (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 18

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Co-operative Commonwealth Federation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Buff (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:45, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

European Coalition (Poland)

Hello. I am sorry to bother you, but if you do not mind I would like to ask about something. Yesterday, the next political party decided to join the European Coalition - source. It was previously called the Union of the Left, but in 2015 changed its name to "Wolność i Równość". Could you add this information to both articles I mentioned above, please? You are a very experienced user, and I don't speak English fluently, thus I would be very grateful for your help. Thanks a lot in advance! PS. I also noticed that in the European Coalition article there is a doubled "and" when the parties included in KE are listed, probably because of adding SDPL after the Union of European Democrats without changing "and" into a comma between the Polish People's Party and the latter. Best regards, Jojnee (talk) 15:00, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Pokémon Tetris for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pokémon Tetris is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pokémon Tetris until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Buckaroo bob 91 (talk) 21:42, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

March 2020

Was it you who wrote "Brexit is a fascist coup" on your user page? It doesn't seem like the type of statement (feels a bit strong) that one would expect from you. On a side note, have you received my ping on Talk:Progressive Slovakia? Thank you in advance! Ezhao02 (talk) 01:57, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Liberal conservatism

Hi Autospark, I saw that you removed Isamaa from the “liberal conservatism” page in this edit, saying that the information in the table from the source was from Wikipedia. Did the book say this somewhere? I didn’t find any mention of Wikipedia in a Google Books search. Thank you in advance. -Ezhao02 (talk) 04:36, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Liberal conservatism vs. conservative liberalism

Hi Autospark,

This isn't really about any article content but more about a lack of understanding I have, so I'm asking here instead of on the article talk pages. Is there any clear difference between liberal conservatism and conservative liberalism? From what I've seen, there's no strong difference and the labels are attached based on whether the parties in question identify more closely with conservatism or with liberalism. This also brings up the following question: what really are liberal conservatism and conservative liberalism, and do they have any clear policy positions, like, say, social democracy and Christian democracy would? Thanks, Ezhao02 (talk) 13:38, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Liberal conservatism describes conservatism that adopts (post-)Enlightenment values such as (broadly speaking) secularism, liberal democracy, globalism and adoption of economic liberalism (including neoliberal ideas). Conservative liberalism describes the ideology of liberal parties which are more moderate or even slightly conservative. Of course, both ideologies overlap in many ways, but then many other political ideologies overlap while being distinctive ideological brackets.--Autospark (talk) 13:23, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation! Ezhao02 (talk) 14:45, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:43, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

"Logotron" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Logotron. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 31#Logotron until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. IceWelder [✉] 02:38, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Party of Action and Solidarity (Moldovan party)

Hello! Listen, i've writed the Party of Action and Solidarity (Moldovan party)'s page, in the election thing, i've writed this, Majority Government, because in the Moldovan Parliament, this party needs to 51 seats, to get the Majority seats, and this party is got the 63 seats, and this is the Majority Government, because this party does no need to get coalition to the other parties in Moldova. So, this party is got 63 seats, and it is now the Majority Government in the Moldovan Parliament, just like in Russia, the United Russia Party is got the Majority Government, and that party does not need to get coalition to the other russian parties. In Hungary, the Fidesz is got the 133 seats, with the KDNP party, and these two parties does not need to get coalition with the other hungarian parties in the Hungarian Parliament. That's all, have nice day! --TomFZ67 (talk) 20:34, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

New Zealand First

We seem to have a bit of a misunderstanding about the New Zealand First article.

While dealing with the deletion of a sourced statement from the Infobox yesterday, I noticed an edit you made which increased the size of the article a lot. Looking at the edit, I saw that it had caused the entire content of the article to be duplicated. So, in the Contents we had the article in sections 1 (History) to 7 (External links), and then the entire thing was repeated in sections 8 to 14. I assumed this to be a mistake (we all make them) so I reverted it. However you've now put it back again, so the article once again has its content in sections 1 to 7 and then it's all repeated in sections 8 to 14. Was this intentional? I can't see any reason why the content should be repeated like that.

Cheers! Neiltonks (talk) 15:10, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Neiltonks, that’s actually an accidental error on my part. Please feel free to reverse it! Thanks.--Autospark (talk) 18:58, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Austrian People’s party

All I was trying to say was that The chancellor added some ideologies such as anti-Islam anti-immigration and euroskepticism to the party. If the chancellor has pro-europeanist views then I apologize for putting in false information. I look up many right wing populist political parties that are taking rising Europe and I thought he was adding views similar to those parties. Worstlimbs (talk) 02:12, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

I also meant to say taking rise not taking rising Worstlimbs (talk) 02:13, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Oh and also I am personally hard euroskeptic so go brexit Worstlimbs (talk) 02:19, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

I think that the people’s party is right wing with center right to far right factions Worstlimbs (talk) 02:22, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

@Worstlimbs I have been pinning multiple warnings on your talk page, but you haven't acknowledged any and continue to make unsourced and error prone edits that are reverted afterwards. Wikipedia:Competence is required and we only include information that is backed by sources. What you think is not key here, but what reliable secondary sources say about the subjects. I suggest you immediately stop editing political pages directly and first establish consensus on the talk page. This is your last warning from me. ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 07:25, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Europe elects

The website doesn't seems to mirror information found on en.wiki, indeed the collocation itself you've reverted and and other political collocations do not correspond to those indicated on wikipedia.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 15:16, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi, while you're correct that it doesn't exactly mirror en.wiki, upon closer inspection, it's still a self-published blog connected to a Twitter account (or group of similar Twitter accounts), lacking any direct referencing for its conclusions, so I don't think it should be considered a reliable or definitive source.--Autospark (talk) 21:45, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

LREM

Hi! Hope all's well. I noticed you were previously engaged in the issue of whether LREM is a centrist or centre-right party. We're currently having a discussion about this on the talk page for the article and I was wondering if you'd like to weigh in. Many thanks in advance and happy holidays. EndlessCoffee54 (talk) 19:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Notification of request for arbitration

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Legitimacy about the imposition of never approved rules and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks, --Scia Della Cometa (talk) 12:09, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Request for arbitration declined

Request for arbitration titled Legitimacy about the imposition of never approved rules has been declined. Please review the comments from the arbitrators for more information about why and suggested next dispute resolution steps. For the arbitration committee, -- Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 16:44, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of 139 Movement for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 139 Movement is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/139 Movement until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Scia Della Cometa (talk) 12:28, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Talk:Alliance 90/The Greens

Talk:Alliance 90/The Greens#Political position 2

Do you want to participate in the talk? Mureungdowon (talk) 11:26, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Free Democratic Party (Germany) has an RFC

Free Democratic Party (Germany) has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Aaron Liu (talk) 01:43, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Red–red coalition for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Red–red coalition is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Red–red coalition until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

UtherSRG (talk) 15:47, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

ANI

Hey Autospark! I see you weren't notified, so please see this at ANI. Not sure that your response is required, but you should know. Mvqr (talk) 10:03, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:28, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Liberal Initiative

It is quite clear that you have no prior knowledge of portuguese politics and cannot read articles in this language either. Your "available sources" is a very dubious local tabloid newspaper with a ridiculously biased title. Better stop now when you can still claim ignorance on this matter.

Stop vandalising that article if you have no sources to back up your edits, it is quite clear that you have an ideological motivation to do so but Wikipedia is NOT your personal blog.2001:8A0:6A16:8301:5E9:CBFF:1927:7FF5 (talk) 19:46, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

improper synthesis?

In the AfD article's third sentence you have added suggestion there was improper synthesis. Did you mean part of that sentence about being right wing or about not opposing democracy? I am asking because in the history of changes I see you started by fixing the first thing, however the improper synthesis tag is attached to the second. IHaveBecauseOfLocks (talk) 20:10, 23 March 2024 (UTC)