Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Politics (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 

New article Lunch pail Democrat (USA) - push for DYK?[edit]

After hearing the term during the MSNBC analysis of the Biden-Ryan US vice-presidential debate, I whipped up a quick Lunch pail Democrat article. The term refers to working-class members of the Democratic Party, and politicians that court them. I reckon it'd be good to strike while the iron is hot, and put this up for WP:Did you know? on Monday or so; I posted it today and there's a 5-day limit for DYK, as well as other items to meet on the checklist.

If anyone is interested in helping out, this could be a really topical DYK given the usage in front of so many MSNBC viewers last night. Happy to share the banners and wiki-love for any other substantial contributors if this hits DYK and gets enough views to be awarded.

Thanks for any help or suggestions! MatthewVanitas (talk)

Forza Italia[edit]

Hello everybody! I'm an italian user, I wanted to inform you that the "new" Forza Italia party of Berlusconi is not an opposition party yet. If Berlusconi will not be pushed out from his seat (an improbably but possibile thing), he can chose to remain in the government coalition. Also, FI has got one vice-minister and one secretary in the italian government! For now, then, it is better to correct the voices about Forza Italia, the parliament and the Letta Cabinet...in 10 days will be all more clear. Bye for now! --Franci---juve 21:46, 20 nov 2013 (UTC)

West Germany and East Germany[edit]

Germanies, West and East have been requested to be renamed to their official names of FDR and GDR, see talk:West Germany for the discussion -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 05:01, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

This closed as not moved. A discussion is continuing at Talk:East Germany -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 03:53, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
The new discussion has been closed -- 65.94.169.222 (talk) 07:57, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Anarcho-capitalism FAR[edit]

I have nominated Anarcho-capitalism for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Binksternet (talk) 17:48, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Local Election Results (Particularly in Wales)[edit]

There are a decent amount of articles in Category:Council_elections_in_Wales that are all local election coverage, where the politicians being elected do not meet WP:POLITICIAN and the sources for the election are generally either WP:ROUTINE or a single primary-ish source that just lists the raw election results for every election for every year. (Many of these articles are from the 1800s and early 1900s)

As a trial baloon, I nominated one of them for deletion Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Pontypridd_Urban_District_Council_election,_1898 which came up delete/redirect/merge. Additionally a good number of the articles were created by a single user who was prolifically WP:SOCKing and is now indeffed Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Macs15/Archive.

I plan on nominating the WP:BUNDLE for deletion, but as its a large number or articles (~180 recursive) I thought I would get some feedback from here first. In general are local (city/county) election results notable enough for individual year article coverage?

Gaijin42 (talk) 16:21, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

See also Category:English_local_elections,_2011 with 151 articles for a single year (and other years with a similar pattern) Category:English_local_elections_by_yearGaijin42 (talk) 16:36, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure about this, you might do best to ask at Wikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom. I certainly can't see any justification for individual articles myself, though merging some of the data with our article on the relevant local council might be an option. AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:36, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
AndyTheGrump Thanks. I had notified wikiprojects Wales and England, but Ill do the one you mentioned as well. Gaijin42 (talk) 17:38, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
It's a worrying development if articles are deleted on the basis the events happened a long time ago. I would think that if important council elections (such as county/city level) receive plenty of news coverage today (they do) they would have received plenty of attention 120 years ago (though admittedly less people would have been eligible to vote, or stand for election). WP:POLITICIAN covers notability of people, not of major events. Mind you, when it comes to town council elections, such as the example AfD'd, the argument becomes more tenuous. Sionk (talk) 18:10, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

A couple of points. Firstly I don't believe the WP:POLITICIAN argument is justifiable reason for deleting election articles. Politicians and elections are markedly different things and have different levels of notability. A good comparator would be sports teams and players - semi-professional sports clubs are deemed notable, but the players are not. In this case I believe the same applies to local elections and politicians.

Secondly, I don't believe the outcome of the AfD in question is representative, as the most relevant WikiProject (WP:Elections and referendums was not informed. This was largely due to the fact that the article alerts feed for election and referendum hasn't been updated by the bot since late July. As as result, I'm going to ask for it to be reopened so that project members can comment.

A general comment is that these election articles have been around for years without being deleted - I wouldn't be surprised if there had been previous AfDs that resulted in a keep (no idea how to find out). Although I haven't created any myself, I'd feel very sorry for the editors (particularly @Davewild:) who have spent thousands of hours compiling detailed articles (which have until now been considered perfectly notable) only to see all their work deleted in a bundle. Number 57 23:12, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

There are 3000 counties in the US. There are ~6000 state districts on top of that. UK has 326 districts, 80 odd counties, etc. Theoretical full coverage of this topic worldwide would be hundreds of thousands of articles, per year. The vast majority of which will never be viewed, and have no content that isn't just copied out of the primary source. If someone wants obscure election results, they can read the primary source. 99% of the value of these articles can be provided by a single table or graph per locale showing the shift in votes over time. Gaijin42 (talk) 01:09, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
Taking a couple at random, Leeds City Council election, 2000 was viewed 69 times in the last month, whilst Hertsmere Borough Council election, 2002 was viewed 43 times. The articles are clearly being used by readers. If it's a noteworthy topic, the fact that there may be lots of articles created is not a reason to be concerned. Number 57 10:44, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Updated parliament diagram tool![edit]

Hi all,

I've put my parliament diagram tool up on Wikimedia Labs, with a new, easier interface. Please let me know if it works for you - I need some testers. The source code is now also hosted on github. --Slashme (talk) 17:18, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Rename proposal if a high-profile topic[edit]

Please see Talk:Freedom#Requested move Oiyarbepsy (talk) 04:51, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Category:New Democratic Party (Canada)‎[edit]

Category:New Democratic Party (Canada)‎ has been proposed to be renamed -- 65.94.169.222 (talk) 05:22, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Michelle Obama/archive3[edit]

Please come comment at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Michelle Obama/archive3.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 01:53, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:World Congress of Families#Neutrality[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:World Congress of Families#Neutrality. Thanks. Elizium23 (talk) 02:34, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

United States: (Losing) Presidential Electors[edit]

For a person who would have cast a vote in the Electoral College if the other (major) party had won their state:

  • Is it proper to call them a Presidential Elector (for the purposes of Categories)?
  • Is it proper to say "Smith was a Presidential Elector for the party name ticket of Foo and Bar in 1946" (which although lost their state, may or may not have won the presidential election).

Assume the person is otherwise Notable (Was former mayor of largest city in state at the time).Naraht (talk) 15:48, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Note, the ultimate solution to this would be to have both "Whig United States presidential electors, 1896" and "Losing United States presidential electors, 1896" and have the first as both a subcat of "Whig United States presidential electors" and "United States presidential electors, 1896" and the second subcatted into Losing and date.Naraht (talk) 17:41, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Featured topic candidate[edit]

I have nominated a politics-related topic for featured topic status here. Any constructive comments there would be greatly appreciated. Neelix (talk) 16:33, 13 September 2014 (UTC)


Reassessment[edit]

Just stopping by to let someone part of the project here to reassess Progressive Labor Party (United States) in its class rating. It is undergoing some changes at the moment due to the lack of sources, wp:soapbox, and POV problems that plagued the article before. xcuref1endx (talk) 14:52 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal[edit]

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Renaming Category:American politicians‎ to Category:United States politicians‎[edit]

There is a proposal to rename Category:American politicians‎ as Category:United States politicians‎ at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 October 4#Category:American politicians.E2.80.8E

Gregkaye 13:47, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

States and capitals[edit]

Bold text--M.J. Winters (talk) 18:56, 12 October 2014 (UTC) I think that this page needs a game review for the people to practice their states and capitals. Like studying for a test.--M.J. Winters (talk) 18:56, 12 October 2014 (UTC)'

Assistance with Heritage Action[edit]

Recently, my colleague Morzabeth posted here asking for editors who'd be interested to review a draft for the Heritage Action article. However, she had trouble finding editors to continue a conversation past the first reply, and I am now stepping in to see if I can help move it forward.

As noted there, we are working on a consulting basis with Heritage Action, and so we will avoid making direct edits to the article, considering our paid COI. Our aim is to make this article more encyclopedic, improve sourcing, give a clearer overview of the organization and its activities. As Morzabeth explained on the Heritage Action Talk page, the current article has much room for improvement.

The proposed draft in in Morzabeth's user space. She has made changes to it based on feedback, and I am willing to make other changes as needed. On the Heritage Action Talk page you can see the discussion since she first posted the request in July; unfortunately it consists of one comment each from three editors, without any follow-up.

I am looking for an editor who is interested in helping to review the current draft and work with me until they are satisfied it is deserving of moving into the mainspace. Thanks in advance, and I hope to see you back on that Talk page. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 14:36, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Problem politics article[edit]

Are any editors actively participating in WikiProject Politics? If so, can you please review the Incumbent article? This stub has been repeatedly misused and abused over the past year with the addition of inappropriate content. Is a WP:Politics editor willing to adopt this article and watch list it? It simply needs someone to protect it and delete inappropriate content as it is added. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 12:23, 16 October 2014 (UTC)