Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics

Reorganized content on: Online Deliberation

Hi. I wanted to let you know that I made a pretty substantial update to Online deliberation. It was listed as a start-class, but I think the changes are substantial enough that it could be upgraded.

RFC: Keep or Delete the monarch, in 'incumbent' section

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

There is consensus among participants that the "Monarch" should be removed from the "Incumbent" section from the specified "Year in..." articles. This is a continuation of previous RfCs to normalize the related pages (cf. this and this). The discussion here shows that having the monarch in these articles is redundant, especially to citizens of the UK, but it was also recommended that some sort of explanatory note or infobox be placed to lead readers to a page containing such information. Editors are recommended to have a post-close discussion to agree on which method would be best. (non-admin closure) Isabelle ^🔔 14:04, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

---

Concerning the following series of Year articles:
post-1707 Year in Scotland
post-1707 Year in England
post-1282 Year in Wales
all Year in Northern Ireland
pre-1922 Year in Ireland.

Should we do the following for all of them. GoodDay (talk) 17:03, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

• A) Keep the monarch
• B) Delete the monarch (with an option to add an explanatory note or infobox to refer readers to the "Year in UK" article)

Survey

• B - I've no objections to deleting the monarch from all aforementioned Year in... articles. Why? Because England took over Wales in 1282. England & Scotland unified in 1707. Great Britain & Ireland unified in 1801 & finally most of Ireland broke away from the United Kingdom in 1922. GoodDay (talk) 17:27, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
• B - purely on the basis that it seems superfluous and repetitive, especially for years in recent history where the monarch has adopted a largely ceremonial role (e.g. 20th century onwards). I don't have a particular view on the post-conquest, pre-modern "Year in Wales" articles as the monarch seems more relevant, although it's probably better for consistency to remove it also, and technically the English monarch wasn't also the Welsh monarch until the Tudor Acts of Union. Jr8825 • Talk 17:50, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

  No worry, we've no pre-1700 in Wales articles ;) GoodDay (talk) 18:29, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

  In 1396 in Wales, it rained a lot... Jr8825 • Talk 20:28, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

• A - I don't really see the benefit of deleting the monarch from all of these articles. That information can provide some useful context to the rest of the events in the article, and at any rate, it doesn't hurt; it's low maintenance. Yes, the information is implied by the fact that the countries have been unified after the dates in question, but it's not readily available to a reader who doesn't already know that. If we are seeking consistency, the monarch details should be kept rather than deleted. AlexEng^(TALK) 06:04, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
• B - Until very recently the monarch wasn't in the Incumbents section in any case, and no one (hardly anyone) minded that. All the "Year in [place]" articles state that they are for matters directly relevant to the country, and the monarch is only directly relevant to the "Year in United Kingdom" articles. At the moment, it's simply an unhelpful duplication, puzzling to many readers. To assist in understanding the relative status of the countries within the United Kingdom (which many non-UK residents have difficulty with), we can add a note like this in the incumbents section: {{For|United Kingdom incumbents|1844 in the United Kingdom#Incumbents}} — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deb (talk • contribs) Sorry. Deb (talk) 08:21, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
• A as User:AlexEng says above, this is useful information for a reader without background. Newystats (talk) 01:20, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

In what way is it more useful than the explanatory note I suggest? Surely that would be less confusing to a reader without background? Deb (talk) 08:21, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

An explanatory note would be OK. Newystats (talk) 05:42, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

@Newystats:, does this mean you've switched to option B? GoodDay (talk) 20:50, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Yes, OK with removal with explanatory note. Newystats (talk) 23:15, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

• B Delete the monarch(!) Inclusion gives the impression that the area has its own monarchy, like listing Donald Trump as president in 2017 in New York. If desired, put an FAQ note on the talk page saying that this article only includes items specific to the area rather than the whole United Kingdom, qv for monarchs, prime ministers, wars, treaties, Brexits etc; we do not and should not clutter up every page with reasons why this or that is out of scope, let alone dump infoboxes everywhere (see Arbcom archives).
  Alternatively, cut the Gordian knot and for full consistency with the rest of the 'pedia, given that 1963 in Texas, 2012 in London and 1947 in Kashmir are all redlinks, merge all articles under discussion into YYYY in United Kingdom. :) NebY (talk) 01:36, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Discussion

I've opened the RFC up 'here', rather then at Wikipedia:WikiProject Years, per its political nature. My major concern is that all these articles be consistent. I'm confident that nobody questions having the monarch listed in the incumbent section at the Year in Great Britain & Year in the United Kingdom articles. GoodDay (talk) 17:10, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

This survey should consider alternative solutions, such as a UK infobox on the "Year in..." articles for England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales and/or an explanatory note as suggested above. Deb (talk) 08:50, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

I've no objections to the UK infobox & explanatory note idea being adopted, no matter which option (A or B) gets consensus. GoodDay (talk) 16:00, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

What I'm saying is that whether A or B is preferred depends on whether you give the whole picture - all the possible options, not just "include or delete". That's exactly what was wrong with the previous discussion. Deb (talk) 16:20, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

If you wish, you may add it if you think it may strengthen the B-option. My overall concern is that the "Year in constituent country" articles are consistent. GoodDay (talk) 16:25, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Come on folks, we'd like a tad more input. GoodDay (talk) 15:43, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Closure request

I've requested closure of this RFC. GoodDay (talk) 18:54, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Well @Newystats:, @Deb:, @Jr8825:, @AlexEng: & @NebY:? I'm commencing with the deletions. I'll leave you all to come to an agreement on the write up of the recommended 'note' or 'infobox'. GoodDay (talk) 14:24, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Update - I've completed the deletions. GoodDay (talk) 19:57, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

I liked Deb's suggestion of using {{for}}. Is someone else able to implement this? Jr8825 • Talk 16:16, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Seaction header "Predictions" for pre-election surveys in election articles

Has there been any consensus discussion over using Seaction header "Predictions" for pre-election survey section in articles about Elections. (See for example 2020 United States presidential election#Predictions). They are also known as Opinion polls, surveys etc. Venkat TL (talk) 10:50, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Philippine Democratic Socialist Party#Requested move 10 January 2022

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Philippine Democratic Socialist Party#Requested move 10 January 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 14:56, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Switching political parties in the United States

There are at least four different list articles covering individuals who have switched political parties in the United States, all of which slice essentially the same information in slightly different ways:

• List of United States representatives who switched parties
• List of United States senators who switched parties
• List of party switchers in the United States
• List of American politicians who switched parties in office

I wonder if it might be worthwhile to combine them all somehow in order to, among other things, ease maintenance? —Gordon P. Hemsley→✉ 18:46, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

The first two articles deal with the federal level. The latter two articles deal with both the federal & state level. Perhaps, the latter two articles can be merged. GoodDay (talk) 19:17, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Discussion about article "Ukrainian crisis"

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Ukrainian crisis#Disambiguate, which is about an article that is within the scope of this WikiProject. --Heanor (talk) 10:32, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation links to Block voting

Could you help to fix the links to Block voting shown at Disambig fix list for Block voting? It would be helpful to readers if these could be made to link to the specific type, as the variations in electoral methods are a little complex (at least to me).— Rod ^talk 16:23, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello, Please note that Social equality, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 31 January 2022 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team

Please note...

the RfC here (with additional information here), and the related AfD here. Beyond My Ken (talk) 10:48, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Discussion about article "Constituent state"

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Constituent state#Merger proposal, which is about an article that is within the scope of this WikiProject. --Heanor (talk) 16:15, 1 February 2022 (UTC)